Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #168874 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-01-22 14:28 -0500 |
| Last post | 2023-01-26 12:48 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 163 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 14:28 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 20:56 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:17 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 05:25 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 09:06 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:14 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 08:42 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 21:27 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:24 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:52 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 13:59 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-23 17:57 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:08 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:49 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:59 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:20 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 15:39 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:18 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 20:10 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2023-01-26 09:04 -0700
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-22 19:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:26 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-22 22:06 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 11:59 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:27 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:31 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 15:34 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 12:45 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:18 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:38 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 13:30 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:17 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-23 20:31 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-01-24 00:31 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-24 00:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:48 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 07:23 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2023-02-03 20:41 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-02-04 17:32 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-02-05 06:35 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:32 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:41 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:49 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:54 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 08:28 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-22 14:17 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-22 23:35 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 00:50 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 19:58 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 01:33 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-23 02:39 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-22 17:03 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Simon.Says.Yes@gfdedsed.hgtgfrfd - 2023-01-23 01:30 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-01-22 21:05 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 02:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 03:21 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 11:15 +0100
PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:47 +0000
Re: PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 14:48 +0100
Re: PGP signatures and BASE64 posts (Was : Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:52 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 09:19 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-23 17:45 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:09 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 23:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:24 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:49 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-24 13:04 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:19 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-01-26 18:28 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-26 18:44 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:42 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 11:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-26 20:37 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:37 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-28 22:27 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-01-26 18:52 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-25 00:33 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:51 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 11:03 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 15:02 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 17:24 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:36 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 00:21 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 15:28 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 06:43 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-25 15:56 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-25 15:08 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 07:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 22:48 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 13:50 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-27 11:46 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-28 13:39 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 11:42 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 12:15 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-28 23:24 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:10 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:12 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 12:05 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:46 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-23 20:06 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:11 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 09:57 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-25 14:08 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 22:05 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:15 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 15:36 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 19:43 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 20:12 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:45 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:58 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:02 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 15:15 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 14:35 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-24 18:32 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2023-01-25 22:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 20:09 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 09:53 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 00:13 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-25 20:41 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-01-25 14:08 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 11:35 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-26 00:18 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 15:33 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-01-29 01:08 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-01-29 13:53 -0800
Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 15:31 -0800
Re: Apology to Öö Tiib (was Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C?) Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-01-25 23:17 -0800
A comment about dogwhistles Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-01-29 13:47 -0800
Re: A comment about dogwhistles Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-03-03 15:05 +0200
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-26 15:16 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 10:37 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2023-01-29 20:57 -0700
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-29 23:04 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-22 21:09 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-23 02:41 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-23 11:35 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Opus <ifonly@youknew.org> - 2023-01-23 19:22 +0100
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:18 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:57 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 18:23 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 20:35 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-24 21:37 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-01-25 11:49 +0300
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 12:32 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Manu Raju <MR@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-25 18:56 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-01-25 18:45 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 13:39 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 17:07 -0500
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 17:54 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-01-26 00:04 +0000
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-25 19:27 -0600
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 02:50 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 03:07 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 04:34 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 04:56 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 05:18 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 05:23 -0800
Re: Why is there not a single good JSON library for C? BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 12:48 -0600
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 00:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87r0vjqwpa.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #169016 |
Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> writes: > On 1/24/23 08:04, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> I know for certain that it's possible to make cleartext PGP >>> signatures—i'm able to do so with GPG's `--clearsign` option. >> Yes, so do I. >> >>> I just don't know _how_ to configure Thunderbird to do that. >> But, as I said, that's only half the problem. A signed post, not matter >> how the main body text is encoded, will be a multipart MIME message and >> that, on it's own, is frowned upon.[…] > > But wouldn't having the post be clearsigned mean that it will be a > plaintext message while still keeping the security that PGP gives? Or > am i misunderstanding what cleartext signing does? If I understand what you are a suggesting, I predict that would annoy even more people because that is not a standard posting format. A multipart MIME signed post has the advantage that news clients will usually hide the signature, and will provide simple methods to validate it if the reader so wishes. (Previously I thought you wanted to use --clearsign to get an unarmoured text, but have thuderbird post the two parts as multi-part MIME. This would fraught with difficulties and understandable that thunderbird won't do it. But if, as I think you are suggested, you just want to post the output of gpg --clearsign <my text> then surely it has some option to pipe a post through a commend? But note: I am not advising you do this. My advice is to take a deep breath and post plain unsigned text.) -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-24 17:51 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87o7qncrfj.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169024 |
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
[...]
