Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #9053 > unrolled thread

Too bad this group is gone

Started by"BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com>
First post2011-08-06 23:55 -0500
Last post2011-08-15 17:03 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 127 — 29 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  Too bad this group is gone "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> - 2011-08-06 23:55 -0500
    Re: Too bad this group is gone Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-08-06 23:44 -0600
    Re: Too bad this group is gone cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-08-07 20:38 +0000
      Re: Too bad this group is gone "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2011-08-07 16:13 -0500
        Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-07 18:28 -0400
        Re: Too bad this group is gone Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-08 09:53 -0400
    Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-08 00:16 +0200
      Re: Too bad this group is gone August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 00:40 +0200
        Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-08 10:05 +0200
          Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-08 12:51 +0100
    Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-08 10:17 +0200
      Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 14:25 +0100
        Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 14:22 +0000
          Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 17:30 +0100
            Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 17:04 +0000
              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 19:10 +0100
                Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-08 18:38 +0000
                Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 20:38 +0000
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-08 20:43 +0000
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 16:02 +0100
                Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-09 00:15 +0200
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:44 +0100
                    Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 08:07 -0700
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:20 +0100
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 12:42 -0700
            Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-08 23:50 +0200
              Re: Too bad this group is gone Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-09 10:08 +1200
                Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-08 18:18 -0400
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:33 +0100
                Re: Too bad this group is gone blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-08-08 15:23 -0700
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:20 +0100
              Re: Too bad this group is gone jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2011-08-08 23:18 +0000
                Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 05:06 +0000
                Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-09 11:11 +0200
              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:01 +0100
                Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 14:23 +0000
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-09 14:53 +0000
                    Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 17:45 +0000
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:51 +0100
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 20:23 +0000
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-10 07:27 -0700
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:02 +0100
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 22:28 +0000
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 11:16 +0000
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 14:59 +0000
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-10 11:30 -0400
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 16:20 +0000
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-10 13:14 -0400
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 08:00 -0400
                                  Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-11 12:13 +0000
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:06 -0400
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:39 -0400
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 17:32 +0000
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-10 23:14 +0000
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-11 14:02 +0000
                                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:49 +0100
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 21:14 +0000
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 17:49 -0400
                                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-13 01:46 +0100
                                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 09:19 +0000
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 08:39 -0400
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 16:34 +0000
                                        Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 20:18 +0000
                                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-18 06:34 +0000
                                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-18 12:20 +0300
                                              Re: Too bad this group is gone BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-18 17:36 +0000
                                            Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-18 07:10 -0400
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 16:39 +0000
                                        Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 20:15 +0000
                                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-13 18:21 -0700
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-08-12 04:36 +0100
                                  Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:03 -0400
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 15:29 -0400
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-14 04:26 -0700
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 20:51 +0000
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-08-14 03:15 +0100
                                      Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-14 02:29 +0000
                                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-14 05:48 +0000
                                          Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-14 06:24 +0000
                                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-14 08:12 +0000
                                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-14 04:39 -0700
                                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 11:36 -0700
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-10 17:55 +0000
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 16:43 +0100
                    Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 17:47 +0000
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 18:26 +0000
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:13 +0100
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:42 +0100
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-09 19:54 +0000
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:11 +0100
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-12 20:25 +0000
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:41 +0100
                    Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 11:28 -0700
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:38 +0100
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-09 19:59 +0000
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-09 20:01 +0000
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-09 22:42 +0000
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 13:16 -0700
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-10 12:12 +0200
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-10 08:44 -0700
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-10 11:36 -0700
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 23:11 -0700
                                  Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-11 15:05 +0200
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 08:43 -0400
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 08:02 -0700
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-08-10 10:39 -0600
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-11 03:47 +0000
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-11 00:33 +0200
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:57 +0100
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:40 +0100
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 20:14 +0000
                            Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-12 13:51 -0700
                              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:12 +0100
                                Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-13 01:42 +0100
                                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 23:52 +0100
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-14 00:35 +0100
                                    Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-13 18:23 -0700
                      Re: Too bad this group is gone gordonb.mbkym@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-10 20:50 -0500
                        Re: Too bad this group is gone gordonb.6v878@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-11 03:34 -0500
                          Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 08:23 -0700
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-10 03:16 -0700
            Re: Too bad this group is gone John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 11:12 -0700
              Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:15 +0100
                Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 20:07 +0000
                Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-12 20:39 +0000
                Re: Too bad this group is gone John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 08:00 -0700
                  Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-15 17:03 +0000

