Comodo CIS Bug fix policy

[Chuck57]

Hi @Chuck57 !

With all due respect, maybe it is because of your high age, but you have an incredible difficulty in differentiating what is your particular case from what are general cases. Repeatedly, you commit the fallacy of making inferences about particular premises (projected) to universal premises. You will never accept that your case with Comodo does not apply to 99.99% of people!

Also possibly because of your high age (and again, I say this with all due respect), you make use and abuse of selectivities (for you, only your arguments are the truth, as well as your analysis, your videos, your experts, your etc, you own the truth... you are completely blind to the arguments, proofs, facts and evidences presented by other people). Among several problems, that also makes you a very intolerant person.

And as the cherry on the top, you exploit the “one weight and two measurements” sophism, you decry in other participants what you yourself use to substantiate your beliefs about Comodo.

I repeat, and again I say this with all due respect... clearly this has to do with your age, and your enormous difficulty in dealing with changes, new habits, new technologies... and with arguments with which you do not agree.

But what makes you a fanatic is not your religious devotion to Comodo (that is your freedom and your right)! You are a fanatic because you are intolerant, a person unable to listen to what others say, unable to understand that others have the same freedom and right to disagree with you, or to criticize Comodo.

Decopi, do you realize that just about every single thing you mentioned, other than my advanced age, also applies to you? Everything. In every paragraph, especially the last paragraph where you accuse me of doing exactly, 100%, what you did and are doing in your post.

 

[Decopi]

All I can do is point towards any cruelsistor video as proof Comodos effectiveness..

... maybe "you could do it", but you never did it, absolutely none of your posts contain facts, evidences, proofs or content... your posts only have personal attacks.

And you have not pointed to anyone's videos, because those videos do not constitute proofs, are not made by experts, do not follow protocols, nor are they universally verifiable. Also, it is never too much to say that it constitutes a selectivity to point to the arguments of 1 single participant at MT as evidence, while you ignore, or minimize, or disqualify all evidence that is presented by other participants.

 

[wat0114]

Regardless of the third party security solution that you use, IPv6 should be disabled on your system. That's just Security 101 as IPv6 after all these years has multiple unresolved security issues.

With the exception of a poorly configured network, there's no reason to disable IPv6.

 

[Chuck57]

... maybe "you could do it", but you never did it, absolutely none of your posts contain facts, evidences, proofs or content... your posts only have personal attacks.

And you have not pointed to anyone's videos, because those videos do not constitute proofs, are not made by experts, do not follow protocols, nor are they universally verifiable. Also, it is never too much to say that it constitutes a selectivity to point to the arguments of 1 single participant at MT as evidence, while you ignore, or minimize, or disqualify all evidence that is presented by other participants.

And yours do?

 

[Behold Eck]

... maybe "you could do it", but you never did it, absolutely none of your posts contain facts, evidences, proofs or content... your posts only have personal attacks.

And you have not pointed to anyone's videos, because those videos do not constitute proofs, are not made by experts, do not follow protocols, nor are they universally verifiable. Also, it is never too much to say that it constitutes a selectivity to point to the arguments of 1 single participant at MT as evidence, while you ignore, or minimize, or disqualify all evidence that is presented by other participants.

Do it yourself.

Regards Eck

 

[Decopi]

especially the last paragraph where you accuse me of doing exactly, 100%, what you did and are doing in your post.

... please, pay more attention to my posts!, I almost never address to any specific participant! I always address to “the (irresponsible and immoral) fanatics of Comodo”. Therefore, it is not my fault that you feel alluded to or offended. I repeat, I never address you personally, and that happens because I respect the right and freedoms of all people to use the software they want.

 

[Behold Eck]

Decopi, do you realize that just about every single thing you mentioned, other than my advanced age, also applies to you? Everything. In every paragraph, especially the last paragraph where you accuse me of doing exactly, 100%, what you did and are doing in your post.

I wouldn`t bother Chuck he`s stuck on attack mode. Not much sense is gonna get through.

Regards Eck

 

[Chuck57]

... please, pay more attention to my posts!, I almost never address to any specific participant! I always address to “the (irresponsible and immoral) fanatics of Comodo”. Therefore, it is not my fault that you feel alluded to or offended. I repeat, I never address you personally, and that happens because I respect the right and freedoms of all people to use the software they want.

Where did I imply being offended. Hell, I agree. I'm old. However, your very first sentence was directed at me. "With all due respect, maybe it is because of your high age, but you have an incredible difficulty in differentiating what is your particular case from what are general cases."

The next paragraph is entirely focused on me "Also possibly because of your high age (and again, I say this with all due respect), you make use and abuse of selectivities (for you, only your arguments are the truth, as well as your analysis, your videos, your experts, your etc, you own the truth... you are completely blind to the arguments, proofs, facts and evidences presented by other people). Among several problems, that also makes you a very intolerant person."

And the 3rd, 4th and 5th paragraphs, are full of you, you, you, and reference my antiquity (that sounds better than being a fossilized old geezer). Age aside, I'm not sure what you're smoking, to think no one can go back only a few posts above and see who you were referencing through the entire post.

 

[bazang]

Hi @Chuck57 !