> My advice is to take a deep breath and post plain unsigned
> text.)
Ah, but the signedness of plain text is implementation-defined.
(I'll see myself out.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 11:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tqquq4$k65d$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169026 |
On 25/01/2023 02:51, Keith Thompson wrote: > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes: > [...] >> My advice is to take a deep breath and post plain unsigned >> text.) > > Ah, but the signedness of plain text is implementation-defined. > > (I'll see myself out.) > Coffee-on-keyboard moments are rare in this group - thanks for that one!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-24 15:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tqooeg$5q5t$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168954 |
On 24/01/2023 00:09, Blue-Maned_Hawk wrote: > On 1/23/23 11:45, David Brown wrote: >> No one on Usenet is going to impersonate you, unless there is >> something /extremely/ unusual about you. You are new to this group, >> so perhaps there is something I don't know about you. But for the >> most part, concern about impersonation is either paranoia or narcissism. >> > > It is probably closer to paranoia. OK. There's no need to be paranoid here. There are a few annoying people on Usenet (at least in technical groups like this), but they mostly annoy by posting mindless nonsense. It's mostly populated by people who have been here for decades. A large proportion use their real names, and valid email addresses. No one spoofs anyone else, and people are generally reasonably polite and respectful. We are an old-fashioned group (even the young people), living in an olde worlde corner of the Internet. So there is no reason to be paranoid - and there /is/ reason to follow the common standards we use here. > >> And no one gives a bugger about how you choose to pronounce your made >> up teenage pseudonym. >> > > It seems to me like you're saying that as though pseudonyms are unusual. > I don't think that's true; i think that it is entirely reasonable to > use a psuedonym on the internet. My particular psuedonym isn't even > very "teenage"; there's no delimitation by "xXx"s or anything like that. > Most posters here use their real names. It helps everyone remember they are talking to real people, and we are not just a bunch of anonymous cowards. > Anyway, i leave the pronounciation explanation there for those who might > want it, and because i happen to care about how my name is pronounced. > It is a single line of a couple dozen characters; it is easily ignorable > by those who don't give a shit. As I say, no one cares how you pronounce your pseudonym. There is no possible benefit in showing it - especially since very few people are familiar with the IPA. If you have particular cause for people to know how you pronounce your /real/ name, and it is relevant in a C discussion group, make a post about that. > >> So yes, it is all about appearing smart. >> > > That is not my intention. Please don't speak as if you know what's > going on in my head. Wanting to appear smart would at least be a reason for the way you post. The alternatives I can come up with are that there is nothing going on inside you head and you have no reasons, or that you are intentionally annoying and alienating people. I don't see these as improvements. Ignorance would have been better - we all start ignorant, and it's easy to cure. But that is ruled out by your insincere apology. If you prefer, I can say it /appears/ to be all about appearing smart. Until you provide some serious and realistic alternative justification, I have no better idea. > >> (Your silly made-up term "octoctal" is another example.) > > > I didn't make up that term. And i don't use it to appear smart; i use > it because it's a very slightly more useful term than "base64", and > because it's more fun to use. > It is much less use than "base64", since "base64" is a very familiar term that exactly matches the situation, while "octoctal" is obscure and quite inaccurate. (It's a more fun word - I'll not argue with that.) >> If you want people to take you seriously, respect what you write and >> help you with the questions you ask, then you need to respect other >> people and the standards of the groups you join. > > I see no reason to do that if those standards are silly. > There would be good reason to follow the standards even if they /were/ silly. And they are not silly. >> Here we prefer simple, clean standard Usenet posts accessible to >> everyone regardless of the software or setup. > > I'm not going to bother supporting software or setups that are obsolete. > No one is asking you to do anything special - merely to stop going out of your way to go against standards. >> Unicode is fine if it is appropriate and useful - examples include >> some peoples' names. >> > > That sounds reasonable to me. > >> You have been asked politely to fix your screwed-up posts. You have >> been told why. >> > > But i have no idea _how_. I don't know how to force Thunderbird to use > quoted-printable instead of octoctal. > Turn off your digital signatures. Remove the drivel from your Usenet signature. I expect your posts will be fine after that. Lots of other people happily use Thunderbird for Usenet. >> Continue to try to justify posting in this way, and you'll alienate >> more people. This would be a shame - it's usually nice to see new kids >> join the group and ask questions. >> > > I am not going to blindly accept things. > Fair enough. That's why you have been given reasons, rather than being asked to accept anything blindly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-24 17:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tqplq1$ahmc$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #168996 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 1/24/23 09:02, David Brown wrote: > Most posters here use their real names. It helps everyone remember they > are talking to real people, and we are not just a bunch of anonymous > cowards. > I don't think it's cowardice to use a psuedonym. I care about my privacy online, and i don't want to connect my online and offline self, because i know that that would be dangerous. Even if the regulars of this newsgroup wouldn't use the information for evil, putting it onto the open internet means that it would be available to _everyone_—and not everyone is nice. -- ⚗︎ | /blu.mɛin.dʰak/ | shortens to "Hawk" | he/him/his/himself/Mr. bluemanedhawk.github.io Apologies if this message got encoded into octoctal. Blame Thunderbird for not behaving correctly with Unicode and PGP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-24 14:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87sffzd0h3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #169017 |
Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> writes:
> On 1/24/23 09:02, David Brown wrote:
>> Most posters here use their real names. It helps everyone remember
>> they are talking to real people, and we are not just a bunch of
>> anonymous cowards.
>
> I don't think it's cowardice to use a psuedonym. I care about my
> privacy online, and i don't want to connect my online and offline
> self, because i know that that would be dangerous. Even if the
> regulars of this newsgroup wouldn't use the information for evil,
> putting it onto the open internet means that it would be available to
> _everyone_—and not everyone is nice.
Some people, including some regulars, do use pseudonyms. I think David
overstated the issue a bit. Personally, I have no problem with
pseudonyms, as long as they're used consistently.
(I'll note that Slashdot uses the term "anonymous coward" for anonymous
posters; that may have influenced David's use of the term.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for XCOM Labs
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 00:21 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tqpp57$avv1$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169019 |
On 24/01/2023 23:36, Keith Thompson wrote: > Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> writes: >> On 1/24/23 09:02, David Brown wrote: >>> Most posters here use their real names. It helps everyone remember >>> they are talking to real people, and we are not just a bunch of >>> anonymous cowards. >> >> I don't think it's cowardice to use a psuedonym. I care about my >> privacy online, and i don't want to connect my online and offline >> self, because i know that that would be dangerous. Even if the >> regulars of this newsgroup wouldn't use the information for evil, >> putting it onto the open internet means that it would be available to >> _everyone_—and not everyone is nice. > > Some people, including some regulars, do use pseudonyms. I think David > overstated the issue a bit. Personally, I have no problem with > pseudonyms, as long as they're used consistently. Regulars with consistent pseudonyms are fine too. I don't really know more about you as a person than I know about, say, "fir" - I know you both from your history of posts in this and neighbouring Usenet groups. I don't even know if "Keith Thompson" is your real name. However, when there is a new poster, if they use their real name (or appear to), it immediately feels more sincere and honest. With pseudonyms, that takes longer - for me, at least. It is fair to say that using a pseudonym does not automatically make one an "anonymous coward". But it is also fair to say that pretty much every anonymous coward uses pseudonyms. Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! > > (I'll note that Slashdot uses the term "anonymous coward" for anonymous > posters; that may have influenced David's use of the term.) > Yes, that's where the term comes from.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-24 15:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <tqppjp$b96f$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169021 |
On 1/24/2023 3:21 PM, David Brown wrote: > On 24/01/2023 23:36, Keith Thompson wrote: >> Blue-Maned_Hawk <bluemanedhawk@gmail.com> writes: >>> On 1/24/23 09:02, David Brown wrote: >>>> Most posters here use their real names. It helps everyone remember >>>> they are talking to real people, and we are not just a bunch of >>>> anonymous cowards. [...] > It is fair to say that using a pseudonym does not automatically make one > an "anonymous coward". But it is also fair to say that pretty much > every anonymous coward uses pseudonyms. > > Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my > real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! [...] :^D Fwiw, Thomasson is not all that common wrt the spelling.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 06:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <eb072988-ca40-45e0-848b-e95b34765975n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169021 |
On Tuesday, 24 January 2023 at 23:21:25 UTC, David Brown wrote: > Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my > real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! My full name is completely unique as far as I know. (Even 'Bart' is rare enough, and that's not my full first name.) I've only once come across a namesake online, and that was for an imaginary player in a fantasy football game. However, I imagine there aren't many Norwegians called 'David Brown'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 15:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tqrfv6$n3ei$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169035 |
