|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.exams.mcse > July 2002 > OU's, Groups, Users & GPO : HELP
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
OU's, Groups, Users & GPO : HELP
|
|
| dvnova 2002-07-19, 4:25 pm |
| I'm currently messing about with AD Users & Computers and have become
baffled about how to do something...
I have set up an Organizational Unit, and linked a GPO to it. I have
then Right Clicked the OU Name and selected NEW and created a new user
in the OU. I log in under that user name and the GPO is applied
successfully! GREAT! I'm happy...but now....
I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?) So I right click the
group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
Why is this the case?
I guess to summarise, is there a way to move pre-existing users/groups
in the USERS built-in group to a OU, or even keep the users/groups in
the USERS built-in group and link it to an OU and then successfully
apply a GPO to it?
Any help would be appreciated, I spent too long trying to work this
one out when I should be learning other things for my exams! ;-)
cheers
Donald
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-19, 4:25 pm |
| "dvnova" <d.nova@bham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
> members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
> put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?) So I right click the
> group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
> appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
> group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
Group policy is applied to users OR computers and NOT groups. Check the
actual policy you'll see a user section and a computer section but no group
section. If you want to filter by group you do it by setting security on the
policy itself.
It's confusing but it makes sense if you think about it. Say you have "Brad"
who is a member of the "sales" group AND is a member of the "marketing"
group. Now if sales is in the "Glasgow" OU and marketing is in the "Dundee"
OU and if those OUs have completely different policies that conflict which
one wins for Brad? Well M$ couldn't come up with a good answer for that so
they decided that groups can't get policy applied to them. Thus making
"Group Policy" my favourite misnomer :-)
| |
| S.O'Brien 2002-07-19, 5:25 pm |
| Xref: tkmsftngp01 microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse:60841
"dvnova" <d.nova@bham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:a02b34f0.0207191352.615bf536@posting.google.com...
> I'm currently messing about with AD Users & Computers and have become
> baffled about how to do something...
>
> I have set up an Organizational Unit, and linked a GPO to it. I have
> then Right Clicked the OU Name and selected NEW and created a new user
> in the OU. I log in under that user name and the GPO is applied
> successfully! GREAT! I'm happy...but now....
>
> I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
> members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
> put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?) So I right click the
> group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
> appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
> group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
>
> Why is this the case?
>
> I guess to summarise, is there a way to move pre-existing users/groups
> in the USERS built-in group to a OU, or even keep the users/groups in
> the USERS built-in group and link it to an OU and then successfully
> apply a GPO to it?
Have you granted the users the read/apply right to the GPO?
Sue
| |
| Ben Smith [MS] 2002-07-20, 1:25 am |
| In article <a02b34f0.0207191352.615bf536@posting.google.com>, dvnova
(d.nova@bham.ac.uk) writes...
> I'm currently messing about with AD Users & Computers and have become
> baffled about how to do something...
>
> I have set up an Organizational Unit, and linked a GPO to it. I have
> then Right Clicked the OU Name and selected NEW and created a new user
> in the OU. I log in under that user name and the GPO is applied
> successfully! GREAT! I'm happy...but now....
>
> I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
> members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
> put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?)
Nope - you are not correct here. As you have probably noticed, each
GPO has two parts: Computer configuration and User configuration.
Each part is applied to either the computer or the user account for
which the GPO applies. The only role that groups have in GPOs is for
filtering.
> So I right click the
> group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
> appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
> group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
> Why is this the case?
This is the expected behavior. You would need to move the user
object into the OU for the User configuration settings affected the
user account.
>
> I guess to summarise, is there a way to move pre-existing users/groups
> in the USERS built-in group to a OU, or even keep the users/groups in
> the USERS built-in group and link it to an OU and then successfully
> apply a GPO to it?
Move the user accounts.
>
> Any help would be appreciated, I spent too long trying to work this
> one out when I should be learning other things for my exams! ;-)
>
> cheers
> Donald
Hope this helps!
