"Compilation Of Tutorials, Guides, Tips & Updates"

[steven36]

All my testing I do mostly is own my own if I post a method to the public its always worked .. Just like the IDM method works .. Every mistake I ever made I overcame ... And I sure didn't post to the public and tell them they needed to do something they didn't need do to began with.

[Cortana]

Comedy nights with Kapil is funny :uhuh:

Those ppl haven't watched Comedy Days with - , well u know who :tehe:

[steven36]

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

More evidence of bogus rules being posted here .. Sometimes I wonder do you guys just make up more stuff on the same program just to keep your topic going ..It still works for me fine just blocking activation and expatriation lps. Really it worked for me only blocking the 2 activation ips . Still no reason on why you added other ips to the block list . I even updated with one of them and mine still works fine.

[Cortana]

It still works for me fine just blocking activation and expatriation lps

That was the very reason it didn't work when the guide came out for the very first time.

There goes ur ESET activation, anyone wanna bet odds - 500/1

c'mon betting lasts only till he breaks the news of his activation blocked.

[dcs18]

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

More evidence of bogus rules being posted here .. Sometimes I wonder do you guys just make up more stuff on the same program just to keep your topic going ..It still works for me fine just blocking activation and expatriation lps. Really it worked for me only blocking the 2 activation ips . Still no reason on why you added other ips to the block list . I even updated with one of them and mine still works fine.

Your uneducated types don't even know how to use a firewall - by your very own candid admission.

[rudrax]

@ rudrax - stop behaving like a pussy. :tehe:

When you add unnecessary & avoidable IPs, you are only laboring the firewall with more auditing & filtering work which causes it to lag - especially for Users with a slow connection. This is exactly what I told you when you also added that extra unnecessary & avoidable IP to your copy of Process Lasso Pro - 0% deviation, man (otherwise what is the difference between you and the one who finds himself unloved, unwanted & neglected.)

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

ps:--

Remember, there are many more programs that are due to be introduced into this section - have not yet published the Skype tutorial as hundreds of its rules are still being optimized, ATM.

That's how you think. I think, adding limited IPs to block rule lets ESET to deploy one after another IP for activation check. If you block whole range of their IPs, they will need to deploy some out of order or some classified IPs for the activation check and once they exposes one, we can block the whole range of the new IP order.

[dcs18]

@ rudrax - stop behaving like a pussy. :tehe:

When you add unnecessary & avoidable IPs, you are only laboring the firewall with more auditing & filtering work which causes it to lag - especially for Users with a slow connection. This is exactly what I told you when you also added that extra unnecessary & avoidable IP to your copy of Process Lasso Pro - 0% deviation, man (otherwise what is the difference between you and the one who finds himself unloved, unwanted & neglected.)

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

ps:--

Remember, there are many more programs that are due to be introduced into this section - have not yet published the Skype tutorial as hundreds of its rules are still being optimized, ATM.

That's how you think. I think, adding limited IPs to block rule lets ESET to deploy one after another IP for activation check. If you block whole range of their IPs, they will need to deploy some out of order or some classified IPs for the activation check and once they exposes one, we can block the whole range of the new IP order.

You can do whatever you like with your system - it is your wish. :tehe:

[steven36]

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

More evidence of bogus rules being posted here .. Sometimes I wonder do you guys just make up more stuff on the same program just to keep your topic going ..It still works for me fine just blocking activation and expatriation lps. Really it worked for me only blocking the 2 activation ips . Still no reason on why you added other ips to the block list . I even updated with one of them and mine still works fine.

Your uneducated types don't even know how to use a firewall - by your very own candid admission.

Lets see I can get everything you can get working on my own .. Never have I had to ask you or the ban guy with 1000 names to help me .. I can get things working that most cant and I don't need help .

[Cortana]

ban guy - :lmao:

i do have a name :showoff:

[rudrax]

@ rudrax - stop behaving like a pussy. :tehe:

When you add unnecessary & avoidable IPs, you are only laboring the firewall with more auditing & filtering work which causes it to lag - especially for Users with a slow connection. This is exactly what I told you when you also added that extra unnecessary & avoidable IP to your copy of Process Lasso Pro - 0% deviation, man (otherwise what is the difference between you and the one who finds himself unloved, unwanted & neglected.)

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

ps:--

Remember, there are many more programs that are due to be introduced into this section - have not yet published the Skype tutorial as hundreds of its rules are still being optimized, ATM.

That's how you think. I think, adding limited IPs to block rule lets ESET to deploy one after another IP for activation check. If you block whole range of their IPs, they will need to deploy some out of order or some classified IPs for the activation check and once they exposes one, we can block the whole range of the new IP order.

You can do whatever you like with your system - it is your wish. :tehe:

Yeah, like I told Lite here :tehe:

[dcs18]

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

More evidence of bogus rules being posted here .. Sometimes I wonder do you guys just make up more stuff on the same program just to keep your topic going ..It still works for me fine just blocking activation and expatriation lps. Really it worked for me only blocking the 2 activation ips . Still no reason on why you added other ips to the block list . I even updated with one of them and mine still works fine.

Your uneducated types don't even know how to use a firewall - by your very own candid admission.

Lets see I can get everything you can get working on my own .. Never have I had to ask you or the ban guy with 1000 names to help me .. t I can get things working that most cant and I don't need help .

