Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 It's April 1 everyone

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Apr 01, 2002
 Comments:
Just a warning to the unsuspecting: April 1st is known as "April Fool's Day". Traditionally, this day is used to pull elaborate pranks and hoaxes on unsuspecting naïve people.
diaries

More diaries by theantix
Adequacy is full of fascists
Adequacy.org bug report
The UK is endangering world peace
The new hacker threat
Fascist Adequacy editors denying me my rights
While it is unlikely that the administrators of this fine website would pull anything like that, it is possible that a rogue editor might post a story that isn't entirely accurate.

So if you see a story today that doesn't seem up to the usual high standards of Adequacy.org, remember that today you need to be extra alert. If required, consume vast quantities of your favorite caffinated mint product.

       
Tweet

you forgot osm's other half Yoshi (none / 0) (#1)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 01:29:00 AM PST
Funny I thought that everyday at Adequacy.org was April Fools Day. I mean if they really want to pull a prank they would actually right something informative, unbiased and factual. Now THAT would be an April Fool.

Pardon me, (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Yoshi on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 02:25:50 AM PST
Pardon me, sir, but everything I author has a solid grounding in fact. If your little fantasy world of flying elephants and fairydust doesn't see this, don't pin the blame on me.

HAHA (none / 0) (#4)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 04:05:09 AM PST
Everything you write is grounded in fact!?! Then why is it that you can never provide any proof? Never once have you been able to confirm anything. Not even by pointing someone to a website or a printed article. The failed attempt at evidence is usually "go to [insert website]". Then when the reader visits the site, they wind up making you look like a fool. Unfortunately both you and osm refuse to visit any links provided to you because you know they are right.

The simple truth is you really have no clue what you are talking about. The droll manner in which you present yourself as a "computer" professional is one of my personal favorites. There's is nothing that you can pretend to know and write about that someone else can't beat you up for being a complete idiot.

Bull. (none / 0) (#5)
by Yoshi on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 04:22:10 AM PST
If you can find as much as one occasion in where anything I said was wrong, proven so by legitimate proof, I would absolutely love to hear it. The simple fact is, I have on numerous occasions cited external references to my information from which you could enumerate. Unfortunately, you and your type would rather provide HyperLinks to secret government infrastructure databases and illegal 'warez' sites that upload melissa viruses to my Internet Explorer.

I had to emit a mild chuckle at the mere thought of "beat you up," as the thought of any of you overweight, acne-faced, underworked, greasy teenage hackers threatening the likes of me is amusing. Keep up the good work, you hacker drones are all alike.

pathetic (none / 0) (#7)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 06:43:29 AM PST
You want me to provide proof yet you don't want to follow any links? What do you want me to do, make a post six miles long and point out every stupid story and comment you made and completely kill it by responding "PROOF?"

Sun's Ulterior Motives: Not a single bit of proof. Simple trip to US patent and trademark website killed your company names confusion. Your timeline was all messed up (Java as a 3.11 killer?)

Cisco's SecurityThreat: regarded only specific model numbers yet you seem to think it meant ALL of them not to mention other idiocies

Overview of Instant Messaging Applications: Gee, ever look at a timeline?

Who's Copying Whom?: Uhhh, duhhhh

My Chat With Tim Mathews: More IP token, refusal to except proof because you're a paranoid loser. Don't even get me started on your whole MAC address iMac address confusion

Major Linux Bug Discovered... 16 Months Later: Really wasn't that big of a deal. The problem was fix in about 2-3 days. I'd like to see MS do that.

AOL in Negotiations to Buy Red Hat: Gee, even though past reports clearly stated the relationship between the two you still went off half-cocked. By the way AOL is dropping IE and going Gecko (Mozilla/Netscape) with their release of 8.0

Your posts: Full of paranoid fantasies. Fear of hypertext links (Oh My God!) More IP Token/iMac address stupidities, Lack of any real let alone solid proof. Total lack of knowledge of timelines and release dates. Nothing even remotely that can be considered proof. Inability to grasp the concept of sarcasm. I mean thanking someone when they're really insulting you? Come on. then let's not forget the childish name calliing (hacker/criminal/fat/teenager/blah blah blah).

 
HAHAHAHA (none / 0) (#9)
by DG on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 07:21:19 AM PST
i'd really like to see yoshi put up, he can't post anything truthful, without falling on his face tripping on one line.. Prove it! he gives me a good laugh though i thank him for that, now if he could stop being paranoid about weblinks we could have a real conversation, and not lower ourselves to flaming each other
© 2002, DG. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

yes (none / 0) (#16)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 11:39:16 PM PST
I find it amusing that when someone realizes that his writing are comical he actually defends them as pure fact. The other point which makes me giggle is than we are never to suspect HIS weblinks.

 
Please... (none / 0) (#10)
by budlite on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 08:30:22 AM PST
...don't think you've posted anything factual. In fact, there's not a single statement in your comment that could be taken to be a fact.

 
Mhmhmhmhmhmhmh (none / 0) (#2)
by osm on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 02:23:12 AM PST
Rogue.

Hey! Winnona Ryder was in the X-Men? (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by elenchos on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 04:39:52 AM PST
If I'd known that I almost would have gone to see it.

I sure hope she doesn't go to prison because that would really make the sequels a mess. Look what happend with Star Wars.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

WR not in XMen (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 06:47:54 AM PST
Hey stupid, next time look at the title bar. You know, the little bar above the menu bar (File, Edit, etc). It reads Anna Paquin.

AR not in Reality (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by hauntedattics on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 11:15:43 AM PST
Hey stupid, next time get a clue.



 
Excuse me for not hacking. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by elenchos on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 02:05:13 PM PST
I don't normally browse the web with illegal hacker tools that extract that kind of information from the machines I visit. I go in through the front door, wipe my feet and treat my host with respect, in other words. What is "stupid" about that?


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill

Attn user interface designers: (1.00 / 1) (#13)
by because it isnt on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 02:26:39 PM PST
following confirmation from Lord Refutation, "title bars" are now considered evil hacking tools, and must not be used.

Thank you for your attention.
adequacy.org -- because it isn't

Also (1.00 / 1) (#14)
by budlite on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 03:11:50 PM PST
God forbid anyone might use the status bar to actually SEE where a link is pointing!

I don't believe... (1.00 / 1) (#15)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Apr 1st, 2002 at 11:37:32 PM PST
that elenchos has ever notice TITLE BAR. I seriously doubt that osm or his gay lover Yoshi know about the STATUS BAR either. But they're idiots and will likely write them off as "hacker tools".

I'm kinda hoping... (none / 0) (#18)
by budlite on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 07:08:29 AM PST
...that they'll be so worked up by the fact that both of these "hacker tools" are present as standard in Internet Explorer, not know what to do or think any more and suddenly implode, seriously upping the Clue Quotient on Adequacy.

dear Lord, can you even read? n/t (none / 0) (#19)
by nathan on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 02:09:20 PM PST

--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
But then (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Apr 2nd, 2002 at 01:42:45 AM PST
after you've wiped your feet, what do you do when you realize you're in the Ladies' Room?

We website designers go through a lot of trouble designing titles for our sites. I estimate that about 80% of the effort involved in launching a site is devoted to getting the title bar right.

Much like lavatory door signs, the title information is intentionally placed to gain your attention. It's only common courtesy that you read it. In fact, for most of my clients' sites, it is a Terms of Use violation if you don't.

 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.