On 25/01/2023 15:43, bart c wrote: > On Tuesday, 24 January 2023 at 23:21:25 UTC, David Brown wrote: > >> Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my >> real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! > > My full name is completely unique as far as I know. (Even 'Bart' is rare enough, and that's not my full first name.) > > I've only once come across a namesake online, and that was for an imaginary player in a fantasy football game. > > However, I imagine there aren't many Norwegians called 'David Brown'. Not many, but I have reason to believe that there a handful. And that's not counting tractors :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 15:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5CbAL.53634$ZnFc.41578@fx41.iad> |
| In reply to | #169035 |
bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> writes: >On Tuesday, 24 January 2023 at 23:21:25 UTC, David Brown wrote: > >> Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my >> real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! > >My full name is completely unique as far as I know. (Even 'Bart' is rare enough, and that's not my full first name.) > >I've only once come across a namesake online, and that was for an imaginary player in a fantasy football game. > Bart Starr is the most famous bart on this side of the pond. Although only to a certain generation of football fans.... >However, I imagine there aren't many Norwegians called 'David Brown'. IIRC David moved to Norway from the UK... Norwegian naming has changed considerably over the last couple of centuries.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 07:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <60306e1a-373b-4794-926e-1f550fbc34ffn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169037 |
On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 17:09:03 UTC+2, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Bart Starr is the most famous bart on this side of the pond. Although > only to a certain generation of football fans.... Bart means beard in German. Google search engine offers mostly Bay Area Rapid Transport and Bart Simpson to request of "bart".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 22:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87357yjq7v.fsf@zotaspaz.fatphil.org> |
| In reply to | #169038 |
Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> writes: > On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 17:09:03 UTC+2, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Bart Starr is the most famous bart on this side of the pond. Although >> only to a certain generation of football fans.... > > Bart means beard in German. Google search engine offers mostly Bay Area > Rapid Transport and Bart Simpson to request of "bart". Bart's usually a contraction of Bartholomew, a name with Hebrew patronymic roots: Bar- = son of, and Talmai is probably the local equivalent of the Greek Ptolomy. So the father of Bart Simpson should have been Ptolomy rather than Homer, you learn something new every day. Scratching my head, the only live Bart I can think of would be Preneel the cryptographer. Most names in use have travelled around, been adopted, and smooshed into local forms at least as much as other words, possibly more so. Almost everything I can think of in Europe and the Americas has a remote, often biblical, history, and in some form has relatives in all corners of that expansive region. Of course, I'm not familiar with most of the little pockets where counterexamples may lie, apart from the local one where Lembit is a good example of a name that's really not travelled much at all. Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 13:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3ef3ead3-58f5-4c52-9d8b-0b076b4bc9ffn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169052 |
On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 21:04:30 UTC, Phil Carmody wrote: > Öö Tiib <...> writes: > > On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 17:09:03 UTC+2, Scott Lurndal wrote: > >> Bart Starr is the most famous bart on this side of the pond. Although > >> only to a certain generation of football fans.... > > > > Bart means beard in German. Google search engine offers mostly Bay Area > > Rapid Transport and Bart Simpson to request of "bart". > Bart's usually a contraction of Bartholomew, a name with Hebrew > patronymic roots: Bar- = son of, and Talmai is probably the local > equivalent of the Greek Ptolomy. So the father of Bart Simpson > should have been Ptolomy rather than Homer, you learn something > new every day. My name was the Italian version, anglicised to Bartholomew, which I later shortened to Bart (partly to stop people making up their own versions). I was named after the saint, also the name of my place of birth (it's complicated...). Nobody usually cares - except airlines who want names on tickets to exactly match names in passports. > Scratching my head, the only live Bart I can think of would be Preneel > the cryptographer. Googling for 'famous people called ...' turns up lots of entries of people you've never heard of, mostly long dead.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-27 11:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <tr12mf$1pkeo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169053 |
On 1/25/2023 3:50 PM, bart c wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 21:04:30 UTC, Phil Carmody wrote:
>> Öö Tiib <...> writes:
>>> On Wednesday, 25 January 2023 at 17:09:03 UTC+2, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>>> Bart Starr is the most famous bart on this side of the pond. Although
>>>> only to a certain generation of football fans....
