Titor story is all a lie, heres why:
- Thread starter creedo299
- Start date
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Tell you what, you go back and address a couple of the things you left hanging in the other IBM/Y2k thread and I'll respond to this one.
I've got my work too. You have poured in a lot of words and cut and paste tactics on that thread. To read that thread and find out and adress the "technical" questions and to differentiate "technical" and "non-technical", I need a couple of days to go through the conversations.
But leave that thread. Come to this one. There is no ASSUMPTIONS involved in this thread. But you said a lot of assumptions are involved. That is the statement I want you to explain in this thread why and you can never do it. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Me or MEM have provided enough information so as why we find the story interesting. You just don't like it and you want me to dismiss it saying Titor is a Fraud.
I've got my work too. You have poured in a lot of words and cut and paste tactics on that thread. To read that thread and find out and adress the "technical" questions and to differentiate "technical" and "non-technical", I need a couple of days to go through the conversations.
But leave that thread. Come to this one. There is no ASSUMPTIONS involved in this thread. But you said a lot of assumptions are involved. That is the statement I want you to explain in this thread why and you can never do it. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Me or MEM have provided enough information so as why we find the story interesting. You just don't like it and you want me to dismiss it saying Titor is a Fraud.
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Bcforn64,
"But...OH OH, maybe uhm you know he did that to keep a sense of disbelief, point is this discussion could go on FOREVER!"
He might have done it, but after 2005 I would not be interested in Titor and talk about him. I would conclude it is a work of fiction. I have made it clear quite a number of times. I have provided LOGICAL reasons for that too.
RMT,
I managed to do a search on that page with a word I remember. Here it is:
“But two things came together in the mid-to-late 90s that made the eventuality of a product like Hercules a necessity:
1- Processing speeds increased by orders of magnitude and true Windows multitasking emerged. There was now an ability to run one, or more, IBM s/360 mainframe applications in a single PC's multitasking environment.
2- As companies began to address their Y2k compliance issues (most didn't really get started analyzing and changing code until the 94-95 timeframe), they saw that they could kill two birds with one stone: They could port their existing S/360 apps running on the old mainframes over to PCs, AND at the same time, clean them up for Y2K. From this business case is where Roger Bowler obviously saw that it would be a good thing to spend the time and effort to reverse engineer S/360 and develop his Hercules emulator.â€
The 2nd reason you provided is your OWN ASSUMPTION. There is nothing, even Bowler’s remarks on his site that says this is the REASON why Hercules was created.
The interpretation is based on a few assumptions, I agree because it is an INTERPRETATION. But your counter argument is also based on ASSUMPTIONS.
"But...OH OH, maybe uhm you know he did that to keep a sense of disbelief, point is this discussion could go on FOREVER!"
He might have done it, but after 2005 I would not be interested in Titor and talk about him. I would conclude it is a work of fiction. I have made it clear quite a number of times. I have provided LOGICAL reasons for that too.
RMT,
I managed to do a search on that page with a word I remember. Here it is:
“But two things came together in the mid-to-late 90s that made the eventuality of a product like Hercules a necessity:
1- Processing speeds increased by orders of magnitude and true Windows multitasking emerged. There was now an ability to run one, or more, IBM s/360 mainframe applications in a single PC's multitasking environment.
2- As companies began to address their Y2k compliance issues (most didn't really get started analyzing and changing code until the 94-95 timeframe), they saw that they could kill two birds with one stone: They could port their existing S/360 apps running on the old mainframes over to PCs, AND at the same time, clean them up for Y2K. From this business case is where Roger Bowler obviously saw that it would be a good thing to spend the time and effort to reverse engineer S/360 and develop his Hercules emulator.â€
The 2nd reason you provided is your OWN ASSUMPTION. There is nothing, even Bowler’s remarks on his site that says this is the REASON why Hercules was created.
The interpretation is based on a few assumptions, I agree because it is an INTERPRETATION. But your counter argument is also based on ASSUMPTIONS.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Now you see Herc, that's just a bunch of baloney. Because the fact that I cut and pasted, and offset with the "quote" capability, all of the statements by you that I was discussing, then TECHNICALLY that should make is easier than what you do...that being either to ignore the point, or when you do quote me you don't use the "quote" feature. You're making excuses, just like you do for Titor.
