Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #20431 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "plewto@gmail.com" <plewto@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-12-18 00:13 -0800 |
| Last post | 2012-12-18 22:10 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 99 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Need clarification on Object.equals. "plewto@gmail.com" <plewto@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 00:13 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-18 10:39 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-12-18 04:48 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-18 10:56 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. FredK <fred.l.kleinschmidt@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 08:13 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 11:22 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 17:43 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 12:06 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-19 09:39 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 13:24 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. FredK <fred.l.kleinschmidt@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 11:23 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-19 08:25 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. plewto@gmail.com - 2012-12-18 10:56 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2012-12-18 14:24 -0700
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-18 13:52 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. markspace <-@.> - 2012-12-18 10:24 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. plewto@gmail.com - 2012-12-18 10:48 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-12-18 14:01 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. plewto@gmail.com - 2012-12-18 12:14 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. plewto@gmail.com - 2012-12-18 12:17 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-18 22:16 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 10:20 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-12-19 03:22 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 12:06 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 09:07 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 09:09 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 14:36 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 09:42 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 15:05 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 16:15 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 15:47 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 16:57 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 16:51 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 18:12 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 17:27 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 11:40 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 10:17 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 15:40 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 10:50 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 17:01 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 10:22 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 18:49 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 11:41 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-19 17:05 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-20 08:34 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-20 07:27 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-20 09:04 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-20 18:10 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-20 11:08 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Dunihơ <Np0eStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-21 07:50 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-21 07:30 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-21 17:09 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Leŵ <lewbl0ch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-23 00:54 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-21 12:23 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-21 17:38 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhoj <arne@vajhoj.dk> - 2012-12-23 00:50 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-21 08:39 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-20 13:39 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-21 08:34 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-12-19 09:22 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 15:35 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 10:56 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 17:08 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-12-19 08:58 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 15:32 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-12-19 11:08 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 17:32 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2012-12-19 18:41 +0100
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 17:58 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 18:12 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-12-19 12:29 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-12-19 12:00 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 18:06 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 13:13 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-19 07:48 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 16:48 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 12:09 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 17:50 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 13:14 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 18:59 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 13:16 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 19:05 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 11:45 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 20:00 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-19 17:15 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-20 09:22 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-12-20 07:36 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 10:19 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-19 19:16 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2012-12-19 11:48 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-12-19 14:12 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 09:04 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 13:40 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-12-20 09:30 +0000
