Google| Subject | Re: Apple Ad debate |
| From | Snit |
| Date | 07/07/2006 09:16 (07/07/2006 00:16) |
| Message-ID | <C0D3586B.545E6%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
| Follows | Sandman |
| Followups | Sandman (19m) > Snit |
"Sandman" <mr@sandman.net>stated in post mr-0B423A.08510807072006@individual.net on 7/6/06 11:51 PM:
SandmanIncorrect. Just because they cached different subdomains and you had them drop one cache does not mean that if one is cached the other must be. I was, and am, merely pointing out that you had Google drop one cache and not the other.
In article <C0D2DC4D.544BE%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>, Snit <SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>wrote:SandmanSnitSnitSandman
All that babbling from you and you *still* can't explain why Google "lost" the cache to your site.
Says the guy that thinks Google indexes all subdomains when it indexes one domain! :-D
By all means, please support your accusation.
As usual.
"Do you think Google just decided to not cache that part (csma.sandman.net) of your site even though they cached the rest (www.sandman.net)?" - Snit
Snit thinks that the subdomain csma.sandman.net is cached in Google if www.sandman.net is cached in google, even though they are completely different sites.
You still have not even tried to explain why they would drop your csma domain but not your www domain.
Oh, and being that you have dug through several of my *different* domains trying to find pages that would not validate you *know* your claim about me is a lie. Again, it is not just a misunderstanding of yours - you openly are lying. And I am calling you on it.
Google does not specificy how they find all the pages they do. They claim it is tied to PCs (Pigion Clusters). You can be the judge if they are being honest or not. :)Well? I want to know :-DPlease tell us all how Google finds out about all these subdomains, Michael. Please detail the process.
Your lie is kinda funny... and I look forward to whatever lie you create to explain why Google dropped your csma domain from its cache but not your www domain. Please do tell!Still funny. :)The most funniest part is that you are here, screaming wildly that I removed something from google cache - something you only *assumed* was there, because Google has cached ANOTHER page.
Ah, so your claim of making no personal attacks is a lie. Thanks for clarifying that.SandmanHaha! I'm sure you teach that at your alleged dreamweaver class.Snit
"Don't worry about linking to other subdomains - Google finds them all automatically, through magic actually. It's really cool - I have a forged PDF here to outline how it works. Look at the IP number - it is in a different FONT! DAMN YOU STEVE MACKAY!!!! Oh, sorry... Well, do you see the IP? I mean, Sandmans cached page? No? Hahaha! TOLD YOU SO SANDMAN!! THEY CAN'T SEE IT EITHER!!! Hahahahaha! You REMOVED IT! Google HAD IT and you REMOVED IT before I could look at it, you BASTARD!!!!!"
Please support your claim. Oh wait, you are just sinking to the trollish tactic of speaking for me since you can find no flaw in what I actually write. OK. Pathetic.
I'm making fun of your ignorance and your humiliation with regards to Google indexing abilities.
You often make personal attacks when your lies are pointed out.
You snipped my response. Why? Here it is again:Well? What is my motive?Apart from that - when you snipped and ran from reality - you also ran from this, I want an answer to this:
Again, why did I remove it in this fantasy? What was my motive? I don't even remember why you're insisting I removed it. How does it help you in your troll?
As for your motive, Sandman, who cares why you lie so much. Maybe you are still pretending that I did not help you with your web design? Maybe the old design you found humiliating. Maybe you just cannot help yourself from being dishonest. Ask yourself your motive for being the lying troll you are; and if you do not know the answer go find a shrink.
Have you gotten the cache re-added yet? Come on, Sandman, that is your predictable next step... or did I cut you off at the pass again? LOL!SnitSandman
Please note: Sandman *still* has not explained why Google would "lose" the cache of his site.
How can I explain something that has never happened?
No need to pretend, Sandman.SnitSandman
As for your motive, Sandman, who cares why you lie so much.
Let's pretend that
I *am* lying about me removing csma.sandman.net from the google cache.Yes, you are.
What am I hiding? What can be seen in the cache? What are you looking for that can only be seen in the cache? You don't seem to even know yourself why the google cache of csma.sandman.net is so important to you.Do you deny claiming that you had not changed the look of your site for months? The last time you claimed things about one of your sites (specifically that your CSS validated) I used the Google cache to prove you lied, being that your CSS in the Google cache did *not* validate.
Who do you think you are fooling by making claims about the past of your site and then removing the contrary evidence from the Google cache? Come on, Sandman, your lie is pretty damned transparent. Even you must realize that by now.
Oh, and I see your site is down ... betcha your Googlebot noarchive tags are mysteriously gone when it comes back.
-- ??Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros ? Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family" ? OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
07/02/2006-