Again, you simply wish to ignore the points I made in that thread that you couldn't answer TECHNICALLY. That's a very poor tactic.
1. I am waiting for you to clearly state the point you are trying to make, so that way you can't continually change it on me (or tell me I don't understand your point).
2. The fact that you cannot identify the underlying assumptions in your own analysis speaks to the technical depth of said analysis. There are implicit assumptions in what you posted, as it would pertain to Titor. But again, I am not going to tell you what they are without you clarifying your point, because then you would just weasel away and change your point or claim I don't understand it.
HA! :D Now it is YOU who do not understand MY point, and what I have been doing all along! And what is even funnier is that I CLEARLY spelled out what I was doing SEVERAL times in that other thread... and you still don't get it! I have been consistent all along in how I have challenged your statements, and yet you still don't get it.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!
RMT
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
If this, indeed, is your "bottom line" then you might want to begin a little earlier than the end of 2005.
I've decided that the only way to get through to you is to use Titor's own words against your theoretical interpretations. And I am going to try to establish something that you must either accept or deny, because otherwise there is no LOGICAL, SCIENTIFIC, or FACTUAL way you can support your "interpretations" if you don't take a stance one way or the other. Are you ready? I would like a clear-cut answer to this:
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
If you DO accept this, then I must tell you that you can't have it both ways. You cannot pick and choose where you think he was relaying factual information and where you think he may have been pulling a fast one on you. Because if you are in the "pick and choose mode", then NOTHING he said can be used as SCIENTIFIC, FACTUAL, or even LOGICAL because there is always the question of whether he was lying. Do you understand that? If so, I am now going to present soemthing that Boomer (AKA "John Titor") himself wrote wherein he clarified exactly which year he expected the US Civil War to begin:
This comes from the archive of Titor's posts at: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/john_titor_archive_page9.html
So... here in this quote FROM JOHN TITOR HIMSELF, we see that he clarified his "prediction" of the US Civil War. Thus, using his own clarifying words, we can therefore eliminate 2005 from consideration and state that the war should have happened before the end of 2004. That would mean we should start my Titor is BS party RIGHT NOW.
OK, now I know I have used rigorous logic and facts here, so I hope your head is not spinning. But are you now going to try to put your own spin on this to try to keep the Titor story alive? My bet is that you will. And you might likely try to fall back on "but maybe our worldline is divergent from Titors enough to push it off into 2005." To which I would respond that an entire year of "divergence" (however you choose to measure it) would certainly be more than "about 2%".
Give me some concrete (and hopefully logical, factual, and scientific) responses to this, if you please! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
RMT
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
Again, you simply wish to ignore the points I made in that thread that you couldn't answer TECHNICALLY. That's a very poor tactic.
I DID answer in the next post. Read it.
How about YOU telling WHAT is the assumption involved in this this thread. I say there is NO assumption involved. You point out the assumption.
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
In that thread I never said the Titor is real. I said it is interesting. You are the ONE taking it so SERIOUSLY.
I DID answer in the next post. Read it.
How about YOU telling WHAT is the assumption involved in this this thread. I say there is NO assumption involved. You point out the assumption.
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
In that thread I never said the Titor is real. I said it is interesting. You are the ONE taking it so SERIOUSLY.
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
You have poured in a lot of words and cut and paste tactics on that thread. To read that thread and find out and adress the "technical" questions and to differentiate "technical" and "non-technical", I need a couple of days to go through the conversations.
Now you see Herc, that's just a bunch of baloney. Because the fact that I cut and pasted, and offset with the "quote" capability, all of the statements by you that I was discussing, then TECHNICALLY that should make is easier than what you do...that being either to ignore the point, or when you do quote me you don't use the "quote" feature. You're making excuses, just like you do for Titor.
In reply to:
But leave that thread. Come to this one.
Again, you simply wish to ignore the points I made in that thread that you couldn't answer TECHNICALLY. That's a very poor tactic.
In reply to:
There is no ASSUMPTIONS involved in this thread. But you said a lot of assumptions are involved. That is the statement I want you to explain in this thread why and you can never do it.