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-12-18 12:52 -0800
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-12-19 09:27 -0600
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-19 10:44 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-18 22:11 -0500
Re: Need clarification on Object.equals. Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-12-18 22:10 -0500
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-18 22:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d13174$0$283$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20473 |
On 12/18/2012 3:17 PM, plewto@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:14:58 PM UTC-6, ple...@gmail.com wrote: >> On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:01:51 PM UTC-6, David Lamb wrote: >>> On 18/12/2012 1:48 PM, p...mail.com wrote: >>>> On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:24:44 PM UTC-6, markspace wrote: >>>>> Show us the implementation of equals() for Node (and probably Gate too, >>>>> that version of equals() could also be borked in the example you gave) >>>>> and we'll point out the error. >>>> It is complex because it is a large application. I can either post the several hundred lines >>>> of source or the the 6 which adequately illustrates the point. >>> There's likely not much people can do to help without more context. The >>> "6 lines" don't adequately "illustrate the point" because from them >>> alone nobody can say for sure what your problem is. Roedy's guess might >>> be the best advice you're going to get. >> >> Yes I understand that. In fact, as I pointed out in a subsequent >> post, none of my code defines equals, Node was however extending >> AbstractSet which does redefine it. Really All I was looking for was a >> general direction I might look and not to burden anyone with large >> blocks of code. Node is 212 lines, Gate is 67, Monitor another 85, none >> of which even once mentions the word "equals" >> >> My issue with Roedy's response was not the helpful suggestion to >> lookat super classes but rather that it comes off as lecturing, >> and frankly rather condescending. > > Im sorry I meant markspace's responce not Roedy's You had a problem. A problem which is relative easy to troubleshoot with some basic Java knowledge. You posted the problem here with absolutely no information to help identify the problem. What do you expect? We can not do anything but provide some guesses the presence of an equals in a class or parent class - and explain some basics about how equals work. So stop whining and learn to post better questions. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <-vKdnV0vgsl4CUzNnZ2dnUVZ8sOdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20510 |
On 19/12/12 03:16, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 12/18/2012 3:17 PM, plewto@gmail.com wrote: [snip] > > So stop whining and learn to post better question. Now I'm not normally driven to using bad language but What the f**k is wrong with you people. This is Usenet, not your private little universe. I've noticed this a lot in various newsgroups that I have been frequenting of late. People who are regular contributors get the idea that foo.bar.baz newsgroup is their private domain and anyone who has the temerity to post a question that doesn't meet their exacting standards get flamed and scolded and told to stop whining. I get told off but I have the skin of a Rhino and none of you silly little jibes affect me or my life in any way whatsoever. Not everyone is so unaffected. Please think before you flame. Oh, and by the way, my flames are ALWAYS justified :-) lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 03:22 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <K5idneDx64TWPkzNnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #20514 |
On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: ... > I've noticed this a lot in various newsgroups that I have been > frequenting of late. People who are regular contributors get the idea > that foo.bar.baz newsgroup is their private domain and anyone who has > the temerity to post a question that doesn't meet their exacting > standards get flamed and scolded and told to stop whining. > > I get told off but I have the skin of a Rhino and none of you silly > little jibes affect me or my life in any way whatsoever. Not everyone is > so unaffected. ... I strongly agree with this, except I would have preferred "Some people who are regular contributors ...". Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 12:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <armdnYPIz7BdMEzNnZ2dnUVZ8gudnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20515 |
On 19/12/12 11:22, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: > ... >> I've noticed this a lot in various newsgroups that I have been >> frequenting of late. People who are regular contributors get the idea >> that foo.bar.baz newsgroup is their private domain and anyone who has >> the temerity to post a question that doesn't meet their exacting >> standards get flamed and scolded and told to stop whining. >> >> I get told off but I have the skin of a Rhino and none of you silly >> little jibes affect me or my life in any way whatsoever. Not everyone is >> so unaffected. > ... > > I strongly agree with this, except I would have preferred "Some people > who are regular contributors ...". Concur, my mistake. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 09:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d1ca29$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20515 |
On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: > ... >> I've noticed this a lot in various newsgroups that I have been >> frequenting of late. People who are regular contributors get the idea >> that foo.bar.baz newsgroup is their private domain and anyone who has >> the temerity to post a question that doesn't meet their exacting >> standards get flamed and scolded and told to stop whining. >> >> I get told off but I have the skin of a Rhino and none of you silly >> little jibes affect me or my life in any way whatsoever. Not everyone is >> so unaffected. > ... > > I strongly agree with this, except I would have preferred "Some people > who are regular contributors ...". Do you agree that it is acceptable behavior calling a named replier lecturing and condescending due to this post: <quote> This is a red flag. The code should not be so complex that you can't show us what is really going on. If it *is* too complex, then likely the issue is the complexity itself. However, I think Roedy zeroed in on the most likely cause. Your abstract class, Node (or some superclass), implements equals() *incorrectly* and is returning true when it should not. Probably Node() should not implement equals() at all. Show us the implementation of equals() for Node (and probably Gate too, that version of equals() could also be borked in the example you gave) and we'll point out the error. <quote> ?? Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 09:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d1caa3$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20523 |