--
Ben Smith
Microsoft Training and Certification
Are you secure? http://www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided “AS IS” with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
| |
| Ben Smith [MS] 2002-07-20, 1:25 am |
| In article <N50_8.36814$WsS.13737
@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, S.O'Brien
(netsvcc@hotmail.com) writes...
> "dvnova" <d.nova@bham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:a02b34f0.0207191352.615bf536@posting.google.com...
> > I'm currently messing about with AD Users & Computers and have become
> > baffled about how to do something...
> >
> > I have set up an Organizational Unit, and linked a GPO to it. I have
> > then Right Clicked the OU Name and selected NEW and created a new user
> > in the OU. I log in under that user name and the GPO is applied
> > successfully! GREAT! I'm happy...but now....
> >
> > I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
> > members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
> > put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?) So I right click the
> > group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
> > appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
> > group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
> >
> > Why is this the case?
> >
> > I guess to summarise, is there a way to move pre-existing users/groups
> > in the USERS built-in group to a OU, or even keep the users/groups in
> > the USERS built-in group and link it to an OU and then successfully
> > apply a GPO to it?
>
> Have you granted the users the read/apply right to the GPO?
>
> Sue
>
>
>
Good thought, but this is not the issue here. See my post to poster.
--
Ben Smith
Microsoft Training and Certification
Are you secure? http://www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided “AS IS” with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
| |
| Ben Smith [MS] 2002-07-20, 1:25 am |
| In article <jc0_8.209130$Vl3.1984133@news.easynews.com>, 70-228
(Gibhal@kreunk.com) writes...
> "dvnova" <d.nova@bham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > I have an existing group in USERS built-in group which has several
> > members in it which I wish to apply the GPO to, so therefore I must
> > put that group into the OU. (I'm I correct?) So I right click the
> > group and select MOVE and I move the group to my OU [it physically
> > appears in the OU], then I log in using one of the user names in the
> > group BUT no GPO is applied!!!!
>
> Group policy is applied to users OR computers and NOT groups. Check the
> actual policy you'll see a user section and a computer section but no group
> section. If you want to filter by group you do it by setting security on the
> policy itself.
>
> It's confusing but it makes sense if you think about it. Say you have "Brad"
> who is a member of the "sales" group AND is a member of the "marketing"
> group. Now if sales is in the "Glasgow" OU and marketing is in the "Dundee"
> OU and if those OUs have completely different policies that conflict which
> one wins for Brad? Well M$ couldn't come up with a good answer for that so
> they decided that groups can't get policy applied to them.
This is not true.
> Thus making "Group Policy" my favourite misnomer :-)
>
Yes, there has definitely been much unnecessary confusion around the
name.
--
Ben Smith
Microsoft Training and Certification
Are you secure? http://www.microsoft.com/security
This posting is provided “AS IS” with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-20, 3:25 am |
| "Ben Smith [MS]" <bensmi@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> In article <jc0_8.209130$Vl3.1984133@news.easynews.com>, 70-228
> > It's confusing but it makes sense if you think about it. Say you have
"Brad"
> > who is a member of the "sales" group AND is a member of the "marketing"
> > group. Now if sales is in the "Glasgow" OU and marketing is in the
"Dundee"
> > OU and if those OUs have completely different policies that conflict
which
> > one wins for Brad? Well M$ couldn't come up with a good answer for that
so
> > they decided that groups can't get policy applied to them.
>
> This is not true.
Which bit?
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-20, 8:25 am |
| circa Sat, 20 Jul 2002 08:23:04 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> > > It's confusing but it makes sense if you think about it. Say you have
> "Brad"
> > > who is a member of the "sales" group AND is a member of the "marketing"
> > > group. Now if sales is in the "Glasgow" OU and marketing is in the
> "Dundee"
> > > OU and if those OUs have completely different policies that conflict
> which
> > > one wins for Brad? Well M$ couldn't come up with a good answer for that
> so
> > > they decided that groups can't get policy applied to them.
> >
> > This is not true.
>
> Which bit?
>
The bit saying that Microsoft "couldn't come up with a good answer
for that". Group Policy works exactly as it was designed, and was
intentionally designed to work exactly as it does.