1. I am waiting for you to clearly state the point you are trying to make, so that way you can't continually change it on me (or tell me I don't understand your point).
2. The fact that you cannot identify the underlying assumptions in your own analysis speaks to the technical depth of said analysis. There are implicit assumptions in what you posted, as it would pertain to Titor. But again, I am not going to tell you what they are without you clarifying your point, because then you would just weasel away and change your point or claim I don't understand it.
In reply to:
Me or MEM have provided enough information so as why we find the story interesting. You just don't like it and you want me to dismiss it saying Titor is a Fraud.
HA! Now it is YOU who do not understand MY point, and what I have been doing all along! And what is even funnier is that I CLEARLY spelled out what I was doing SEVERAL times in that other thread... and you still don't get it! I have been consistent all along in how I have challenged your statements, and yet you still don't get it.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!
RMT
TPM of MST = (Triplex Physical Matrix) of (Massive SpaceTime)
post Extras:
He might have done it, but after 2005 I would not be interested in Titor and talk about him. I would conclude it is a work of fiction. I have made it clear quite a number of times.
If this, indeed, is your "bottom line" then you might want to begin a little earlier than the end of 2005.
I've decided that the only way to get through to you is to use Titor's own words against your theoretical interpretations. And I am going to try to establish something that you must either accept or deny, because otherwise there is no LOGICAL, SCIENTIFIC, or FACTUAL way you can support your "interpretations" if you don't take a stance one way or the other. Are you ready? I would like a clear-cut answer to this:
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
If you DO accept this, then I must tell you that you can't have it both ways. You cannot pick and choose where you think he was relaying factual information and where you think he may have been pulling a fast one on you. Because if you are in the "pick and choose mode", then NOTHING he said can be used as SCIENTIFIC, FACTUAL, or even LOGICAL because there is always the question of whether he was lying. Do you understand that? If so, I am now going to present soemthing that Boomer (AKA "John Titor") himself wrote wherein he clarified exactly which year he expected the US Civil War to begin:
In reply to:
02/12/01 23:51 (about the future) 375
((8. John says the civil war which starts in 2004 or 2005 (depending on the post) leads to the world war which starts in 2015. ( So we have a TEN YEAR civil war???))
It's 2004. I apologize for a missed key (very observant ? we all need good critics).
This comes from the archive of Titor's posts at: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/john_titor_archive_page9.html
So... here in this quote FROM JOHN TITOR HIMSELF, we see that he clarified his "prediction" of the US Civil War. Thus, using his own clarifying words, we can therefore eliminate 2005 from consideration and state that the war should have happened before the end of 2004. That would mean we should start my Titor is BS party RIGHT NOW.
OK, now I know I have used rigorous logic and facts here, so I hope your head is not spinning. But are you now going to try to put your own spin on this to try to keep the Titor story alive? My bet is that you will. And you might likely try to fall back on "but maybe our worldline is divergent from Titors enough to push it off into 2005." To which I would respond that an entire year of "divergence" (however you choose to measure it) would certainly be more than "about 2%".
Give me some concrete (and hopefully logical, factual, and scientific) responses to this, if you please!
RMT
TPM of MST = (Triplex Physical Matrix) of (Massive SpaceTime)
Now you see Herc, that's just a bunch of baloney. Because the fact that I cut and pasted, and offset with the "quote" capability, all of the statements by you that I was discussing, then TECHNICALLY that should make is easier than what you do...that being either to ignore the point, or when you do quote me you don't use the "quote" feature. You're making excuses, just like you do for Titor.
In reply to:
But leave that thread. Come to this one.
Again, you simply wish to ignore the points I made in that thread that you couldn't answer TECHNICALLY. That's a very poor tactic.
In reply to:
There is no ASSUMPTIONS involved in this thread. But you said a lot of assumptions are involved. That is the statement I want you to explain in this thread why and you can never do it.
1. I am waiting for you to clearly state the point you are trying to make, so that way you can't continually change it on me (or tell me I don't understand your point).
2. The fact that you cannot identify the underlying assumptions in your own analysis speaks to the technical depth of said analysis. There are implicit assumptions in what you posted, as it would pertain to Titor. But again, I am not going to tell you what they are without you clarifying your point, because then you would just weasel away and change your point or claim I don't understand it.
