AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › Feedback › Macintosh's label not appropriate
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Macintosh's label not appropriate

post #1 of 23
2/18/02 at 9:46pm
Thread Starter 
Whether or not Macintosh is an "impatient whiner" is subject to personal opinion. It is NOT appropriate, however, for him to be officially labeled as such by the administration of these boards.
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
post #2 of 23
2/18/02 at 9:59pm
I've complained about some of the problems the admins and mods have had controlling their authority here before. It's been MUCH better recently and this is probably just a joke for a while. If you're interested in reading some of the heated discussion in the thread I started, click <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000078" target="_blank">here</a>.
for sale. or rent
Reply
for sale. or rent
Reply
post #3 of 23
2/18/02 at 10:44pm
1. chill out.

2. it's just a temporary joke and our way of telling him to chill out.

3. there is no step 3! (insert insane jeff goldblum nonsense here)
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 23
2/18/02 at 10:59pm
meh, **** it.

[ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: poor taylor ]</p>
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 23
2/19/02 at 12:29am
shame we have no sense of humor here anymore <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 23
2/19/02 at 1:24am
Never mind.

EDIT: I decided to be nice.

[ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: Brian J. ]</p>
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
post #7 of 23
2/19/02 at 2:12am
On second thought...

Lately, I've been kicking around a theory that Macintosh is Peacekeeper. The evidence:

1. This is the third time Peacekeeper has come out of nowhere to defend Macintosh. The first was during the <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000364" target="_blank">Mastergateing hoax</a> when Peacekeeper defended both Macintosh and Mastergateing. The second was during the <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000868" target="_blank">"Pray for Mickey Rehring" thread</a>. Peacekeeper has never shown up to defend any other members.

2. In that same Mastergateing thread, Peacekeeper admitted that he normally posts under another handle. However, Peacekeeper also denied that he was Mastergateing (who actually was Macintosh).

3. Macintosh has a history of posting under multiple handles.

4. In the <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=001032" target="_blank">**** Apple thread</a>, EmAn hints that Macintosh is posting under multiple handles again.

5. Peacekeeper and Macintosh have a similar writing style.


I can't be 100% certain that I am right. However, even if I am, I don't think it's a big deal if Macintosh is posting under multiple handles. I posted this, because I'm dying from the curiosity. I want to find out the truth, even if it means risking my own credibility.

BTW, I attempted to verify my theory directly, but Macintosh ignored a private message that I sent to him.

[ 02-19-2002: Message edited by: Brian J. ]</p>
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
post #8 of 23
2/19/02 at 2:12am
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>shame we have no sense of humor here anymore <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Some of us do!



J
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 23
2/19/02 at 3:00am
[quote]Originally posted by Brian J.:
[QB]On second thought...

Lately, I've been kicking around a theory that Macintosh is Peacekeeper. The evidence:

&lt;snip&gt;
QB]<hr></blockquote>

You are so right!! Take a look at their posts, very similar and Peacekeeper is always there to back Macintosh up.

J :cool:
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 23
2/19/02 at 3:17am
There are just too many coincidences. If they aren't the same person, then they must be lovers.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
post #11 of 23
2/19/02 at 3:25am
[quote]Originally posted by Brian J.:
<strong>There are just too many coincidences. If they aren't the same person, then they must be lovers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hmmm I think we should discount that theory

J
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 23
2/19/02 at 6:28am
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Brian J.:
<strong>On second thought...

Lately, I've been kicking around a theory that Macintosh is Peacekeeper. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Although I can see where you might come to that conclusion, try again. Better yet, don't try at all.

I created "Peacekeeper" as a means to be a voice of reason when things get a bit out of hand around here. It's true, I usually post under a different name around here, but I pull this one out when I think its needed.

To defend this thread, I understand you want to joke with Macintosh. I'll admit, he DOES need to be more patient where his new iMac is concerned. That doesn't discount the fact that any new lurkers/members coming here will automatically have a bad impression of Macintosh when they see "Impatient Whiner" as his user status. That was the only reason for this thread.