While I agree that the term "Group Policy" is confusing, it's easier
to understand if one considers that GP is "groupings of policy
settings". Group policy applies only to computers and to users, based
on the location of their objects in the Active Directory hierarchy.
People who make comments like the one you made usually do so either
out of misunderstanding of how it works or out of irrational dislike
of anything Microsoft, in my experience.
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-20, 9:25 am |
| "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.17a33232cce80e6f989fa7@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Sat, 20 Jul 2002 08:23:04 GMT, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> > > > It's confusing but it makes sense if you think about it. Say you
have
> > "Brad"
> > > > who is a member of the "sales" group AND is a member of the
"marketing" [colo
r=darkred]
> > > > group. Now if sales is in the "Glasgow" OU and marketing is in the
> > "Dundee"
> > > > OU and if those OUs have completely different policies that conflict
> > which
> > > > one wins for Brad? Well M$ couldn't come up with a good answer for[/color]
that
> > so
> > > > they decided that groups can't get policy applied to them.
> > >
> > > This is not true.
> >
> > Which bit?
> >
> The bit saying that Microsoft "couldn't come up with a good answer
> for that". Group Policy works exactly as it was designed, and was
> intentionally designed to work exactly as it does.
>
> While I agree that the term "Group Policy" is confusing, it's easier
> to understand if one considers that GP is "groupings of policy
> settings". Group policy applies only to computers and to users, based
> on the location of their objects in the Active Directory hierarchy.
> People who make comments like the one you made usually do so either
> out of misunderstanding of how it works or out of irrational dislike
> of anything Microsoft, in my experience.
>
You are tempting me to pull out the post-conf CD from the
late June 1998 NT5 Pre-Deployment Conf NDA gathering in
San Jose. At that point the folks building Group Policy were
shopping for further ideas on how/when things happen.
IIRC Group in Group Policy has a heavy history based in
what is now called security group filtering.
--
Roger
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-20, 10:25 am |
| "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in
message
Laura. Please killfile me again. Sorry about the change in name.
> You are tempting me to pull out the post-conf CD from the
> late June 1998 NT5 Pre-Deployment Conf NDA gathering in
> San Jose. At that point the folks building Group Policy were
> shopping for further ideas on how/when things happen.
> IIRC Group in Group Policy has a heavy history based in
> what is now called security group filtering.
LOL. All I was doing was trying to make the concept clear. I wasn't trying
to make any deep claims about the inner workings of Microsoft. God and I
thought I could be pedantic. I don't hold a candle to you guys!
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-20, 12:25 pm |
| circa Sat, 20 Jul 2002 15:33:43 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> > "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in
> message
>
> Laura. Please killfile me again. Sorry about the change in name.
>
> > You are tempting me to pull out the post-conf CD from the
> > late June 1998 NT5 Pre-Deployment Conf NDA gathering in
> > San Jose. At that point the folks building Group Policy were
> > shopping for further ideas on how/when things happen.
> > IIRC Group in Group Policy has a heavy history based in
> > what is now called security group filtering.
>
> LOL. All I was doing was trying to make the concept clear. I wasn't trying
> to make any deep claims about the inner workings of Microsoft. God and I
> thought I could be pedantic. I don't hold a candle to you guys!
>
Hey, dolt, you're responding to Roger's post. Threading difficult for
you, is it?
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-21, 10:25 am |
| Fair enough, and it was a good example to drive
home to people some cause for thinking, leading
to insight into why GPO does not apply _directly_
to groups. The only suggestion I might offer is,
a pedantic point should not conclude by deriving
anything but what is validly grasped from the
example - in this case, that there would be conflict,
not that there was an inability to figure what to do
with the conflict. See how that one overstepped
the pedagogic objective ?
--
Roger
"70-228" <Gibhal@kreunk.com> wrote in message
news:rpf_8.351701$Bm3.56394@news.easynews.com...
>
> LOL. All I was doing was trying to make the concept clear. I wasn't trying
> to make any deep claims about the inner workings of Microsoft. God and I
> thought I could be pedantic. I don't hold a candle to you guys!