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next page →

#9403

FromNick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com>
Date2011-08-14 04:39 -0700
Message-ID<ff02b5a0-73a1-4e1a-ab28-75805ad44342@f2g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
In reply to#9394
On Aug 14, 9:12 am, Willem <wil...@toad.stack.nl> wrote:
> Seebs wrote:
>
> ) On 2011-08-14, John Gordon <gor...@panix.com> wrote:
> )> I used the term "community site" because the particular mechanism under
> )> discussion -- asking questions, providing answers and voting on them --
> )> is driven by community interaction.
> )>
> )> I didn't feel that the term "web site" necessarily carried that meaning.
> )
> ) I think the probable complaint is that if those are "community" things, then
> ) Usenet is presumably non-community by contrast, which seems prejudicial.
>
> Disagree.
> That would only hold if it was 'community sites' vs 'usenet sites'.
>
> The word 'community' was applied to 'sites', thereby distinguishing
> it from other *sites*.
>
> Usenet doesn't need further qualifying.  There is only one usenet,
> and it is not a site, let alone multiple sites.
>
> The whole asking about the choice of words is obviously just a smokescreen,
> because the real meat of the discussion -the comparison of usenet and
> community sites- was probably deemed to be unwinnable.
>
> The reason I say this because I saw numerous arguments that were not
> replied to (including some of my own), and the whole thing shifted
> to an elaborate attack on an innocent choice of words.
>
> Note that I find 'winning' a discussion to be a ridiculous concept,
> but it seems that a lot of people don't even grasp that notion.
>
> "You're wrong!"
> "So what?  The other guy got fed up so I won the discussion."


yes but once in a blue moon the other guy turns round and says "I've
listened to your arguments and I can see that I was mistaken"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9405

FromKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date2011-08-14 11:36 -0700
Message-ID<ln62lz4z7p.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
In reply to#9403
Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> writes:
[...]
> yes but once in a blue moon the other guy turns round and says "I've
> listened to your arguments and I can see that I was mistaken"

I think we can safely assume that "Jed" isn't going to do that.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9164

FromSeebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
Date2011-08-10 17:55 +0000
Message-ID<slrnj45c7g.14vk.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net>
In reply to#9140
On 2011-08-10, Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you pay for usenet?

I do, but...

> If not, I don't see how you an legitimately call 
> it a "service" that you are subscribing to - let alone complain about 
> "bad service". If you don't like it, don't use it.

I don't really think this applies.  Participation in a forum or discussion
medium is an investment of time, and many people participate both in asking
and answering.

I think Usenet is good at some kinds of C stuff and bad at others.  A system
like stackoverflow's is useful for some things, not so useful for others.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9111

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-09 16:43 +0100
Message-ID<4e41588f$0$9129$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9102
John Gordon wrote:

> If he ignores posts, he might miss one that has a good answer.  Sites such
> as stackoverflow provide a mechanism for such answers to naturally bubble
> to the top so they are easily seen.

And why exactly do you believe that the censorship policy put in place in 
sites such as stackoveflow end up putting an emphasis on the answers which 
you perceive as "good" and eliminate what you may perceive as noise?  If you 
can't evaluate it by yourself then how do you actually know what's going on?


> (However, throwing around such terms as "free will" tells me that you're
> not interested in having a genuine debate about this matter.  Good day.)

You are refering to the following quote:

"No one forces you to follow every thread to it's last post.  You have free 
will, don't you?"