On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >> ... >>> I've noticed this a lot in various newsgroups that I have been >>> frequenting of late. People who are regular contributors get the idea >>> that foo.bar.baz newsgroup is their private domain and anyone who has >>> the temerity to post a question that doesn't meet their exacting >>> standards get flamed and scolded and told to stop whining. >>> >>> I get told off but I have the skin of a Rhino and none of you silly >>> little jibes affect me or my life in any way whatsoever. Not everyone is >>> so unaffected. >> ... >> >> I strongly agree with this, except I would have preferred "Some people >> who are regular contributors ...". > > Do you agree that it is acceptable behavior calling a named > replier lecturing and condescending due to this post: > > <quote> > This is a red flag. The code should not be so complex that you can't > show us what is really going on. If it *is* too complex, then likely > the issue is the complexity itself. > > However, I think Roedy zeroed in on the most likely cause. Your > abstract class, Node (or some superclass), implements equals() > *incorrectly* and is returning true when it should not. Probably Node() > should not implement equals() at all. > > Show us the implementation of equals() for Node (and probably Gate too, > that version of equals() could also be borked in the example you gave) > and we'll point out the error. > <quote> > > ?? My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed to insult others without being criticized for it" card. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 14:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cMqdnZgL74Z1TUzNnZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20524 |
On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> ... [snip] > > My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post > stupid questions" card, Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment on what is a stupid question and what isn't. This is USENET, you don't own it, you don't have the right to tell people what they can and cannot post, in fact you are just another faceless whiner among so many faceless whiners. Maybe you and cadre of self appointed administrators should go and hang out on IRC, then you can ban people who you don't agree with ... massage your overinflated egos a bit more. jeez, I haven't got this worked up in a while. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 09:42 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d1d243$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20527 |
On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: > On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>> ... > > [snip] > >> >> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. > Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself > You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment > on what is a stupid question and what isn't. Congratulations you completely missed the point. > This is USENET, you don't own it, you don't have the right to tell > people what they can and cannot post, And you are trying to do what? Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 15:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kuWdndhi7_1PSkzNnZ2dnUVZ8v6dnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20528 |
On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>> ... >> >> [snip] >> >>> >>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. > >> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment >> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. > > Congratulations you completely missed the point. No I didn't and I quote "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post stupid questions" card" Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. You ? Who decides who is a newbie You ? Who decides it is a stupid question You ? And before you use the 'community' card Who made you the spokesperson You ? Well ? lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 16:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <50D1D9FD.4070202@telia.com> |
| In reply to | #20530 |
2012-12-19 16:05, lipska the kat skrev: > On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>> ... >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> >>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >> >>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment >>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >> >> Congratulations you completely missed the point. > > No I didn't and I quote > > "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post > stupid questions" card" > > Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. > You ? > > Who decides who is a newbie > You ? > > Who decides it is a stupid question > You ? > > And before you use the 'community' card > > Who made you the spokesperson > You ? > > Well ? You're overreacting, in a big way (and there should be no space before ?). You completely missed the spirit (and point) of Arne's response(s). -- Lars Enderin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <8NGdnZJoQO_qfEzNnZ2dnUVZ8mmdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20531 |
