Re: Post with redirect?


"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:itudnbgDVpVteP7anZ2dnUVZ_h6hnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Steve wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MZCdnbHkv81Q-v7anZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Steve wrote:
omp.lang.javascript"
you incompetent fuckwit. lol.
That isn't what he asked, S.T.O.O.P.I.D. Why didn't you answer his
question? I did.
perhaps not. i gave him a solution which shows him how to not use
redirection...and how to do a post from php (which you said was
impossible) to his provider. that method averts his problem and doesn't
force his users to enable js.

You have him a piece of a solution which is entirely unworkable in its
entirety. But since script kiddies like you don't understand the entire
scope of what goes on, that's not surprising.

finally jerry, you are absolutely correct. i gave him a piece of a
solution. is a piece of a solution (though an entire description of a
more complete one was given) expected to work in its entirety? wouldn't
that make it a whole solution rather than a piece? ROFLMAO.


Yep, but you're completely incapable of creating a whole solution.

no, my not providing a whole solution means i did not provide a whole
solution...no matter what you may wish. again, did you ever take logic
courses?

again, your solution to the op's problem was that he should go somewhere
else. nice.

and yes, script kiddies don't usually understand much about anything.
however, i'm no script kiddie...so i hardly see the worth in your stating
such common knowledge. oh yeah, did you ever prove i copied code? no?
then shut the *** up already, whining baby! damn! a 60 year old man
behaving like a 12 year old...for 2 days even!


Oh, so you aren't even as good as a script kiddie, huh? Thanks for
letting us know.

you're illiterate, no?

And for your simple mind - I didn't say it was impossible to post from
PHP. I said it was impossible to redirect from PHP. Two entirely
different statements.

oh no. yep. as predicted. backpeddling via the 'i left out the adjective
that would best help me get out of looking like a liar'...the 'it' now
suddenly become 'redirect'. hmmm, so when i say header, location...you'll
come back with, 'i said redirect post data'. dumbass. you speak an
entirely different language than english, my friend!


Not at all. Those were my statements - which you have consistently tried
to misquote. But that's only because you can't understand plain English.
I left nothing out. It's your *** for brains which doesn't allow you to
understand that.

no misquoting. nice try. apparently your english is not the same one the
rest of us right.

But you've repeatedly claimed it is possible, yet you haven't shown us
how to do it.

oh no, my claim is NOT that you can redirect post data. my claim was that
you can effectively post data to and process data from external sources.
my goal was to avoid redirection. i was clear with the example code that
i gave and clear in the solution's description. i thought redirection was
rather un-needed.


Now who's backpeddling, troll? That's what the op and I were talking
about, and I told him it wasn't possible. Several times you said it was.

not me. if you think i am, provide the quote jerry. i know you don't provide
proof for claims, but when you start claiming you can walk on water (in a
few more years when your alzheimer's is more advanced), people are going to
ask to see it. i guess you'll still not think you actually have to pony up.

So stop backpeddling and tell the world exactly how it was done,
T.R.O.L.L.

provide me a quote that shows i'm backpeddling.

Please do so - the entire PHP world wants to know your magic secret that
even Zend says is impossible.

that's your strawman, jerry. i never claimed that. follow along please.


Multiple times you did, Stevie. Want me to quote your posts? You can't
seem to remember what you said.

yes, many times you build strawmen...and burn them down. yes, quote away.
and if i can't seem to remember what i've said, it would be you, pot,
calling me, kettle, black. as it is, all you can afford in any argument thus
far are unsupported claims. this one is no different.

And all you do is post scripts you've collected off the internet. At
least I understand the magnitude of what you're proposing. So does the
op. But you've already proven you don't.

oh no, i originated that code. support your claim of pleagurism or stfu.
and if you did understand the magnitude, you'd not have suggested
javascript/ajax as any better than a strictly php solution. AND yours
would have sought to AVOID redirection. boy, i really can see where i
considered everything at a much lower observation point than you! LOL.


ROFLMAO. You couldn't originate a phpinfo(). You've already shown that
so many times before. And you even admitted you aren't as good as a
script kiddie.

sorry, jer. that's what you get out of what you read...i cannot help the
quality of your comprehension. again, the rest of us read at or above
colligiate level. i give your eighth grade level a wide birth, but this
one's a bit hard to swallow. please keep up. read the words sloooowwwlllyyy
if that helps.

You posted NO solution. Just a script which does about 2% of what he
wants.

oh, it went from a 'piece of a solution' to 'NO solution'. idiot...and
liar. yes, the function is a very important 2%...the description gets
about 60%. the remaining 38% is describing how to handle the other
server's response.


Nope, it is not a solution. It's some code which is a piece of a
completely unworkable solution.