If you believe that this "genuine debate" cannot possibly delve into the 
issue of censorship and you being the one making the decisions on what is 
best for you then it becomes quite clear that you feel compelled to avoid 
touching these points.  Free will regarding access to information is only an 
elephant in the room to those who have a vested interest in censoring that 
information.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9115

FromJohn Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date2011-08-09 17:47 +0000
Message-ID<j1rrrg$qvu$2@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to#9111
In <4e41588f$0$9129$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:

> And why exactly do you believe that the censorship policy put in place in 

Now you're bringing in censorship too?  /tinfoilhat

-- 
John Gordon                   A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com              B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
                                -- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9116

FromJohn Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date2011-08-09 18:26 +0000
Message-ID<j1ru3o$fhl$1@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to#9115
In <j1rrrg$qvu$2@reader1.panix.com> John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> writes:

> Now you're bringing in censorship too?  /tinfoilhat

That was rude of me.  I apologize.

-- 
John Gordon                   A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com              B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
                                -- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9287

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-12 21:13 +0100
Message-ID<4e458c8a$0$31424$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9116
John Gordon wrote:

> In <j1rrrg$qvu$2@reader1.panix.com> John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> writes:
> 
>> Now you're bringing in censorship too?  /tinfoilhat
> 
> That was rude of me.  I apologize.

No problem, no harm done.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9122

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-09 20:42 +0100
Message-ID<4e419092$0$9121$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9115
John Gordon wrote:

> In <4e41588f$0$9129$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel
> <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> And why exactly do you believe that the censorship policy put in place in
> 
> Now you're bringing in censorship too?  /tinfoilhat

Do you even know what moderation, in the context of managing a forum, is?


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9123

FromWillem <willem@toad.stack.nl>
Date2011-08-09 19:54 +0000
Message-ID<slrnj4344d.2a05.willem@toad.stack.nl>
In reply to#9122
Rui Maciel wrote:
) John Gordon wrote:
)
)> In <4e41588f$0$9129$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel
)> <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
)> 
)>> And why exactly do you believe that the censorship policy put in place in
)> 
)> Now you're bringing in censorship too?  /tinfoilhat
)
) Do you even know what moderation, in the context of managing a forum, is?

I know for a fact that it is not censorship.  Look it up.


SaSW, Willem
-- 
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
            made in the above text. For all I know I might be
            drugged or something..
            No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9286

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-12 21:11 +0100
Message-ID<4e458c21$0$31424$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9123
Willem wrote:

> I know for a fact that it is not censorship.  Look it up.

Good suggestion.  Let's.


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censorship

noun
1.  the act or practice of censoring. 


Then censoring points to censor, both the noum and the transitive verb.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor

Main Entry: cen·sor
Function: transitive verb
: to examine (as a publication or film) in order to suppress or delete any 
contents considered objectionable 


Do we agree that, on an internet forum, a moderator's job is to "examine" 
what is posted "in order to suppress or delete any contents considered 
objectionable"?  If we agree on that then we can agree that it is in fact 
censorship.

Some people tend to associate their view on morality, their personal opinion 
or how they perceive their personal interests are affected, with the concept 
of censorship.  That is, they tend to believe that censorship is only 
censorship if they don't agree with it.  But that doesn't make it true.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9289

FromWillem <willem@toad.stack.nl>
Date2011-08-12 20:25 +0000
Message-ID<slrnj4b329.168k.willem@toad.stack.nl>
In reply to#9286
Rui Maciel wrote:
) Willem wrote:
)
)> I know for a fact that it is not censorship.  Look it up.
)
) Good suggestion.  Let's.
)
)
) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censorship

Wow, how long did it take you to find that one quotation that half-supports
your position ?  And even on that same page, there are several definitions
that flatly disagree with you.

Sorry to call your bluff there.

) Do we agree that, on an internet forum, a moderator's job is to "examine" 
) what is posted "in order to suppress or delete any contents considered 
) objectionable"?  If we agree on that then we can agree that it is in fact 
) censorship.

On stackoverflow.com, answers are being voted up or down, which is
something completely different from what you quoted above.

So you're wrong for two different reasons.  You're wrong twice.

Grow up.


SaSW, Willem
-- 
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
            made in the above text. For all I know I might be
            drugged or something..
            No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9298

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-12 22:41 +0100
Message-ID<4e45a141$0$31418$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9289
Willem wrote:

> Rui Maciel wrote:
> ) Willem wrote:
> )
> )> I know for a fact that it is not censorship.  Look it up.
> )
> ) Good suggestion.  Let's.
> )
> )
> ) http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censorship
> 
> Wow, how long did it take you to find that one quotation that
> half-supports
> your position ?  And even on that same page, there are several definitions
> that flatly disagree with you.
> 
> Sorry to call your bluff there.