On 19/12/12 15:15, Lars Enderin wrote: > 2012-12-19 16:05, lipska the kat skrev: >> On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>>> ... >>>> >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>>> >>>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >>> >>>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment >>>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >>> >>> Congratulations you completely missed the point. >> >> No I didn't and I quote >> >> "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >> stupid questions" card" >> >> Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. >> You ? >> >> Who decides who is a newbie >> You ? >> >> Who decides it is a stupid question >> You ? >> >> And before you use the 'community' card >> >> Who made you the spokesperson >> You ? >> >> Well ? > > You're overreacting, in a big way (and there should be no space before > ?). You completely missed the spirit (and point) of Arne's response(s). This is Usenet, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. I do like it so I'm staying and I will continue however futile it may be to stand up against the ludicrous pomposity and arrogance I see here. Get used to it. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 16:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <50D1E3F3.5050703@telia.com> |
| In reply to | #20539 |
2012-12-19 16:47, lipska the kat skrev: > On 19/12/12 15:15, Lars Enderin wrote: >> You're overreacting, in a big way (and there should be no space before >> ?). You completely missed the spirit (and point) of Arne's response(s). > > This is Usenet, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. I do like it so > I'm staying and I will continue however futile it may be to stand up > against the ludicrous pomposity and arrogance I see here. Get used to it. Did I imply that I don't like Usenet? You seem to misunderstand a lot. And I don't see much pomposity and arrogance here. I've been on Usenet for 25 years or more. -- Lars Enderin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 16:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <WvidnYtFWss3bUzNnZ2dnUVZ8madnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20543 |
On 19/12/12 15:57, Lars Enderin wrote: > 2012-12-19 16:47, lipska the kat skrev: >> On 19/12/12 15:15, Lars Enderin wrote: >>> You're overreacting, in a big way (and there should be no space before >>> ?). You completely missed the spirit (and point) of Arne's response(s). >> >> This is Usenet, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. I do like it so >> I'm staying and I will continue however futile it may be to stand up >> against the ludicrous pomposity and arrogance I see here. Get used to it. > > Did I imply that I don't like Usenet? You seem to misunderstand a lot. > And I don't see much pomposity and arrogance here. I've been on Usenet > for 25 years or more. Well you wouldn't I guess I have a question Why do you (collectively) feel the need to chastise someone for behaviour that you decide is inappropriate for this group when that behaviour is not directed at you. I expand on this in a reply to Arne elsewhere. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 18:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <50D1F57C.4090901@telia.com> |
| In reply to | #20550 |
2012-12-19 17:51, lipska the kat skrev: > On 19/12/12 15:57, Lars Enderin wrote: >> 2012-12-19 16:47, lipska the kat skrev: >>> On 19/12/12 15:15, Lars Enderin wrote: >>>> You're overreacting, in a big way (and there should be no space before >>>> ?). You completely missed the spirit (and point) of Arne's response(s). >>> >>> This is Usenet, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. I do like it so >>> I'm staying and I will continue however futile it may be to stand up >>> against the ludicrous pomposity and arrogance I see here. Get used to >>> it. >> >> Did I imply that I don't like Usenet? You seem to misunderstand a lot. >> And I don't see much pomposity and arrogance here. I've been on Usenet >> for 25 years or more. > > Well you wouldn't I guess > > I have a question > > Why do you (collectively) feel the need to chastise someone for > behaviour that you decide is inappropriate for this group when that > behaviour is not directed at you. I expand on this in a reply to Arne > elsewhere. Why don't you like it when somebody stands up for somebody else? It's not abnormal behaviour. And in this case Arne may have felt that the OP's reply was (also) directed at him. But I am not allowed to answer for Arne, right? -- Lars Enderin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 17:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sfOdnW1z1PZuZUzNnZ2dnUVZ8rCdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20555 |
On 19/12/12 17:12, Lars Enderin wrote: > 2012-12-19 17:51, lipska the kat skrev: >> On 19/12/12 15:57, Lars Enderin wrote: > > Why don't you like it when somebody stands up for somebody else? It's > not abnormal behaviour. And in this case Arne may have felt that the > OP's reply was (also) directed at him. But I am not allowed to answer > for Arne, right? Well in the real world nobody answers for me except me. I stand and fall by my own decisions and am quite prepared to take the consequences of my actions however harsh those consequences may be. However we are not in the real world are we. We are in a world where it's easy to gang up on someone who doesn't fit your idea of 'acceptable' and escape without any of the consequences that might accrue were you to exhibit that behaviour with a flesh and blood person. I don't have an issue with standing up for your friends when it is warrented however I do have an issue with the aggressive pack like rounding on some unfortunate individual who steps on your delicate little toes. Witness the forthporing of vitriol and invective from you and others in this group to my 'frank and lively exchange of views' with Arne although what the f**k it has got to do with you is anyones guess. Anyway, this has been an exhilarating and enjoyable exchange and you can be sure that I will speak up in future when and if I see it happening again. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 11:40 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4v54d8hip10qsph37qanub263gvntna20q@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #20556 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:27:12 +0000, lipska the kat
<lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On 19/12/12 17:12, Lars Enderin wrote:
>> 2012-12-19 17:51, lipska the kat skrev:
>>> On 19/12/12 15:57, Lars Enderin wrote:
>
>>
>> Why don't you like it when somebody stands up for somebody else? It's
>> not abnormal behaviour. And in this case Arne may have felt that the
>> OP's reply was (also) directed at him. But I am not allowed to answer
>> for Arne, right?
>
>Well in the real world nobody answers for me except me. I stand and fall
>by my own decisions and am quite prepared to take the consequences of my
>actions however harsh those consequences may be.
Not everyone has to do that.