Let's see you post the WHOLE SOLUTION. T.R.O.L.L.

i won't even entertain your glass house *** anymore jerry, until you pony
up with ANY solution. go ahead. is it because you're really projecting
here...*you* can't provide a single coherent though to solve the problem?
aside from "go to comp.lang.javascript and leave us alone"...yeah, that was
a real winner.

lest i forget to mention, the best you've offered to date is
comp.lang.javascript. laughable.


Which is exactly the right place to ask javascript questions. And
javascript is the best way to handle it.

lol...which is why you've not considered the options you've said you'd
weighed. tell me jerry, how does that solve *anything* that php cannot?

If your way is so much better, let's see you post the entire solution. But
you can't. You can't find anyplace to steal it from. Maybe one of your
script kiddie friends can write it for you.

let's see you post ANYTHING, jerry.

Yep, which book did you copy it out of? Or what site did you get the
original from? You've already proven you don't know how to handle the
op's problem. Just post scripts you've gotten from somewhere.

look man, if you think i copied it, it would be wise of you to research
it and THEN make the claim...and QUOTE the source.


ROFLMAO! I hit a sore point, huh, Stevie? I caught you at your own game
and called you on it. The only "writing" you did was change a few
variable names.

no, i'm just saying SMART people use proof rather than JUST allegations. but
you do what you want. again, you seem to think i care about you enough to
care what you think of me. i don't. sorry, you're going to have to move on
to someone else for that.

you have it ass-backward. you make the claim, have no proof, and make
further estimations from a faulty assumption. what a moron.


Like you do all the time? ROFLMAO, T.R.O.L.L. Your feelings of
inadequacy are showing again. You really need to get professional help
for that.

But in this case you've been caught.

have i? again, give us some proof. we don't all share your version of
delution. and, i'm a troll? no, i think it's even more apparent that you're
not only a troll...but a steve-addict as well.

btw, any luck trying to find out WHO i am...like you said you could...but
can't?

And no, I don't need to spend my time searching the internet finding how
many places scripts like yours are posted. Experienced programmers can
tell when someone is bullshitting them. And you are.

oh. is this like 'i know i serve the one true god' argument we had a
couple of months back. you require no proof...you just 'know' out of some
'superior' vantage point? just as it was in that argument, one should
require some shred of evidence before believing something as
whole-heartedly as you do. seems that activity is wide-spread among many
aspects of your life. good on you.


Yep, maybe a little religion would help you, Stevie. But instead you
attend a church you don't believe in, but don't even tell your fellow
parishioners that you don't believe in God. You're a user besides a
troll.

a "user"? well i've been called worse. btw, as far as church goes, i think
churches have used paritioners far more than vice versa...so if i am, they
can spare some grace there.

But then it's the only way you can gain any semblance of acceptance from
any group. But I suspect they're laughing at you, also.

is that right? are you going to just say whatever you'd like about me and
hope that 1) anyone cares and 2) that it's true, and 3) no one notices you
do so without any proof.

You're a troll in real life as well as on usenet.

wow. all proof to the contrary, stalking knuckle-dragger. at your age, i'd
expect more of myself that what you're getting.

But he's completely incapable of understanding the entire problem.
oh no, i looked past his suggested architecture because it creates
un-needed difficulties. i suggested a new approach. again dimwit, you
just copped-out...comp.lang.javascript. funny how you are so nit-picky
here, when your first statement was that it can't be done in php. lol.
perhaps you should be clear *what* can't be done. perhaps you can more
easily backpeddle going that route.
And you're "architecture" creates 50 times more difficulties.

really? and comp.lang.javascript does what? keeps you from posting even
an idea of what to do? yeah, glass houses are great, aren't they.


It gets him to a group which helps him solve his problems.

hmmm, no point in that since php can handle it all just fine. oh yeah, you
can't solve his problem. i remember. that makes since that you'd pawn him
off.

as for the difficulties? let's hear how you'd do it. and do try to not
limit the audience by requiring js...hmmm.


Not at all, Stevie. JS is the better way to go.

proove it. produce ANY part of your solution.

Let's see you post a COMPLETE solution, Stevie. Not just a few lines of
code you copied from somewhere else.

let's see you post ANY PART of a solution, jer. not just a pass-off to
another newsgroup.

Again, you claim a redirect can be done in PHP. Show the world how it's
done. Maybe one of the sites you steal your scripts from will show you.

oh no, not my claim. you're building strawmen again. my sample and
description clearly avoid redirection. hmmm...i wonder why?!!!


You sure have, troll. Multiple times in this thread. Now who's
backpeddling?

<insert PROOF here>

dumbass.

Come on, troll. Show us. Or we will know you're a troll.

by that logic, you're a troll. i support my claims. you just make them
and run. sounds like you're the prime suspect in that activity.

You have supported no claims. You've just misquoted and twisted words to
what you want things to say. Just like the troll you are.

no, that's what you think i've done. you are just getting scenile. the rest
of us still have our facilities.

Now why don't you go running. I hear you mommy calling you.

lol. troll.


.

Quantcast