>>>
>>> Bart means beard in German. Google search engine offers mostly Bay Area
>>> Rapid Transport and Bart Simpson to request of "bart".
>> Bart's usually a contraction of Bartholomew, a name with Hebrew
>> patronymic roots: Bar- = son of, and Talmai is probably the local
>> equivalent of the Greek Ptolomy. So the father of Bart Simpson
>> should have been Ptolomy rather than Homer, you learn something
>> new every day.
>
> My name was the Italian version, anglicised to Bartholomew, which I later shortened to Bart (partly to stop people making up their own versions). I was named after the saint, also the name of my place of birth (it's complicated...).
>
> Nobody usually cares - except airlines who want names on tickets to exactly match names in passports.
>
My given name ("Brendan") is itself apparently a source of much confusion...
I guess, my first name is Irish, my last-name is Scots-Irish (apparently
it was an alternate form of Buchanan originating in the Ulster region of
Ireland).
Actual ancestry is a bit more mixed, but apparently:
Scots, Irish, Scots-Irish
Norwegian (and some French and similar as well, ...)
Ashkenazi (German Jew), (*1)
*1: Likely first place (followed by Scots) in terms of total percentage.
However, based on traditional rules (I neither have direct maternal
descent, nor practice Judaism, nor can I speak Yiddish), I would not be
classified as part of their group.
If anything, I would more likely identify as a Christianity-leaning
theistic-agnostic (but generally do not agree with either the YEC
position nor a strict literal interpretation of the bible; interpreting
it as being more historical in nature, and interpreting some of the more
far reaching claims as likely themselves a misinterpretation).
Say, if one takes a more skeptical view of arguments based on circular
reasoning and cherry-picked proof-texts, then a lot of the more far
reaching claims fall apart.
Well, also a large part of my immediate extended family is LDS, which is
"more obviously wrong" (so, say, the Scots-Irish part of my background
mostly came via the Utah route...).
>> Scratching my head, the only live Bart I can think of would be Preneel
>> the cryptographer.
>
> Googling for 'famous people called ...' turns up lots of entries of people you've never heard of, mostly long dead.
>
Probably.
There are more people with my name at least, but none the less people
are prone to screw it up...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-28 13:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tr3528$27911$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169080 |
On 27/01/2023 18:46, BGB wrote:
> My given name ("Brendan") is itself apparently a source of much
> confusion...
>
> I guess, my first name is Irish, my last-name is Scots-Irish (apparently
> it was an alternate form of Buchanan originating in the Ulster region of
> Ireland).
>
The Scots originated in Ireland, if you go back far enough.
> Actual ancestry is a bit more mixed, but apparently:
> Scots, Irish, Scots-Irish
> Norwegian (and some French and similar as well, ...)
> Ashkenazi (German Jew), (*1)
>
>
> *1: Likely first place (followed by Scots) in terms of total percentage.
> However, based on traditional rules (I neither have direct maternal
> descent, nor practice Judaism, nor can I speak Yiddish), I would not be
> classified as part of their group.
>
Ah, so you are "Jew-ish", not "Jewish" :-)
(Apologies for the somewhat political joke.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-28 11:42 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <tr3mqt$2ages$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169081 |
On 1/28/2023 6:39 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 27/01/2023 18:46, BGB wrote:
>> My given name ("Brendan") is itself apparently a source of much
>> confusion...