Now, I will ask you all to respect my intent for this username, and let me remain "anonymous" regarding what I usually post under around here. Rest assured, though, that I'm not Macintosh. Do you think he would want to risk another fiasco like the Mastergateing incident?
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
post #13 of 23
2/19/02 at 6:34am
Ok. We believe you
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 23
2/19/02 at 8:16am
Let's not go (falsely) guessing people's identities again, guys.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 23
2/19/02 at 10:45am
peacekeeper should be banned as he admittedly has a second name here. thought the rules were no double (or triple, etc) accounts?
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 23
2/19/02 at 1:29pm
[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>Let's not go (falsely) guessing people's identities again, guys.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey, if Peacekeeper does not want us to guess, then he should not be posting under multiple handles. And it's not like anything that Peacekeeper says ever warrants anonymity. All he's been mostly doing is defending Macintosh. If Peacekeeper isn't Macintosh or a mod, then why can't he use his normal handle?

Personally, I still think Peacekeeper is Macintosh. But I'm not going to push this issue any further, because I have no concrete evidence.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
post #17 of 23
2/19/02 at 3:54pm
Thread Starter 
The point of having an "anonymous" name is for objectivity. If everyone here knows that anyone else could be Peacekeeper -- and that Peacekeeper only tries to be fair, objective, kind, and see both sides of an issue -- maybe that'll keep the boards that much "nicer."

Well, my original reason for creating this thread has been resolved, so there's not much more to say here. I'll see you around.
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
Discuss reasonably. Play nice. Don't hate. Peace out.
Reply
post #18 of 23
2/19/02 at 7:47pm
Well I know for a fact Macintosh's other name that he uses to be annoying. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to tell...
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 23
2/19/02 at 8:02pm
[quote]Originally posted by EmAn:
<strong>Well I know for a fact Macintosh's other name that he uses to be annoying. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to tell...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Reply
Reply
post #20 of 23
2/19/02 at 8:05pm
[quote]Originally posted by Peacekeeper:
<strong>The point of having an "anonymous" name is for objectivity. If everyone here knows that anyone else could be Peacekeeper -- and that Peacekeeper only tries to be fair, objective, kind, and see both sides of an issue -- maybe that'll keep the boards that much "nicer."

Well, my original reason for creating this thread has been resolved, so there's not much more to say here. I'll see you around. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't see you doing any of that. I see you being a full of it pain in the ass who is too insecure to say what he really thinks through his real nickname.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 23
2/19/02 at 10:11pm
I agree with applenut. Any member who hides their true identity loses credibility, and deserves to be the target of this sort of speculation.

If Peacekeeper is truly objective, he should have established his objectiveness with his other username. Posting under another name suggests that he is manipulative and has a lot to hide.

Anyways, I don't really care that much. It's just a message board, and Peacekeeper can go on with this facade if he wants. I was more curious than anything.
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: one way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no...
Reply
post #22 of 23
2/20/02 at 4:20pm
OMG!!! Applenut and Macintosh are the same person maybe!!!!
I'm not living... I'm just killing time.
Reply
I'm not living... I'm just killing time.
Reply
post #23 of 23
2/20/02 at 4:44pm
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

I don't see you doing any of that. I see you being a full of it pain in the ass who is too insecure to say what he really thinks through his real nickname.</strong><hr></blockquote>

your just bitter cause your one of the assholes he has adressed in previous conflicts <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

you've reached a new low Applenut....now your going after someone that is earnestly attempting to stop fools like you going around and doing what you do constantly.
you talk about being mature, and all that, When your the one that needs to be checked. remember that atease radiohead UBB foolishness???

no offense, but you can be quite the little prick alot of the time, though thats not to say you can't be a good person as well though.
I don't want to have any bad blood with you, but in light of not-so-distant actions, my advice to you is to actually listen to what Peacekeeper has to say and NOT just bash him for his attempts at anonymity.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Feedback
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › Feedback › Macintosh's label not appropriate