>
>
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-21, 5:25 pm |
| "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> Fair enough, and it was a good example to drive
> home to people some cause for thinking, leading
> to insight into why GPO does not apply _directly_
> to groups. The only suggestion I might offer is,
> a pedantic point should not conclude by deriving
There was nothing pedantic about my illustration. If there was I would have
most assuredly mentioned Brad's OU membership.
> anything but what is validly grasped from the
> example - in this case, that there would be conflict,
> not that there was an inability to figure what to do
> with the conflict. See how that one overstepped
> the pedagogic objective ?
Only the most rabid of pedants would care about such minutiae. I find that
degree of exactitude just serves to obfuscate. Clarity, in this case, was
worth the exaggeration especially when the overstatement was so evident. Of
course pedants are often flummoxed by embellishment, seeing falsity rather
than hyperbole. Their world must be less colourful for it.
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-21, 7:25 pm |
| circa Sun, 21 Jul 2002 22:57:43 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> > Fair enough, and it was a good example to drive
> > home to people some cause for thinking, leading
> > to insight into why GPO does not apply _directly_
> > to groups. The only suggestion I might offer is,
> > a pedantic point should not conclude by deriving
>
> There was nothing pedantic about my illustration. If there was I would have
> most assuredly mentioned Brad's OU membership.
>
> > anything but what is validly grasped from the
> > example - in this case, that there would be conflict,
> > not that there was an inability to figure what to do
> > with the conflict. See how that one overstepped
> > the pedagogic objective ?
>
> Only the most rabid of pedants would care about such minutiae. I find that
> degree of exactitude just serves to obfuscate. Clarity, in this case, was
> worth the exaggeration especially when the overstatement was so evident. Of
> course pedants are often flummoxed by embellishment, seeing falsity rather
> than hyperbole. Their world must be less colourful for it.
>
<suppresses yawn>
Self-reflection isn't your forte, is it?
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-23, 1:25 am |
| "70-228" <Gibhal@kreunk.com> wrote in message
news:H%G_8.460249$Bm3.73417@news.easynews.com...
> "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> > Fair enough, and it was a good example to drive
> > home to people some cause for thinking, leading
> > to insight into why GPO does not apply _directly_
> > to groups. The only suggestion I might offer is,
> > a pedantic point should not conclude by deriving
>
> There was nothing pedantic about my illustration. If there was I would
have
> most assuredly mentioned Brad's OU membership.
>
> > anything but what is validly grasped from the
> > example - in this case, that there would be conflict,
> > not that there was an inability to figure what to do
> > with the conflict. See how that one overstepped
> > the pedagogic objective ?
>
> Only the most rabid of pedants would care about such minutiae. I find that
> degree of exactitude just serves to obfuscate. Clarity, in this case, was
> worth the exaggeration especially when the overstatement was so evident.
Of
> course pedants are often flummoxed by embellishment, seeing falsity rather
> than hyperbole. Their world must be less colourful for it.
>
Perhaps, but my 16 years teaching in universities and
colleges tells me it would be the presentation which
allowed the fact of being "hyperbole" to be grasped.
With regrets, we have not much such non-verbal clues
to express in posts. When I choose hypotheticals for
emphasis I prefer that any real entities be cast is a
positive light.
--
Roger
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-23, 2:25 am |
| "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> Perhaps, but my 16 years teaching in universities and
Well you must be right then. 16 years...mmm.... Proves it...
> colleges tells me it would be the presentation which
> allowed the fact of being "hyperbole" to be grasped.
But I'm guessing sarcasm is easier to spot (see above) LOL
### This is your non-verbal clue to inform you the above comments are humour
although even this statement is touched with a hint of sarcasm :-) ###
> With regrets, we have not much such non-verbal clues
> to express in posts. When I choose hypotheticals for
> emphasis I prefer that any real entities be cast is a
> positive light.
You should bear in mind that only two people to responded to my post in a
negative way. They were Ben who works for M$ and is somewhat (financially)
beholden to defend them and Laura who makes a hobby out of flaming those she
dislikes no matter what they say. And boy oh boy she dislikes me.
