Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #9053 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-08-06 23:55 -0500 |
| Last post | 2011-08-15 17:03 +0000 |
| Articles | 7 on this page of 127 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
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 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 03:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f9daf6a2-921d-4663-a27c-adb1afe99564@t5g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #9102 |
On Aug 9, 3:23 pm, John Gordon <gor...@panix.com> wrote: > In <4e4140c0$0$9125$a729d...@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > what I mean by that is that everyone explains his point, eventually > > > edits it if necessary and that's it. No need of seeking threads and > > > extracting information spread over hundreds of posts, where people bark > > No one forces you to follow every thread to it's last post. You have free > > will, don't you? You are free to simply ignore any post you wish. Heck, I > > 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. > > (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.) I think he's one of those "the internet must be free! Censorship is EEvil" guys
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-11 11:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5ec1e622-b9ed-4dbc-87a1-4a1a473b063c@m18g2000vbl.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #9081 |
On Aug 8, 11:30 am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote: > John Gordon wrote: > > I disagee strongly. If you're having trouble with, say, a third-party > > API method that is behaving contrary to its documentation, how is thinking > > about it going to help you? > > I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in > sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then > picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of > parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the added > problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, yet wrong > answer. > It's not a given that the highest-voted answer is always the accepted answer. I've seen more than one case where the accepted answer had 0 votes and was the *right* answer (or at least righter than the rest). So at least some of the questioners are able to think on their own. There are some damned smart people on SO. I've seen Keith Thompson hanging out there lately. > > But a site such as stackoverflow might have people who have experienced > > the issue and perhaps know of a workaround, or can at least confirm that > > the method is buggy. > > Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort of > sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? * No propagation delays * No mail header weirdness * Ability to edit posts * Ability to format text * Ability to add or remove tags * No need to "find a real newsreader" * Easy archive searches > Users aren't served better by those sites. I disagree. I've found more useful discussion on SO about C for the last couple of years than I have here. The quality of advice is variable tending towards pretty good, but that's just as true here (or it used to be). > In fact, it can be argued that those sites actually do the users a disservice when compared with > what people get with Usenet. Not convincingly. > So, what exactly is there to be gained? Avoiding self-importance and pomposity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 20:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e457f0a$0$31414$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9226 |
John Bode wrote: > On Aug 8, 11:30 am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> John Gordon wrote: >> > I disagee strongly. If you're having trouble with, say, a third-party >> > API method that is behaving contrary to its documentation, how is >> > thinking about it going to help you? >> >> I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in >> sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then >> picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of >> parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the >> added problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, >> yet wrong answer. >> > > It's not a given that the highest-voted answer is always the accepted > answer. I've seen more than one case where the accepted answer had 0 > votes and was the *right* answer (or at least righter than the rest). > So at least some of the questioners are able to think on their own. Precisely. That form of quantifier, which is interpreted by some as a validity and correctness indicator, is useless and irrelevant. In general it doesn't correlate with the best answer or even, in some cases, with the right answer. Yet, some people tend to blindly put their faith in it and tend to be quick to point it out that an example of how that forum is somehow superior to Usenet, as it has been shown in this thread. And this is silly. > There are some damned smart people on SO. I've seen Keith Thompson > hanging out there lately. That is a consequence of a forum's popularity, and not it's intrinsic quality. As we've seen in the past few years, some online communities grow and fade away independent of any real value they actually provide to their users. If Usenet suddenly experienced a new september with a considerable influx of new users then naturally a subset of those users would also be "damned smart". >> > But a site such as stackoverflow might have people who have experienced >> > the issue and perhaps know of a workaround, or can at least confirm >> > that the method is buggy. >> >> Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort >> of sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? > > * No propagation delays I don't know what you mean by propagation delays. When I post a message to a newsgroup, it tends to be listed automatically. > * No mail header weirdness I don't know what that