Lol. flameduck is the most irrational person i have ever heard. He is arguing by stating facts that are actually AGAINST his argument. The first three definitions do agree. They agree with my point of view. Not yours.
[qupte]Yes. It could be for a lot of things, and your wild guesses are not fact, so please stop presenting them as such.[/quote]Look who's talking guesser boy:
In fact you edited it out of your post. Because you know you are wrong and wish to frame me as some sort of "bad guy". It is clear that this existed at one time because tonyg also quoted a piece of this insult.
You have done stuff like this before, Flameduck. It's no secret that you like argueing about totally pointless topics, and meanwhile making yourself sound completly foolish yet very zealous in defending very odd and clearly wrong ideas.
Most certainly applies here.
Also applies here.
Again applies well here.
Yes, it does agree with my argument. Your just adding flowers to your argument's grave.Also applies here.
Again applies well here.
[qupte]Yes. It could be for a lot of things, and your wild guesses are not fact, so please stop presenting them as such.[/quote]Look who's talking guesser boy:
I interpreted the "finished" statement in his worklog as meaning "All commands are now covered".
How do you figure that? In the future I would ask that you refrain from personal attacks, and instead comply to the rules of the forum.
AAAHAAHHAAHAHAHAH I used your insult against yourself. hell. you should recognise it: And you must not have done much programming which is interesting, considering that this forum is exclusive to software developers.
I've programmed for 6 years.In fact you edited it out of your post. Because you know you are wrong and wish to frame me as some sort of "bad guy". It is clear that this existed at one time because tonyg also quoted a piece of this insult.
You have done stuff like this before, Flameduck. It's no secret that you like argueing about totally pointless topics, and meanwhile making yourself sound completly foolish yet very zealous in defending very odd and clearly wrong ideas.
To determine this please pick one of the following:
1) It is my position that the docs will never be improved or updated, they are definitively finished, and will not be updated ever, even for spellling mistakes as Mark is already finished with this.
2) It is my position that the docs will only be updated for spelling mistakes and new modules, but that existing documentation will remain the same.
3) It is my position that the docs, and all aspects of the documentation will be updated regularilly, based on feedback, like they where for all previous Blitz Research products.
I'd probably pick 2, however, I would like to help blitz research out with the documentation, making the end result a 3. BTW, atleast while I was there the docs were pretty static. Sure everyonce in a while a pack that added a few commands or introduced a new organization system, but no wide re-doing of all the documentation, as seems to be needed. 1) It is my position that the docs will never be improved or updated, they are definitively finished, and will not be updated ever, even for spellling mistakes as Mark is already finished with this.
2) It is my position that the docs will only be updated for spelling mistakes and new modules, but that existing documentation will remain the same.
3) It is my position that the docs, and all aspects of the documentation will be updated regularilly, based on feedback, like they where for all previous Blitz Research products.