You will never accept that your case with Comodo does not apply to 99.99% of people!

That is a sweeping generalization infused with copious amounts of speculation to the extent that it just ain't true.

But what makes you a fanatic is not your religious devotion to Comodo (that is your freedom and your right)! You are a fanatic because you are intolerant, a person unable to listen to what others say, unable to understand that others have the same freedom and right to disagree with you, or to criticize Comodo.

They do understand. And they agree with you. All they are doing is saying "I (we) do not experience the bugs and it works for me (us)." They admit that Comodo has bugs and issues. It is software. They understand software. There is a way around the bugs and issues. It is CS configuration.

None of them are saying "Comodo is the greatest, most powerful security software in the universe and every person on Earth needs to use it!" All they are saying is "It works for me, and therefore I use it."

The problem over-and-over again with you is you take a simple post made by people like @Chuck57 , @Behold Eck, @cruelsister and others - deliberately twist it using your own agenda words and mis-characterize\mis-categorize their posts and usage of Comodo as "irresponsible and immoral" fanatics.

@Chuck57 , @Behold Eck , @cruelsister , and others all know and agree that people encounter bugs and other issues. They also agree that others can experience serious problems with Comodo. At the same time they are capable of making Comodo work successfully for them. That in no way makes them fanatics.

Stating "It works for me" does not make anybody a fanatic.

It is weird that you use every opportunity to rage against Comodo by twisting others' posts. Even when others agree with you - but using words and phrases that you deliberately ignore what they posted - and automatically default to "You are an irresponsible and immoral Comodo fanatic."

 

[Chuck57]

I wouldn`t bother Chuck he`s stuck on attack mode. Not much sense is gonna get through.

Regards Eck

And he can't see that what he's accusing us of is exactly what he's been doing for as long as I remember, in every Comodo thread.

 

[Decopi]

@Chuck57 , I repeat, I almost never address to any specific participant! Your quote was my answer to a specific question you requested from me.

 

[Trident]

And yours do?

Yes, his posts included evidence. Not sure if it was on this thread, there are many Comodo threads every day so it’s hard to keep up.

 

[bazang]

while you ignore, or minimize, or disqualify all evidence that is presented by other participants.

You never supply evidence either.

Any of you that dislike Comodo so much all have the opportunity to pentest it and provide video proof that it is a terrible security software, but none of you critics ever do.

When test labs such as AVLab.pl test it in specialized use-case scenarios, and Comodo performs extremely well, then you and others attack the test results as "flawed" and state all manner of incorrect things because your intent is to undermine the results and make anyone that posts them as evidence as "irresponsible and immoral fanatics."

 

[bazang]

Yes, his posts included evidence. Not sure if it was on this thread, there are many Comodo threads every day so it’s hard to keep up.

And you and him visit every single Comodo thread on purpose with the intent of creating flame wars and to get the thread locked.

You and @Decopi never miss a Comodo thread so you can bash Comodo and those here that use it.

 

[bazang]

Yes, his posts included evidence.

And what evidence is that?

@Decopi posting critical reviews by laypersons on review websites that are paid to provide good reviews and bad reviews for any other publisher that does not pay them for their "review"?

 

[Chuck57]

Yes, his posts included evidence. Not sure if it was on this thread, there are many Comodo threads every day so it’s hard to keep up.

Is my YouTube video from PC Security Channel evidence? He recommends Comodo Firewall over all others. I'm assuming the guy is an "expert."

I notice you've both assiduously avoided mentioning it. Perhaps because it doesn't agree with your stances?

 

[Trident]

Is my YouTube video from PC Security Channel evidence? He recommends Comodo Firewall over all others. I'm assuming the guy is an "expert."

I notice you've both assiduously avoided mentioning it. Perhaps because it doesn't agree with your stances?

I am not mentioning Leo, I don’t like him, neither I agree with his opinions. Leo has been recommending Sophos for many years and has went above and beyond to promote Sophos. Now the new “baby” seems to be Comodo. Nobody in their right mind will recommend Comodo over others. Unless there is some incentive.

 

[bazang]

I always address to “the (irresponsible and immoral) fanatics ...”.

You do realize that your phrase “the (irresponsible and immoral) fanatics of ...” is offensive to anybody who is native English speaker, right?

It is very obvious from your behaviors here at MT that you do know that it is offensive, but don't care because you have an agenda against Comodo (and users here that use it).

I respect the right and freedoms of all people to use the software they want.

And yet you deliberately troll, undermine, derail, and interfere with every single Comodo discussion here at MT.

Virtually everything you post in a Comodo discussion clearly shows that you do not respect others' choices of software.

 

[Chuck57]

I see. He disagrees with you, so he's being bribed by a software or softwares you don't like. I understand.

 

[Trident]

I see. He disagrees with you, so he's being bribed by a software or softwares you don't like. I understand.

I didn’t necessarily say he’s been bribed, there are loads of “sponsorships” in this world. Tbh I haven’t even watched the video. But I am not a fan of his work in general and if you look at all my posts, you’ll notice that I’ve never commented on him. The Sophos promotions were brought to my attention by another member here, on another thread.