means. Can you provide an example? > * Ability to edit posts I'l grant you this. Nonetheless, this isn't that important. > * Ability to format text You mean, to represent code snippets and lists? > * Ability to add or remove tags Can you present a case where this is of any use and where no equivalent option is available to those who use access Usenet newsgroups? > * No need to "find a real newsreader" You also don't need to "find a real newsreader" to read/post to Usenet. Then again, up to this date there is still to be developed a web interface which comes remotely close in usability and features to those which are provided by any popular newsreader. > * Easy archive searches Google groups does have it's faults, but it isn't exactly hard to use. >> Users aren't served better by those sites. > > I disagree. I've found more useful discussion on SO about C for the > last couple of years than I have here. The quality of advice is > variable tending towards pretty good, but that's just as true here (or > it used to be). Did you took the time to search through this newsgroup's backlog before arriving to that conclusion? Odds are that any "useful discussion" that you've stumbled upon in that web forum already took place in this newsgroup throughout the years. I've mentioned before that humanity's best attempt at an expert system was the pairing of Usenet’s backlog with a search engine, and you can experience that in first hand. >> In fact, it can be argued that those sites actually do the users a >> disservice when compared with what people get with Usenet. > > Not convincingly. Only if you aren't aware of what Usenet provides. >> So, what exactly is there to be gained? > > Avoiding self-importance and pomposity. You are seeking that in a public forum which is dedicated to provide incentives for contributions in exchange of popularity brownie points? That isn't very realistic. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 20:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j2416c$8u0$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9281 |
In <4e457f0a$0$31414$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> > It's not a given that the highest-voted answer is always the accepted
> > answer. I've seen more than one case where the accepted answer had 0
> > votes and was the *right* answer (or at least righter than the rest).
> Precisely. That form of quantifier, which is interpreted by some as a
> validity and correctness indicator, is useless and irrelevant. In general
> it doesn't correlate with the best answer or even, in some cases, with the
> right answer.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the highest-voted answer
on sites such as stackoverflow usually isn't the best one.
If you believe that, then no wonder you hold these sites in low esteem.
That does not match my experiences with these sites.
> Yet, some people tend to blindly put their faith in it and
> tend to be quick to point it out that an example of how that forum is
> somehow superior to Usenet, as it has been shown in this thread. And this
> is silly.
I am unaware of anyone in this discussion who advocates "blindly putting
their faith" in such answers. Why do you keep repeating it?
I have explicitly said, more than once, that such answers ought to be
tested and verified for oneself before they are accepted.
--
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]
| From | Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 20:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnj4b3rq.1og7.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net> |
| In reply to | #9281 |
On 2011-08-12, Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> wrote: > John Bode wrote: >> It's not a given that the highest-voted answer is always the accepted >> answer. I've seen more than one case where the accepted answer had 0 >> votes and was the *right* answer (or at least righter than the rest). >> So at least some of the questioners are able to think on their own. > Precisely. That form of quantifier, which is interpreted by some as a > validity and correctness indicator, is useless and irrelevant. No it's not. > In general > it doesn't correlate with the best answer or even, in some cases, with the > right answer. I would say it *correlates* quite nicely. It's not an absolute predictor, but CORRELATE? Heck yeah. > I don't know what you mean by propagation delays. When I post a message to > a newsgroup, it tends to be listed automatically. Listed on your server, yes. Listed on other servers, minutes to hours to days later. >> * Ability to edit posts > I'l grant you this. Nonetheless, this isn't that important. I'm not sure about that; clarifications and improvements are a big win. >> * Ability to format text > You mean, to represent code snippets and lists? I'd have assumed stuff like bold/italics. > Can you present a case where this is of any use and where no equivalent > option is available to those who use access Usenet newsgroups? Tagging systems are awesome, as they provide a secondary indexing system which doesn't restrict things to a single index. I do not know of any comparable tool for Usenet. >> * No need to "find a real newsreader" > You also don't need to "find a real newsreader" to read/post to Usenet. > Then again, up to this date there is still to be developed a web interface > which comes remotely close in usability and features to those which are > provided by any popular newsreader. So in practice, if you want to make good use of Usenet, you need a newsreader. >> * Easy archive searches > Google groups does have it's faults, but it isn't exactly hard to use. It is if you want to actually FIND stuff, in my experience. -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]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-15 08:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <63f5a097-6e8f-4451-a1fe-fa9a40b28f51@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #9281 |