We do not need your impotent help, either and have been persistently saying this to you - but, you think you are doing us a big favor.

We are not even interested in addressing you and your pet dog - can't you even see that (do you guys want me to to re-post the links . . . . . . . and images.)

Feel welcome to start your own thread - just stop patronizing us!!!

[dcs18]

@ rudrax - stop behaving like a pussy. :tehe:

When you add unnecessary & avoidable IPs, you are only laboring the firewall with more auditing & filtering work which causes it to lag - especially for Users with a slow connection. This is exactly what I told you when you also added that extra unnecessary & avoidable IP to your copy of Process Lasso Pro - 0% deviation, man (otherwise what is the difference between you and the one who finds himself unloved, unwanted & neglected.)

I already have an alternative firewall implementation which works fantastic with most of the recommended IPs completely removed - something which is also future-safe (have not published that noob-free implementation, here - simply because it freezes ones self-growth.) If you are interested about this rule - I can set it (via TeamViewer,) for you.

ps:--

Remember, there are many more programs that are due to be introduced into this section - have not yet published the Skype tutorial as hundreds of its rules are still being optimized, ATM.

That's how you think. I think, adding limited IPs to block rule lets ESET to deploy one after another IP for activation check. If you block whole range of their IPs, they will need to deploy some out of order or some classified IPs for the activation check and once they exposes one, we can block the whole range of the new IP order.

You can do whatever you like with your system - it is your wish. :tehe:

Yeah, like I told Lite here :tehe:

That applies to you, too - may follow him and his pet dog . . . . . . . . . . . . . start using the hosts file as your next contraceptive. :angry:

[steven36]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

[rudrax]

Yeah, like I told Lite here :tehe:

That applies to you, too - may follow him and his pet dog . . . . . . . . . . . . . start using the hosts file as your next contraceptive. :angry:

hosts file is an expired contraceptive. :D

[rudrax]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

He is? :omg:

[dcs18]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

[clubhouse]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

You're using the 'we' word again....Define 'we' :)

[dcs18]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

You're using the 'we' word again....Define 'we' :)

Who might you be to demand that? :)

[steven36]

If you want your own private chat room were you can discuss your own little theories . I suggest you get a room. The only reason anyone is unwanted in your topic is because they disagree with you. As long they suckup and act like your the best thing since the internet your nice to them.

[dcs18]

If you want your own private chat room were you can discuss your own little theories . I suggest you get a room. The only reason anyone is unwanted in your topic is because they disagree with you. As long they suckup and act like your the best thing since the internet your nice to them.

Disagreeing is one thing and being disagreeable is quite another - you may go and get yourself your own private chat room.

[steven36]

If you want your own private chat room were you can discuss your own little theories . I suggest you get a room. The only reason anyone is unwanted in your topic is because they disagree with you. As long they suckup and act like your the best thing since the internet your nice to them.

Disagreeing is one thing and being disagreeable is quite another - you may go and get yourself your own private chat room.

Now you just repeat what I say pretty much as your whole topic . I would expect no less from you . I guess ill join the other 95% of the members here and don't post in your topic anymore what ever makes you happy ! :P

[clubhouse]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

You're using the 'we' word again....Define 'we' :)

Who might you be to demand that? :)

Nobody but I almost always disagree with your opinions, just wanted you to know that you are incorrectly using the word 'we' as in 'all' incorrectly :)

[dcs18]

If you want your own private chat room were you can discuss your own little theories . I suggest you get a room. The only reason anyone is unwanted in your topic is because they disagree with you. As long they suckup and act like your the best thing since the internet your nice to them.

Disagreeing is one thing and being disagreeable is quite another - you may go and get yourself your own private chat room.

Now you just repeat what I say pretty much as your whole topic . I would expect no less from you . I guess ill join the other 95% of the members here and don't post in your topic anymore what ever makes you happy ! :P

Thank you!!!

[dcs18]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

You're using the 'we' word again....Define 'we' :)

Who might you be to demand that? :)

Nobody but I almost always disagree with your opinions, just wanted you to know that you are incorrectly using the word 'we' as in 'all' incorrectly :)

Exactly - nobody!!!

Now, why would I be answerable to a nobody? :)

[clubhouse]

Your on a pubic board .. When I was at Appznet I had 1000s of threads and people I didn't like come in them all the time . But if one debated me I didn't sink low and call them names or talk about them . That's just life .

You cannot sink any lower than you already have - just get lost and stop seeking attention.

We don't give a fcuk to what you did on the public floors of AppzNet - just scam, we do not honor Braggarts, here.

Just go away from where you are unwanted, unloved and neglected - blatantly ignored (the world is watching your desperation and ignorance.)

You're using the 'we' word again....Define 'we' :)

Who might you be to demand that? :)

Nobody but I almost always disagree with your opinions, just wanted you to know that you are incorrectly using the word 'we' as in 'all' incorrectly :)

Exactly - nobody!!!

Now, why would I be answerable to a nobody? :)

Because you can't. You'll be screaming troll next, I don't care :).....I will enter your threads or respond to your arrogant posts or comments as and when I please....Remember that and remember there is nothing you can do to prevent me, until the next time I choose to mess with you

Adios!