My point is that even without verbal clues it was clearly hyperbole and only
those with very strong motivation would choose not to treat it as such (or
are just a bit dumb :-) ).
| |
|
| SO! Now everybody has learned to master the use of Words'
Thesaurus, can we all get some work done for Christs sake?!
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-23, 9:25 am |
| circa Tue, 23 Jul 2002 07:54:51 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> > Perhaps, but my 16 years teaching in universities and
>
> Well you must be right then. 16 years...mmm.... Proves it...
>
> > colleges tells me it would be the presentation which
> > allowed the fact of being "hyperbole" to be grasped.
>
> But I'm guessing sarcasm is easier to spot (see above) LOL
> ### This is your non-verbal clue to inform you the above comments are humour
> although even this statement is touched with a hint of sarcasm :-) ###
You know, Roger is a really nice, sincere, guy, and if you weren't so
busy being a weenie all the time, you might realize that.
>
> > With regrets, we have not much such non-verbal clues
> > to express in posts. When I choose hypotheticals for
> > emphasis I prefer that any real entities be cast is a
> > positive light.
>
> You should bear in mind that only two people to responded to my post in a
> negative way. They were Ben who works for M$ and is somewhat (financially)
> beholden to defend them and Laura who makes a hobby out of flaming those she
> dislikes no matter what they say. And boy oh boy she dislikes me.
I have no liking or disliking towards you whatsoever. You're of no
significance to me. However, your posts are often inaccurate,
bellicose and bigoted in terms of technological leanings, and I
respond to them in the vein in which they're written.
>
> My point is that even without verbal clues it was clearly hyperbole and only
> those with very strong motivation would choose not to treat it as such (or
> are just a bit dumb :-) ).
Maybe people are just tired of seeing others who don't know what
they're talking about claim omniscience.
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-25, 2:25 am |
| "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.17a73b751965746e989fe9@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Tue, 23 Jul 2002 07:54:51 GMT, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> > "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> > > Perhaps, but my 16 years teaching in universities and
> >
> > Well you must be right then. 16 years...mmm.... Proves it...
> >
speak of a love to remove context . . .
[colo
r=darkred]
> > > colleges tells me it would be the presentation which
> > > allowed the fact of being "hyperbole" to be grasped.
> >
> > But I'm guessing sarcasm is easier to spot (see above) LOL
> > ### This is your non-verbal clue to inform you the above comments are[/color]
humour
> > although even this statement is touched with a hint of sarcasm :-) ###
>
> You know, Roger is a really nice, sincere . . .
Although the yard cats still like me pretending to
not see them when I go out hunting for cave rocks !
:-)
--
Roger
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-25, 2:25 am |
| "70-228" <Gibhal@kreunk.com> wrote
> My point is that even without verbal clues it was clearly hyperbole and
only
> those with very strong motivation would choose not to treat it as such (or
> are just a bit dumb :-) ).
>
Evidently what you have not grasped is that you
said something about people that we know in a way
we felt unfair and wrong.
I erred in assuming you to be within the trainer
community rather than being a learner.
--
Roger Abell
MS MVP (Windows Platform), MCSE, MCDBA, MCT
Associate Expert - Windows XP ExpertZone
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-25, 5:25 am |
| "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> Evidently what you have not grasped is that you
> said something about people that we know in a way
> we felt unfair and wrong.
So Ben doesn't work for M$ and Laura's not a XXXXX??? Excuse me while I go
watch Pigs flying in formation.
> I erred in assuming you to be within the trainer
> community rather than being a learner.
Please note the extended use of the LOLs and happy faces in my previous
post.
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 10:25 am |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:22:20 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (Gibhal@kreunk.com) said,
> > Evidently what you have not grasped is that you
> > said something about people that we know in a way
> > we felt unfair and wrong.
>
> So Ben doesn't work for M$ and Laura's not a XXXXX???
>
Well, you'll never really know, so why bother speculating?
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
|
| > Well, you'll never really know, so why bother speculating?
>
Which is exactly why we imagine you with other women. ;-)
| |
| Consultant® 2002-07-25, 10:25 am |
| because that's what the imagineers programmed her to do
"Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
news:e0VXuY$MCHA.2260@tkmsftngp10...