You mean, the long list of nouns which refer to the person which is involved 
in enacting the censorship?  

Then again, if they were any relevant or contradicted what I've said then 
you would have pointed any contradiction at all, which you didn't, because 
you couldn't.  But hey, you believe it is better to try to fool others with 
a string of empty words and absurd accusations than actually admitting that 
you were wrong.  So, I hope you believe your attempt was worth it.


> ) Do we agree that, on an internet forum, a moderator's job is to
> "examine" ) what is posted "in order to suppress or delete any contents
> considered
> ) objectionable"?  If we agree on that then we can agree that it is in
> fact ) censorship.
> 
> On stackoverflow.com, answers are being voted up or down, which is
> something completely different from what you quoted above.

Nice attempt at a strawman.  The problem you face with usenet, or any other 
web forum, is that the discussion is logged, and your attempts at derailing 
the subject are recorded and rendered obvious.  Here's what I asked you:

<quote>
) Do you even know what moderation, in the context of managing a forum, is?

I know for a fact that it is not censorship.  Look it up.
</quote>

Voting up an answer, as implemented in stack overflow, does not constitute 
moderation in the context of managing a forum.  If you don't acknowledge 
that the job of a moderator on an internet forum is to censor then you 
either not understand what a moderator does on a forum or you have a hard 
time acknowledging reality.


> So you're wrong for two different reasons.  You're wrong twice.

You would like to attribute your wrong assertions onto others, but silly 
vacuous accusations and strawmen ploys don't make you out to be right.  Only 
childish.


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9117

FromKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date2011-08-09 11:28 -0700
Message-ID<ln7h6mbft5.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
In reply to#9111
Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> John Gordon wrote:
>> If he ignores posts, he might miss one that has a good answer.  Sites such
>> as stackoverflow provide a mechanism for such answers to naturally bubble
>> to the top so they are easily seen.
>
> And why exactly do you believe that the censorship policy put in place in 
> sites such as stackoveflow end up putting an emphasis on the answers which 
> you perceive as "good" and eliminate what you may perceive as noise?  If you 
> can't evaluate it by yourself then how do you actually know what's going on?
[...]

Do you have actual data that indicates stackoverflow.com doesn't work
well for its intended purpose?

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9121

FromRui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com>
Date2011-08-09 20:38 +0100
Message-ID<4e418fb5$0$9121$a729d347@news.telepac.pt>
In reply to#9117
Keith Thompson wrote:

> Do you have actual data that indicates stackoverflow.com doesn't work
> well for its intended purpose?

It really depends on what you define as what the site's intended purpose or 
what can be seen as working well.  If the purpose is to define an answers 
validity and correctness through a vote count then surely we can agree that 
this is a flawed method which can lead to false results through multiple 
ways, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread.  Then, if we take 
away this feature, what are we left with?  Are users "better served" with 
this sort of service than simply posting and sifting through a Usenet 
newsgroup?


Rui Maciel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9124

FromSeebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
Date2011-08-09 19:59 +0000
Message-ID<slrnj4343o.1i12.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net>
In reply to#9121
On 2011-08-09, Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> wrote:
> It really depends on what you define as what the site's intended purpose or 
> what can be seen as working well.  If the purpose is to define an answers 
> validity and correctness through a vote count then surely we can agree that 
> this is a flawed method which can lead to false results through multiple 
> ways, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread.

Sure, it's flawed.  However... I don't think you've shown that it's
more flawed than *not* having voting or ratings or something comparable.

> Then, if we take 
> away this feature, what are we left with?  Are users "better served" with 
> this sort of service than simply posting and sifting through a Usenet 
> newsgroup?