>However we are not in the real world are we. We are in a world where
Yes, we are. The idea that the Net is not part of the real world
is inane.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d1da91$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20530 |
On 12/19/2012 10:05 AM, lipska the kat wrote: > On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>> ... >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> >>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >> >>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment >>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >> >> Congratulations you completely missed the point. > > No I didn't and I quote > > "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post > stupid questions" card" > > Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. > You ? > > Who decides who is a newbie > You ? > > Who decides it is a stupid question > You ? > > And before you use the 'community' card > > Who made you the spokesperson > You ? > > Well ? Yes - you missed the point, but let me try to explain again. My point is that I am not objecting to questions whether I consider them stupid or not (or whether I consider the person a newbie or not) - I am objecting to the person asking the question insulting those that try to help. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 15:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oOidneXJfN2XfUzNnZ2dnUVZ8qOdnZ2d@bt.com> |
| In reply to | #20532 |
On 19/12/12 15:17, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 12/19/2012 10:05 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >> On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>>> ... >>>> >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>>> >>>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >>> >>>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass judgment >>>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >>> >>> Congratulations you completely missed the point. >> >> No I didn't and I quote >> >> "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >> stupid questions" card" >> >> Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. >> You ? >> >> Who decides who is a newbie >> You ? >> >> Who decides it is a stupid question >> You ? >> >> And before you use the 'community' card >> >> Who made you the spokesperson >> You ? >> >> Well ? > > Yes - you missed the point, but let me try to explain again. > > My point is that I am not objecting to questions whether > I consider them stupid or not (or whether I consider the > person a newbie or not) - I am objecting to the > person asking the question insulting those that try to help. Well you still don't get it do you I don't defend insulting behavior but sometimes flesh and blood can stand just so much, lets try again. One question at a time. You said "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post stupid questions" card" Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. Do you understand the question It's a very simple question, really it is. who is it ? I really do want to know. lipska -- Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <50d1e260$0$285$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #20537 |
On 12/19/2012 10:40 AM, lipska the kat wrote: > On 19/12/12 15:17, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 10:05 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >>>> >>>>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>>>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass >>>>> judgment >>>>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >>>> >>>> Congratulations you completely missed the point. >>> >>> No I didn't and I quote >>> >>> "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>> stupid questions" card" >>> >>> Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. >>> You ? >>> >>> Who decides who is a newbie >>> You ? >>> >>> Who decides it is a stupid question >>> You ? >>> >>> And before you use the 'community' card >>> >>> Who made you the spokesperson >>> You ? >>> >>> Well ? >> >> Yes - you missed the point, but let me try to explain again. >> >> My point is that I am not objecting to questions whether >> I consider them stupid or not (or whether I consider the >> person a newbie or not) - I am objecting to the >> person asking the question insulting those that try to help. > > Well you still don't get it do you > I don't defend insulting behavior Then why do you complain about me pointing out insulting behavior? Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 17:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <50D1E4D7.6020205@telia.com> |
| In reply to | #20537 |
2012-12-19 16:40, lipska the kat skrev: > On 19/12/12 15:17, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> On 12/19/2012 10:05 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>> On 19/12/12 14:42, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>> On 12/19/2012 9:36 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>> On 19/12/12 14:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>> On 12/19/2012 9:07 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: >>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 6:22 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>> On 12/19/2012 2:20 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >>>>>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>>>>> stupid questions" card, then they do not have a "allowed >>>>>> to insult others without being criticized for it" card. >>>> >>>>> Your arrogance is almost beyond belief. Listen to yourself >>>>> You really do think that you are in some way qualified to pass >>>>> judgment >>>>> on what is a stupid question and what isn't. >>>> >>>> Congratulations you completely missed the point. >>> >>> No I didn't and I quote >>> >>> "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post >>> stupid questions" card" >>> >>> Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. >>> You ? >>> >>> Who decides who is a newbie >>> You ? >>> >>> Who decides it is a stupid question >>> You ? >>> >>> And before you use the 'community' card >>> >>> Who made you the spokesperson >>> You ? >>> >>> Well ? >> >> Yes - you missed the point, but let me try to explain again. >> >> My point is that I am not objecting to questions whether >> I consider them stupid or not (or whether I consider the >> person a newbie or not) - I am objecting to the >> person asking the question insulting those that try to help. > > Well you still don't get it do you > I don't defend insulting behavior but sometimes flesh and blood can > stand just so much, lets try again. One question at a time. > > You said > > "My point is that while newbies do have a "allowed to post > stupid questions" card" > > Who 'allows' them to post stupid questions. > > Do you understand the question > > It's a very simple question, really it is. who is it ? > I really do want to know. You are takings things too literally. Makes me think of Asperger's syndrome and related. -- Lars Enderin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web