> > Well, you'll never really know, so why bother speculating?
> >
>
> Which is exactly why we imagine you with other women. ;-)
>
>
| |
| 70-228 2002-07-25, 11:25 am |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
> > Well, you'll never really know, so why bother speculating?
>
> Which is exactly why we imagine you with other women. ;-)
Is she still replying to me? I killfiled her a month ago and she STILL
replies as if I'm reading her posts (not including right after my reinstall,
I read one of her poison pen posts then unfortunately). Although I suppose
she's trying getting round it by her replies appearing in others quotes.
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 12:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:19:45 -0700, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Consultant®
(consultant_mcngp@yahoo.com) said,
> because that's what the imagineers programmed her to do
>
I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 12:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:27:09 GMT, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, 70-228 (KLim@barrysworld.co.uk)
said,
> > > Well, you'll never really know, so why bother speculating?
> >
> > Which is exactly why we imagine you with other women. ;-)
>
> Is she still replying to me? I killfiled her a month ago and she STILL
> replies as if I'm reading her posts
No, I reply as if you're still referring to me. Got a little
obsession going, it seems..
> (not including right after my reinstall,
> I read one of her poison pen posts then unfortunately). Although I suppose
> she's trying getting round it by her replies appearing in others quotes.
Yeah, right, I control how others snip or don't snip. Moron.
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Consultant® 2002-07-25, 12:25 pm |
| standard pre-programmed response, deny everything
what are your thoughts on this article, laura v1.3b
http://www.askmen.com/dating/dating...ating_list.html
"Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.17aa00c8a6f6ebb298a001@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:19:45 -0700, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Consultant®
> (consultant_mcngp@yahoo.com) said,
> > because that's what the imagineers programmed her to do
> >
> I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!
> --
> One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
> -Tick, Strange Days
| |
|
| > I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!
> --
Fembot?
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-07-25, 12:25 pm |
| "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.17aa00c8a6f6ebb298a001@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 09:19:45 -0700, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Consultant®
> (consultant_mcngp@yahoo.com) said,
> > because that's what the imagineers programmed her to do
> >
> I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!
> --
> One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
> -Tick, Strange Days
Laura, I need to make a slight adjustment to your code... hold one sec.
Public Sub LauraButton_Click(ByVal Source As Newsgroup.Reader)
Select Case Source
Case MCNGP.Member
If MCNGP.Member.Name = "Frisbee" Then
Me.Obey
Else
Me.Speak "I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!"
End If
Case Else
Killfile.Add Source
End Select
End Sub
There... That's better.
Fris "as you were" bee®
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 2:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:39:01 -0700, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Consultant®
(consultant_mcngp@yahoo.com) said,
> standard pre-programmed response, deny everything
> what are your thoughts on this article, laura v1.3b
>
> http://www.askmen.com/dating/dating...ating_list.html
>
I'm not version 1.3b! And since I don't date women, I don't have an
opinion on the article. :-)
Laura
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 2:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:41:19 -0700, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Jtyc (yo@respondtothegroup.com)
said,
> > I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!
> > --
>
> Fembot?
>
Ick. I think I'd rather be an Animatron...
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 2:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:48:57 -0400, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Frisbee®, MCNGP (bhileman@dasi-
software.com) said,
> Laura, I need to make a slight adjustment to your code... hold one sec.
>
> Public Sub LauraButton_Click(ByVal Source As Newsgroup.Reader)
> Select Case Source
> Case MCNGP.Member
> If MCNGP.Member.Name = "Frisbee" Then
> Me.Obey
> Else
> Me.Speak "I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!"
> End If
> Case Else
> Killfile.Add Source
> End Select
> End Sub
>
> There... That's better.
>
Error line 5
'obey' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable
program or batch file...
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-07-25, 3:25 pm |
| "Laura A. Robinson" < firstinitiallastname@technolog
ist.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.17aa26a440b99c4798a008@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:48:57 -0400, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Frisbee®, MCNGP (bhileman@dasi-
> software.com) said,
> > Laura, I need to make a slight adjustment to your code... hold one sec.