Honestly, for some purposes they are.  It's not good for discussing; it's
very good for answering questions.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9126

FromWillem <willem@toad.stack.nl>
Date2011-08-09 20:01 +0000
Message-ID<slrnj434h4.2a05.willem@toad.stack.nl>
In reply to#9121
Rui Maciel wrote:
) Keith Thompson wrote:
)
)> Do you have actual data that indicates stackoverflow.com doesn't work
)> well for its intended purpose?
)
) It really depends on what you define as what the site's intended purpose or 
) what can be seen as working well.  If the purpose is to define an answers 
) validity and correctness through a vote count then surely we can agree that 
) this is a flawed method which can lead to false results through multiple 
) ways, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread.  Then, if we take 
) away this feature, what are we left with?  Are users "better served" with 
) this sort of service than simply posting and sifting through a Usenet 
) newsgroup?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy


SaSW, Willem
-- 
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
            made in the above text. For all I know I might be
            drugged or something..
            No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9130

Fromgazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Date2011-08-09 22:42 +0000
Message-ID<j1sd4n$b3p$2@news.xmission.com>
In reply to#9126
In article <slrnj434h4.2a05.willem@toad.stack.nl>,
Willem  <willem@toad.stack.nl> wrote:
>Rui Maciel wrote:
>) Keith Thompson wrote:
>)
>)> Do you have actual data that indicates stackoverflow.com doesn't work
>)> well for its intended purpose?
>)
>) It really depends on what you define as what the site's intended purpose or 
>) what can be seen as working well.  If the purpose is to define an answers 
>) validity and correctness through a vote count then surely we can agree that 
>) this is a flawed method which can lead to false results through multiple 
>) ways, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread.  Then, if we take 
>) away this feature, what are we left with?  Are users "better served" with 
>) this sort of service than simply posting and sifting through a Usenet 
>) newsgroup?
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/PEEVES.HTM

(And yes, there is a bit of unintentional irony in my posting that URL
with no further explanation)

-- 
"The anti-regulation business ethos is based on the charmingly naive notion
that people will not do unspeakable things for money." - Dana Carpender

Quoted by Paul Ciszek (pciszek at panix dot com).  But what I want to know
is why is this diet/low-carb food author doing making pithy political/economic
statements?

Nevertheless, the above quote is dead-on, because, the thing is - business
in one breath tells us they don't need to be regulated (which is to say:
that they can morally self-regulate), then in the next breath tells us that
corporations are amoral entities which have no obligations to anyone except
their officers and shareholders, then in the next breath they tell us they
don't need to be regulated (that they can morally self-regulate) ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9127

FromKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date2011-08-09 13:16 -0700
Message-ID<lnpqke9w79.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
In reply to#9121
Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Do you have actual data that indicates stackoverflow.com doesn't work
>> well for its intended purpose?
>
> It really depends on what you define as what the site's intended purpose or 
> what can be seen as working well.  If the purpose is to define an answers 
> validity and correctness through a vote count then surely we can agree that 
> this is a flawed method which can lead to false results through multiple 
> ways, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread.  Then, if we take 
> away this feature, what are we left with?  Are users "better served" with 
> this sort of service than simply posting and sifting through a Usenet 
> newsgroup?

In other words, no.  (I asked whether you have actual data, not whether
it *can* lead to false results.)

Whatever the relative merits, I suggest that users are better served by
a service that they actually use.  If you have any suggestions for
encouraging people to use Usenet, feel free to share them.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9137

Fromjacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net>
Date2011-08-10 12:12 +0200
Message-ID<j1tliv$h8$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#9127
Le 09/08/11 22:16, Keith Thompson a écrit :
>
> Whatever the relative merits, I suggest that users are better served by
> a service that they actually use.  If you have any suggestions for
> encouraging people to use Usenet, feel free to share them.
>

Well a suggestion would be that you disappear from this group. It would
vastly improve it.

Thanks in advance

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9148

FromKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date2011-08-10 08:44 -0700
Message-ID<lnhb5p9sq8.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
In reply to#9137
jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> writes:
> Le 09/08/11 22:16, Keith Thompson a écrit :
>> Whatever the relative merits, I suggest that users are better served by
>> a service that they actually use.  If you have any suggestions for
>> encouraging people to use Usenet, feel free to share them.
>>
>
> Well a suggestion would be that you disappear from this group. It would
> vastly improve it.
>
> Thanks in advance

I've responded to this by e-mail.  Let's not have this argument,
whatever it may be about, in public.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web