>>
>> I guess, my first name is Irish, my last-name is Scots-Irish
>> (apparently it was an alternate form of Buchanan originating in the
>> Ulster region of Ireland).
>>
>
> The Scots originated in Ireland, if you go back far enough.
>
Yeah.
One part of my lineage goes up through Canada, and is mostly
Scots+Norwegian+French.
Another part apparently came via Utah, and another part came from
Germany (not sure exact timeframe).
>> Actual ancestry is a bit more mixed, but apparently:
>> Scots, Irish, Scots-Irish
>> Norwegian (and some French and similar as well, ...)
>> Ashkenazi (German Jew), (*1)
>>
>>
>> *1: Likely first place (followed by Scots) in terms of total percentage.
>> However, based on traditional rules (I neither have direct maternal
>> descent, nor practice Judaism, nor can I speak Yiddish), I would not
>> be classified as part of their group.
>>
>
> Ah, so you are "Jew-ish", not "Jewish" :-)
>
> (Apologies for the somewhat political joke.)
>
Most other ethnic groups are not so particular:
* Have ancestry from that group, good enough.
* Percentage then is a rough estimate of their association with that group.
Like, say: a person with 30-40% Italian ancestry could claim to be
Italian, people would take it at face value. No demands that they also
be Roman Catholic, wave their hands while speaking, or talk endlessly
about food.
Not so in this case, it is more like "What do the mitzvoth say? ... The
mitzvoth say no."
...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-28 12:15 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <tr3vpb$2c554$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169084 |
On 1/28/2023 9:42 AM, BGB wrote:
> On 1/28/2023 6:39 AM, David Brown wrote:
>> On 27/01/2023 18:46, BGB wrote:
>>> My given name ("Brendan") is itself apparently a source of much
>>> confusion...
>>>
>>> I guess, my first name is Irish, my last-name is Scots-Irish
>>> (apparently it was an alternate form of Buchanan originating in the
>>> Ulster region of Ireland).
>>>
>>
>> The Scots originated in Ireland, if you go back far enough.
>>
>
> Yeah.
> One part of my lineage goes up through Canada, and is mostly
> Scots+Norwegian+French.
>
> Another part apparently came via Utah, and another part came from
> Germany (not sure exact timeframe).
>
>
>>> Actual ancestry is a bit more mixed, but apparently:
>>> Scots, Irish, Scots-Irish
>>> Norwegian (and some French and similar as well, ...)
>>> Ashkenazi (German Jew), (*1)
>>>
>>>
>>> *1: Likely first place (followed by Scots) in terms of total percentage.
>>> However, based on traditional rules (I neither have direct maternal
>>> descent, nor practice Judaism, nor can I speak Yiddish), I would not
>>> be classified as part of their group.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, so you are "Jew-ish", not "Jewish" :-)
>>
>> (Apologies for the somewhat political joke.)
>>
>
> Most other ethnic groups are not so particular:
> * Have ancestry from that group, good enough.
> * Percentage then is a rough estimate of their association with that group.
>
> Like, say: a person with 30-40% Italian ancestry could claim to be
> Italian, people would take it at face value. No demands that they also
> be Roman Catholic, wave their hands while speaking, or talk endlessly
> about food.
>
> Not so in this case, it is more like "What do the mitzvoth say? ... The
> mitzvoth say no."
I am 50% Italian. That is not good enough to be a made man, in the
mafia. ;^)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-28 23:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <tr4vui$2kkkk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #169085 |
On 1/28/2023 2:15 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 1/28/2023 9:42 AM, BGB wrote:
>> On 1/28/2023 6:39 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 27/01/2023 18:46, BGB wrote:
>>>> My given name ("Brendan") is itself apparently a source of much
>>>> confusion...
>>>>
>>>> I guess, my first name is Irish, my last-name is Scots-Irish
>>>> (apparently it was an alternate form of Buchanan originating in the
>>>> Ulster region of Ireland).
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Scots originated in Ireland, if you go back far enough.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah.
>> One part of my lineage goes up through Canada, and is mostly
>> Scots+Norwegian+French.