> >
> > Public Sub LauraButton_Click(ByVal Source As Newsgroup.Reader)
> > Select Case Source
> > Case MCNGP.Member
> > If MCNGP.Member.Name = "Frisbee" Then
> > Me.Obey
> > Else
> > Me.Speak "I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!"
> > End If
> > Case Else
> > Killfile.Add Source
> > End Select
> > End Sub
> >
> > There... That's better.
> >
> Error line 5
> 'obey' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable
> program or batch file...
Oh well, at least your debugger is working.
Fris "back to the drawing board" bee®
| |
| Laura A. Robinson 2002-07-25, 3:25 pm |
| circa Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:43:55 -0400, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Frisbee®, MCNGP (bhileman@dasi-
software.com) said,
> > > Laura, I need to make a slight adjustment to your code... hold one sec.
> > >
> > > Public Sub LauraButton_Click(ByVal Source As Newsgroup.Reader)
> > > Select Case Source
> > > Case MCNGP.Member
> > > If MCNGP.Member.Name = "Frisbee" Then
> > > Me.Obey
> > > Else
> > > Me.Speak "I am not an Animatron, I say! Not an Animatron!"
> > > End If
> > > Case Else
> > > Killfile.Add Source
> > > End Select
> > > End Sub
> > >
> > > There... That's better.
> > >
> > Error line 5
> > 'obey' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable
> > program or batch file...
>
> Oh well, at least your debugger is working.
>
My debugger always works. Well, if I had one, it would.
--
One man's mundane and boring existence is another man's Technicolor.
-Tick, Strange Days
| |
| Roger Abell [MVP] 2002-07-26, 1:25 am |
| "70-228" <Gibhal@kreunk.com> wrote in message
news:wjQ%8.382917$om4.3386463@news.easynews.com...
> "Roger Abell [MVP]" <mvpNOSPAM@asu.edu> wrote in message
> > Evidently what you have not grasped is that you
> > said something about people that we know in a way
> > we felt unfair and wrong.
>
> So Ben doesn't work for M$ and Laura's not a XXXXX??? Excuse me while I go
> watch Pigs flying in formation.
>
> > I erred in assuming you to be within the trainer
> > community rather than being a learner.
>
> Please note the extended use of the LOLs and happy faces in my previous
> post.
>
I have only intended to show that the people that did
Group Policy _did_ have broader awareness and options
than what your initial example claimed.
What you have going with others in the NG is something
I did and will not get into.
--ra
--
..
| |
| MCSEwannabe 2002-07-28, 9:25 pm |
| "Mickael Dickinson" <michael.dickinson@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> 12) You must configure your win2k pro computer with multiple monitors.
> you
>
> currently have a single video card in the computer that uses 800*600
> pixels
>
> at a refresh rate of 85 Hertz. your current card and the one you are
>
> installing are both on the HCL and are PCI video adaptors. You shut
> down the
>
> computer, install the second card in an available PCI slot, and
> restart the
>
> computer. The driver loads from windows 2k cab file. However, when you
>
> restart the computer after loading the new drivers, only the primary
> display
>
> is used and the secondary monitor is blank. When you view the Display
>
> setings tab, you see two monitor icons. How can you resolve this
> problem so
>
> both displays will work? (choose 1 answer)
> a) place the secondary video card adaptor into PCI slot 0 or 1 (the
> first
>
> PCI slot on the motherboard)
> b)use primary and secondary video cards that are compatible.
> c) install 3rd party drivers on the computer for the secondary
> adapter. d) ensure the 'extend my windows desktop into this monitor'
> selection box is
http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...;EN-US;Q238886&
and the answer to one of your earlier monitor questions is there too.
| |
| Mickael Dickinson 2002-07-28, 10:25 pm |
| woohooo
many thanx my friend, this article is amazing, its the 1st time iv come
across this info and it helps to answer a good few of my questions regarding
multiple display adaptors in windows 2000 as its something iv never tried 
nothing like this at all in my 210/215 books or on cramsession!