In reply to:
Me or MEM have provided enough information so as why we find the story interesting. You just don't like it and you want me to dismiss it saying Titor is a Fraud.
HA! Now it is YOU who do not understand MY point, and what I have been doing all along! And what is even funnier is that I CLEARLY spelled out what I was doing SEVERAL times in that other thread... and you still don't get it! I have been consistent all along in how I have challenged your statements, and yet you still don't get it.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!
RMT
TPM of MST = (Triplex Physical Matrix) of (Massive SpaceTime)
post Extras:
He might have done it, but after 2005 I would not be interested in Titor and talk about him. I would conclude it is a work of fiction. I have made it clear quite a number of times.
If this, indeed, is your "bottom line" then you might want to begin a little earlier than the end of 2005.
I've decided that the only way to get through to you is to use Titor's own words against your theoretical interpretations. And I am going to try to establish something that you must either accept or deny, because otherwise there is no LOGICAL, SCIENTIFIC, or FACTUAL way you can support your "interpretations" if you don't take a stance one way or the other. Are you ready? I would like a clear-cut answer to this:
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
If you DO accept this, then I must tell you that you can't have it both ways. You cannot pick and choose where you think he was relaying factual information and where you think he may have been pulling a fast one on you. Because if you are in the "pick and choose mode", then NOTHING he said can be used as SCIENTIFIC, FACTUAL, or even LOGICAL because there is always the question of whether he was lying. Do you understand that? If so, I am now going to present soemthing that Boomer (AKA "John Titor") himself wrote wherein he clarified exactly which year he expected the US Civil War to begin:
In reply to:
02/12/01 23:51 (about the future) 375
((8. John says the civil war which starts in 2004 or 2005 (depending on the post) leads to the world war which starts in 2015. ( So we have a TEN YEAR civil war???))
It's 2004. I apologize for a missed key (very observant ? we all need good critics).
This comes from the archive of Titor's posts at: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/john_titor_archive_page9.html
So... here in this quote FROM JOHN TITOR HIMSELF, we see that he clarified his "prediction" of the US Civil War. Thus, using his own clarifying words, we can therefore eliminate 2005 from consideration and state that the war should have happened before the end of 2004. That would mean we should start my Titor is BS party RIGHT NOW.
OK, now I know I have used rigorous logic and facts here, so I hope your head is not spinning. But are you now going to try to put your own spin on this to try to keep the Titor story alive? My bet is that you will. And you might likely try to fall back on "but maybe our worldline is divergent from Titors enough to push it off into 2005." To which I would respond that an entire year of "divergence" (however you choose to measure it) would certainly be more than "about 2%".
Give me some concrete (and hopefully logical, factual, and scientific) responses to this, if you please!
RMT
TPM of MST = (Triplex Physical Matrix) of (Massive SpaceTime)
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Once again you have missed the point of what I am doing (how does it feel with the shoe being on the other foot?). All along I have been challenging the scientific, factual, and logical basis of your analysis and interpretations. And YOU were the one who called for sticking to facts, science and logic.
And oh, BTW, you have (once again) NOT responded to my questions and/or points! Why not answer them instead of stalling or changing the topic? This is about you and your "proof" of interpretations.
RMT
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
And YOU were the one who called for sticking to facts, science and logic.
Interpretations are based on assumptions. But the assumptions should be logical. In the assumption there was nothing like a "genie" magically comes out of the IBM 5100 and gave Roger Bowler the emulator. You make a big issue out of it.
Just scroll up and read my response to the other thread.
On your quote about 2004 and 2% divergence, read MEM's interpretation of Yellowstone. I found that LOGICAL and fitting the story. Here is why I say 2005 is the end of Titor. Armed conflict started when he was 8 years old:
“When the civil “conflict†started and got worse, people generally decided to either stay in the cities and lose most of their civil rights under the guise of security or leave the cities for more isolated and rural areas. Our home was searched once and the neighbor across the street was arrested for some unknown reason. That convinced my father to leave the city.