>>
>> Another part apparently came via Utah, and another part came from
>> Germany (not sure exact timeframe).
>>
>>
>>>> Actual ancestry is a bit more mixed, but apparently:
>>>> Scots, Irish, Scots-Irish
>>>> Norwegian (and some French and similar as well, ...)
>>>> Ashkenazi (German Jew), (*1)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *1: Likely first place (followed by Scots) in terms of total
>>>> percentage.
>>>> However, based on traditional rules (I neither have direct maternal
>>>> descent, nor practice Judaism, nor can I speak Yiddish), I would not
>>>> be classified as part of their group.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, so you are "Jew-ish", not "Jewish" :-)
>>>
>>> (Apologies for the somewhat political joke.)
>>>
>>
>> Most other ethnic groups are not so particular:
>> * Have ancestry from that group, good enough.
>> * Percentage then is a rough estimate of their association with that
>> group.
>>
>> Like, say: a person with 30-40% Italian ancestry could claim to be
>> Italian, people would take it at face value. No demands that they also
>> be Roman Catholic, wave their hands while speaking, or talk endlessly
>> about food.
>>
>> Not so in this case, it is more like "What do the mitzvoth say? ...
>> The mitzvoth say no."
>
> I am 50% Italian. That is not good enough to be a made man, in the
> mafia. ;^)
>
Possibly, I wasn't thinking so much of Mafia...
But, say, more like in places like New Jersey or similar...
Then there are people who claim to be African or Native American because
only a single ancestor a fair number of generations back was such.
It is a little loose sometimes.
If going by name, I would be classified as Irish:
"Brendan", apparently a fairly common name in Ireland.
"Bohannon", also Irish, but less common, originating in Ulster.
Technically a mutated form of the Scots "Buchanan".
Along with various other related but different variants.
...
Genetics is more of a toss up.
I could also claim to be Scots, and "white" is pretty much a given (at
least by most peoples' definitions).
Pretty much all of my recent ancestry comes from Europe (though, the
Ashkenazim can trace their origins back to Israel, some time long ago).
But, I fall outside of the maternal descent mitzvah.
My dad is one technically under this rule, as are a lot of my cousins.
Paternal grandparents were from a mixed background (and my grandma could
apparently speak Yiddish, ...). My dad and his siblings were raised
speaking English only, and were also raised as LDS (prior generations
having ended up basically converting to LDS for whatever reason).
Seemingly, most of my aunts/uncles are still openly LDS.
But, parts of the family from one generation earlier (great-aunts /
uncles and their descendants) are mostly still practicing Judaism.
Prior to this point, things go back to Germany. Specifics much beyond
this, dunno. This part was never really talked about.
My dad had also abandoned LDS, but specifics here get a bit fuzzy...
He has generally been jumping ship from one denomination to another (and
to/from the Messianic community a few times). His beliefs also seem to
be a little syncretic in some ways.
My mom is mostly Scots+Norwegian+French, and her ancestors came from
Canada (well, and then back to Scotland, Norway, and France; if one
traces things back further).
My parents identify as Christian, and are currently attending a Lutheran
church. Partly because this is what is available here (and "less bad"
than some of the other options).
I don't really identify with any particular denomination.
Generally theistic (believing the creator exists), but leave most other
stuff up to interpretation.
As noted, I am generally not a fan of:
Taking stuff overly literally
Some of this stuff just seems obviously not a literal description
Nor of the whole YEC thing
The people going around claiming that Earth is 6000 years old
Both science and physical evidence seem to say this is wrong
Proof texts and similar
Reading verses out of context to make a point
Basing doctrine on long chains of out-of-context passages
Basing doctrine on obvious circular arguments
...
I kinda suspect the Evangelical movement has sorta gotten some stuff
wrong here. Say, they have zeal, granted, but some of it is potentially
misguided. They are seemingly relentless in their efforts to tell
everyone in range about the crucifixion, and maybe while they are at it,
to try to push the whole YEC thing as well (since their particular
variety of "take everything literally" theology also demands that all of
Genesis also be taken as literal, ...).
But, stuff starts to become an issue when one starts trying to climb a
wall made out of circular logic and absurdity.
