Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
i was trying to help some people dont no how to do it if this is what u get for helping thats what i hate about forums  someone with abit of rep and a few posts behind them has to no everything

---

I know you were trying to help, but you can't post something wich is incorrect and let it go.
But here, take a look:

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
and how is DUIDebug removed from 9.0 build 14 i have tried and test it on the lastest wlm 9.0 build 14 heres a screenhttp://img16.imageshack.us/img16/6677/wlm90.jpg

---

This information is completely wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
if i fresh install wlm 9.0 with a fresh install of msgplus  latest version i cannot change the dp position it does not have that feature so i download skins they are either crap or they move the dp's but the skin is horrible the only way i can get it to work is use the reg entry

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\DUIDebug]
"Binary"=dword:00000000
then i can change the dp position otherwise its a no go so how would u do it then change the dp without a horrible skin ??? that skin i posted up does not modify the look in any way unless u tell it to

---

This registry entry just won't do anything. It's like adding

xml code:

---

<--! a comment -->

---

in a .xml file.
So, what would be the difference between with and without that entry? None. Then skins work the same way in both cases. wich makes your post again completely wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
it works perfect on mine in that post u put up it says its not valid anymore well it is quite ov because im using it right now

---

Same as above.

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
if i fresh install wlm 9.0 with a fresh install of msgplus  latest version i cannot change the dp position it does not have that feature so i download skins they are either crap or they move the dp's but the skin is horrible the only way i can get it to work is use the reg entry
[...]
then i can change the dp position otherwise its a no go so how would u do it then change the dp without a horrible skin ??? that skin i posted up does not modify the look in any way unless u tell it to

---

First, about the italics part: Guèna's skin is a normal .plsk file. It sure works without your "workaround".
Second, about the underlined parts: Speaking (or typing, in this case) is easy, but I want you see how good can you make it by yourself. Don't like the skins? Suggest what you think would make them better. Still hate them? No problems. But you don't need to go and call people who made those skin's "people who only want to make skins for themselves".

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
i put this on here because all the skins i could find were customized to how the people that made them wanted them

---

It's true. Partially, but true. Why would someone do something they dislike? By the way, you pay them? I'm sure you don't. They all do it for free, and they really do what they want to, still in the way they think people will like the most. Calling them "selfish people" hurts, didn't you know? If you dislike those that much, why don't you make your own skins? Then come here to criticise other people.

And as Spunky said while I was typing all this:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spunky
Don't think I'm asking questions because I have rep and some posts. I'd do it if I was a nub as well.

As far as I'm concerned the megaupload link was waving a red flag as you are a new member. Then, you proceed to insist that you need a RegHack to use the skins you've "provided", which you don't (as all forum regulars know).

Before trying to help other people, ask if help is already provided and, if it is, think of alternate ways you can help. Simple

---

And, to complete,

quote:

---

Originally posted by landermash
sorry for all the cofusion all i meant really was it worked for me

---

It's not only because it worked for you it has/will work for everyone. Also, take a look at this example:
"Turning off the lights before turning your computer on is the only way to make it work. REALLY! I've tested it, and it really turns on if the lights are off."
See? That's what you've typed, but with other objects. Read "Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison, et chercher la verité dans les sciences", by René Descartes, you'll see why your workaround isn't valid. (If you're not going to read it, as I think, it will be considered invalid because you haven't done step one: receiving the information, verifying if it's true and it's procedences, to then examin it's racionality and justificative. Then only accept what's undoubtably true. In your case, you haven't even checked if the information was true.)