From the age of 8 to 12, we lived away from the cities and spent most of our time in a farm community with other families avoiding conflict with the federal police and national guard. By that time, it was pretty clear that we were not going back to what we had and the division between the “cities†and the “country†was well definedâ€
Posted by John Titor on 02-12-2001 08:54 PM
I can’t tell you what music is popular in the next few years because the “me†here is only three years old.
Titor posted this on November 2000:
I was born in 1998 so the other "me" is 2 on this world line.
Titor was born someday between 1st Jan 1998 to 12th Feb 1998. He has celebrated his 3rd birthday, so on 12th February 2001, he says he is 3 years old.
Now Titor’s age is 7 years old. Next year Jan/Feb, he’d be 8. From the above quote, they moved away from the cities when he was 8 to avoid conflict. So the 2008 Civil War interpretation is WRONG. In 2008, he’d be 10.
“In my 2012, I was 14 years old spending most of my time living, running and hiding in the woods and rivers of central Florida. The civil war was in its 7th year and the world war was three years away.â€
Interpretations are based on assumptions. But the assumptions should be logical. In the assumption there was nothing like a "genie" magically comes out of the IBM 5100 and gave Roger Bowler the emulator. You make a big issue out of it.
Just scroll up and read my response to the other thread.
On your quote about 2004 and 2% divergence, read MEM's interpretation of Yellowstone. I found that LOGICAL and fitting the story. Here is why I say 2005 is the end of Titor. Armed conflict started when he was 8 years old:
“When the civil “conflict†started and got worse, people generally decided to either stay in the cities and lose most of their civil rights under the guise of security or leave the cities for more isolated and rural areas. Our home was searched once and the neighbor across the street was arrested for some unknown reason. That convinced my father to leave the city.
From the age of 8 to 12, we lived away from the cities and spent most of our time in a farm community with other families avoiding conflict with the federal police and national guard. By that time, it was pretty clear that we were not going back to what we had and the division between the “cities†and the “country†was well definedâ€
Posted by John Titor on 02-12-2001 08:54 PM
I can’t tell you what music is popular in the next few years because the “me†here is only three years old.
Titor posted this on November 2000:
I was born in 1998 so the other "me" is 2 on this world line.
Titor was born someday between 1st Jan 1998 to 12th Feb 1998. He has celebrated his 3rd birthday, so on 12th February 2001, he says he is 3 years old.
Now Titor’s age is 7 years old. Next year Jan/Feb, he’d be 8. From the above quote, they moved away from the cities when he was 8 to avoid conflict. So the 2008 Civil War interpretation is WRONG. In 2008, he’d be 10.
“In my 2012, I was 14 years old spending most of my time living, running and hiding in the woods and rivers of central Florida. The civil war was in its 7th year and the world war was three years away.â€
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
BWAAAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA! My goodness, your thinking is unbelieveably shallow, Hercules! Let's examine why:
#1 - The very assumption that Titor WAS a time traveler, galavanting across the years to get an IBM 5100 and bring it to Bowler in 1998 is pretty much along the lines of "genie magic".
#2 - The fact that the IBM 5100 had to be "tweaked" (no specific details there) is certainly worded in such a way as to appear "magical". "Tweak" is not, repeat NOT a technical term!
No, I am sorry, but that is NOT a given. In fact, the best interpretations are based on FACTS! But I find it odd now that for all the whining you did about SCIENCE, FACTS, and LOGIC that you are now admitting that you are making assumptions.
And precisely what are the TECHNICAL criteria for an assumption to be logical? Oh my goodness, would my father have a field day with you! (BTW, he was a top-notch engineer for AT&T back in the days when they were putting the first satellites in orbit for communications)
And why do you find that logical? In fact, when people are talking "in code" they most often will try to select a code that does NOT follow logic so that people not intended to understand the code are unable to figure it out.
That's an awful lot of mathematical gymnastics when you could just believe ONE statement from Titor in which he clarified his prediction. And I must also point out you did NOT answer the simple question I asked and placed in BOLD. But can't you see how silly your analysis is? Here let me show you:
There are at LEAST FOUR different statements by Titor that you are ASSUMING (and not very logically I might add) are true with respect to his age and events about the civil war. THEN you take the assumption that these four statements are true, and apply "logic" to them to rule out 2008 as a civil war date. Now, can't you understand the following are facts:
1- There is a LARGER chance for error with your method because you are relying upon the assumptions that ALL of these statements from Titor are true.