Admittedly, I personally am more inclined to believe the Earth 4.5
billion years old or similar and that a guided evolution approach was
used. Demanding that someone who exists both outside of time and our
universe would operate in terms of literal 24 hour days (and in near
complete violation of the laws of physics) is absurd. Occam's razor
option being to assume the Earth is old.
At least from our perspective; one could also argue that possibly the
"seventh day" never ended.
But, will note that they are not entirely wrong on some things:
Namely, the New Testament stuff follows along well enough from the Old
Testament prophecies that, basically, there isn't really a way around
it. Still have some reservations as to the interpretation of some of
this (some aspects of mainline Christian doctrine still don't sit well
with me; basically, besides just what the text says, there is all the
stuff people say about what the text says, and not all of it seems to
entirely "add up").
But, it seems like, if one assumes the OT is correct, they need to
assume the NT is correct as well, or claim that the first time was an
aberration and that a similar chain of events would need to happen
again. Easier to assume "Yeah, it happened, 2000 years ago, that was it".
But, at the same time, still don't really agree with the Messianic
movement, since it also picks up some of the bad points of the
Evangelical movement. In particular, it mostly takes Evangelical
Christian theology and puts a veneer of Jewish traditions on top of it,
then they try to pass it off as a form of Judaism and then still try to
evangelize to everyone. But, like, while also still expecting people to
keep Kosher and similar (but at the same time, kind of defeating the
point as well, as a person who believes in the NT is, by extension, not
under any sort of moral obligation to keep kosher, only the Noahide laws).
Ironically, "no longer needing to keep kosher" thing holds regardless of
interpretation:
NT side:
Paul said the rules no longer apply;
Biblical inerrancy makes this binding.
Otherwise:
They are now part of the goyim, so it still no longer applies.
Say, one can still do it as a piety thing, but it is not a moral
requirement.
...
Admittedly, I do still have a few reservations:
One should not say names associated with the creator casually;
One tradition is to write his name as "G-d"
But then people give funny looks...
Similar issue if one makes any mention of kosher rules, ...
These being, not normal WASP behavior...
I am not really a fan of either tattoos or piercings;
Generally, they seem like a bad idea.
...
Would also not go as far as to go around wearing a kippah or tzitzit in
public, since this sort of thing can provoke hostility; and doing so
would also not really be in line with my personal beliefs (this being
more an Orthodox thing; Even if I did so, would not be showing proper
respect, besides making oneself into a walking target).
Well, and admittedly, I don't really keep kosher either.
Granted, all of these are more piety things than moral things.
But, yeah, where exactly I would fit in the religious landscape is
itself subject to interpretation.
...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-25 12:10 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <96643cbf-1427-48a0-8cc5-179df0f6ab8dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #169035 |
środa, 25 stycznia 2023 o 15:44:00 UTC+1 bart c napisał(a): > On Tuesday, 24 January 2023 at 23:21:25 UTC, David Brown wrote: > > > Maybe I am influenced by having the best of both worlds - I can use my > > real name, but it is so common that it might as well be a pseudonym! > My full name is completely unique as far as I know. (Even 'Bart' is rare enough, and that's not my full first name.) > > I've only once come across a namesake online, and that was for an imaginary player in a fantasy football game. > > However, I imagine there aren't many Norwegians called 'David Brown'. my pseudonim FIR is invented conceptually by me some day i cannot reckognize wgere it were, i guess though iys probably late 2001 or somewhat later i rememner hovever place where it was invented (big room in my/my mother house, upper flor) ...i conceptually needed some good nickname and needed it to be rather short (it was somewhat influenced by length of assembly menmonics as i remember, and i considered mainly 3 letter long or maybe eben 2 letter long (influeanced by 2-letter names used in computer names like 'AT' for example..fir seemed the most perfect, expecially i liked the letters) (very sai im rather not in the same mind-space as i was then,, and now my mindspace is much more painfull and i feel painfully old and still did nothing)( i feel i was in that mind space quite long for sure for some like 2012-14 maybe eben longer..and for sure im not there last 2 years ...so maybe i even should rename to dead fir,, and this death my appear somewhere in 2015-2-17 probably and only grows.. im doomd as hell and this only grows)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web