"MCSEwannabe" <MCSEwannabe@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9259E217981B7MCSEwanna
be123@204.127.68.17...
> "Mickael Dickinson" <michael.dickinson@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > 12) You must configure your win2k pro computer with multiple monitors.
> > you
> >
> > currently have a single video card in the computer that uses 800*600
> > pixels
> >
> > at a refresh rate of 85 Hertz. your current card and the one you are
> >
> > installing are both on the HCL and are PCI video adaptors. You shut
> > down the
> >
> > computer, install the second card in an available PCI slot, and
> > restart the
> >
> > computer. The driver loads from windows 2k cab file. However, when you
> >
> > restart the computer after loading the new drivers, only the primary
> > display
> >
> > is used and the secondary monitor is blank. When you view the Display
> >
> > setings tab, you see two monitor icons. How can you resolve this
> > problem so
> >
> > both displays will work? (choose 1 answer)
> > a) place the secondary video card adaptor into PCI slot 0 or 1 (the
> > first
> >
> > PCI slot on the motherboard)
> > b)use primary and secondary video cards that are compatible.
> > c) install 3rd party drivers on the computer for the secondary
> > adapter. d) ensure the 'extend my windows desktop into this monitor'
> > selection box is
>
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...;EN-US;Q238886&
>
> and the answer to one of your earlier monitor questions is there too.
>
>
| |
|
| Yes, Microsoft's website is a great place to get info on Microsoft's
products. Who would've figured.
Jim
"Mickael Dickinson" <michael.dickinson@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:zF219.26521$vN6.1327197@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...
> woohooo
>
> many thanx my friend, this article is amazing, its the 1st time iv come
> across this info and it helps to answer a good few of my questions
regarding
> multiple display adaptors in windows 2000 as its something iv never tried
>
> nothing like this at all in my 210/215 books or on cramsession!
>
>
> "MCSEwannabe" <MCSEwannabe@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9259E217981B7MCSEwanna
be123@204.127.68.17...
> > "Mickael Dickinson" <michael.dickinson@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> >
> > > 12) You must configure your win2k pro computer with multiple monitors.
> > > you
> > >
> > > currently have a single video card in the computer that uses 800*600
> > > pixels
> > >
> > > at a refresh rate of 85 Hertz. your current card and the one you are
> > >
> > > installing are both on the HCL and are PCI video adaptors. You shut
> > > down the
> > >
> > > computer, install the second card in an available PCI slot, and
> > > restart the
> > >
> > > computer. The driver loads from windows 2k cab file. However, when you
> > >
> > > restart the computer after loading the new drivers, only the primary
> > > display
> > >
> > > is used and the secondary monitor is blank. When you view the Display
> > >
> > > setings tab, you see two monitor icons. How can you resolve this
> > > problem so
> > >
> > > both displays will work? (choose 1 answer)
> > > a) place the secondary video card adaptor into PCI slot 0 or 1 (the
> > > first
> > >
> > > PCI slot on the motherboard)
> > > b)use primary and secondary video cards that are compatible.
> > > c) install 3rd party drivers on the computer for the secondary
> > > adapter. d) ensure the 'extend my windows desktop into this monitor'
> > > selection box is
> >
> >
> > http://support.microsoft.com/defaul...;EN-US;Q238886&
> >
> > and the answer to one of your earlier monitor questions is there too.
> >
> >
>
>
| |
| MCSEwannabe 2002-07-28, 10:25 pm |
| "Jim" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
> Yes, Microsoft's website is a great place to get info on Microsoft's
> products. Who would've figured.
>
> Jim
The real trick is finding it. Google Microsoft works better than MS's own
search engine. Even so, you need a good key word or two. Without good,
unique keywords you often get far too many hits. If anyone has any search
tips and tricks, i'd like to hear them.
| |
|
|
|
|
| MCSEwannabe 2002-07-28, 10:25 pm |
| "Mickael Dickinson" <michael.dickinson@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> can you please post the link for this google microsoft
>
http://www.google.com/microsoft.html
( or advanced search from the main google page )
|
|
|
|
|
0319.26593$vN6.1328251@newsfep2-win.server.ntli.net...