2- Your elimination of 2008 has little, if anything, to do with why 2005 is a relevant date or not.
3- If you have to accept anything Titor wrote as true, why not just accept the fact that HE SAID that the civil war starts in 2004 (and further corrected his 2005 error)?
Not only would I not hire you as an engineer, Herc, but I would be scared [censored]-less if you were ever a lawyer for me! :D
RMT
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
QUESTION FOR HERCULES
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
Please answer this simple question, if you would.
RMT
Do you accept words that the alleged John Titor wrote as if they COULD BE factual as a basis for your interpretations?
Please answer this simple question, if you would.
RMT
Hercules
Temporal Navigator
The fact that the IBM 5100 had to be "tweaked" (no specific details there) is certainly worded in such a way as to appear "magical". "Tweak" is not, repeat NOT a technical term!
RMT, this is clear evidence that you don't know ANYTHING on this subject. Do you know what Tweak XP is?
YOU don't know anything on the subject and so your VALIDATION about me bothers me the least.
If you were a Judge in a court of Law, I guess you would sentence a person to death without analyzing whether he is has really committed the crime or not.
MEM was right:
"I've had similar interactions with RMT. Get ready for the "titor is a fraud" counterpoint with no supporting facts. He pulls that out when he gets his facts screwed up of cannot support his stance."
I have always liked MEM for his logical and intellectual analysis. But YOU dont like it. Now I understand why you hate Titor. You cannot analyze it. You have not answered any of my technical statements in this thread, simply saying Titor is a Fraud.
End of Conversation.
RMT, this is clear evidence that you don't know ANYTHING on this subject. Do you know what Tweak XP is?
YOU don't know anything on the subject and so your VALIDATION about me bothers me the least.
If you were a Judge in a court of Law, I guess you would sentence a person to death without analyzing whether he is has really committed the crime or not.
MEM was right:
"I've had similar interactions with RMT. Get ready for the "titor is a fraud" counterpoint with no supporting facts. He pulls that out when he gets his facts screwed up of cannot support his stance."
I have always liked MEM for his logical and intellectual analysis. But YOU dont like it. Now I understand why you hate Titor. You cannot analyze it. You have not answered any of my technical statements in this thread, simply saying Titor is a Fraud.
End of Conversation.
RainmanTime
Super Moderator
Oh geez! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/mad.gif So now I suppose you are going to tell me that your "interpretation" is that Titor was referring to Tweak XP!?!?! Gimme a break! You have readily admitted that you understand that Titor was vague in a great many of his descriptions... and so now you are going to claim that he meant something SPECIFIC when he said "tweak" (and yes, he DID use quotes)?
BS...I am convinced I know more than you, especially if you think his use of "tweak" meant anything other than a vague reference to somehow changing the basic design of the computer's underlying processing.
No, that would be something you would be more likely to do, because you would simply ASSUME and "interpret" instead of relying on science, facts, and logic.
Sure...that's an easy way to run away from valid criticism of your analytical processes. Face it Hercules, you have strayed very far from using SCIENCE, FACTS, and LOGIC in your "interpretation" of Titor.
If you're done talking to me, I would just like to ask one favor: Promise you will come back after Jan 1, 2006 so I can harangue you some more about how obvious it is that Titor was a fake! Pretty please? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/devil.gif
RMT
For God's sake people, grow up. I have been lurking at this forum forever, not caring to post. I can't even follow what half these arguements are about. What is the arguement of this thread? Debating the interpretations of each other's interpretations?
Webopedia Definition of Tweak
Here's webopedia's definiton of Tweak. I'm a Computer Science major, who is studying to become an engineer, but I'm not going to comment on this because there is no point. Take with the definition what you will and have fun!
P.S. Watching all of this go on for months, I can tell you right now that this will go on forever.
Webopedia Definition of Tweak
Here's webopedia's definiton of Tweak. I'm a Computer Science major, who is studying to become an engineer, but I'm not going to comment on this because there is no point. Take with the definition what you will and have fun!
P.S. Watching all of this go on for months, I can tell you right now that this will go on forever.