On Aug 12, 2:15 pm, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote: > John Bode wrote: > > On Aug 8, 11:30 am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> John Gordon wrote: > >> > I disagee strongly. If you're having trouble with, say, a third-party > >> > API method that is behaving contrary to its documentation, how is > >> > thinking about it going to help you? > > >> I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in > >> sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then > >> picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of > >> parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the > >> added problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, > >> yet wrong answer. > > > It's not a given that the highest-voted answer is always the accepted > > answer. I've seen more than one case where the accepted answer had 0 > > votes and was the *right* answer (or at least righter than the rest). > > So at least some of the questioners are able to think on their own. > > Precisely. That form of quantifier, which is interpreted by some as a > validity and correctness indicator, is useless and irrelevant. In general > it doesn't correlate with the best answer or even, in some cases, with the > right answer. That is not true IME. Even though the highest-voted answer isn't *always* the right one, more often than not it is. From what I've seen, there *is* a strong correlation between vote count and correctness. > Yet, some people tend to blindly put their faith in it and > tend to be quick to point it out that an example of how that forum is > somehow superior to Usenet, as it has been shown in this thread. And this > is silly. > > > There are some damned smart people on SO. I've seen Keith Thompson > > hanging out there lately. > > That is a consequence of a forum's popularity, and not it's intrinsic > quality. As we've seen in the past few years, some online communities grow > and fade away independent of any real value they actually provide to their > users. If Usenet suddenly experienced a new september with a considerable > influx of new users then naturally a subset of those users would also be > "damned smart". > > >> > But a site such as stackoverflow might have people who have experienced > >> > the issue and perhaps know of a workaround, or can at least confirm > >> > that the method is buggy. > > >> Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort > >> of sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? > > > * No propagation delays > > I don't know what you mean by propagation delays. When I post a message to > a newsgroup, it tends to be listed automatically. > To your local server. It still takes time to propagate through the system. I've seen delays of several days between the time a message is posted until it gets to my server. > > * No mail header weirdness > > I don't know what that means. Can you provide an example? > > > * Ability to edit posts > > I'l grant you this. Nonetheless, this isn't that important. > Au contraire; being able to go back and add information to a question or to clarify an answer has real value. It can make the discussion flow better. And it doesn't result in thread clutter. > > * Ability to format text > > You mean, to represent code snippets and lists? > Yes, along with the usual text styling (bold, underline, different fonts, etc.). Makes the text easier to read, makes it easier to emphasize important concepts. The code formatter, while not perfect, makes code much easier to follow. > > * Ability to add or remove tags > > Can you present a case where this is of any use and where no equivalent > option is available to those who use access Usenet newsgroups? Imagine being able to add and remove subthreads from different newsgroups on the fly. If you decide a discussion is relevant to both C and C++ for example, you can add the C++ tag and suddenly it's visible to anyone searching on that tag. Conversely, if you decide the discussion isn't relevant to C++, you can remove the tag and it no longer shows up for anyone searching on that tag. The tagging system gives you much finer control over showing the kinds of posts you're interested in than any newsreader filter. You don't have to subscribe to multiple newsgroups. > > > * No need to "find a real newsreader" > > You also don't need to "find a real newsreader" to read/post to Usenet. You do if you want decent filtering or searching capability. > Then again, up to this date there is still to be developed a web interface > which comes remotely close in usability and features to those which are > provided by any popular newsreader. > And there won't be; much like C, Usenet is a product of its time, but times have changed. > > * Easy archive searches > > Google groups does have it's faults, but it isn't exactly hard to use. > Depending on what I want to find, it can be. It's a fairly common occurrence for me to search for an article, click on the result, and get nothing back except [no subject]. > >> Users aren't served better by those sites. > > > I disagree. I've found more useful discussion on SO about C for the > > last couple of years than I have here. The quality of advice is > > variable tending towards pretty good, but that's just as true here (or > > it used to be). > > Did you took the time to search through this newsgroup's backlog before > arriving to that conclusion? Yes. I've been reading this newsgroup since the mid-90s. Over the last four or five years, I've seen a marked decline in the quality of discussion here, which is why I don't participate much anymore. It just hasn't been interesting in quite a while. > Odds are that any "useful discussion" that > you've stumbled upon in that web forum already took place in this newsgroup > throughout the years. Not that anyone will ever know about it. > I've mentioned before that humanity's best attempt at > an expert system was the pairing of Usenet’s backlog with a search engine, > and you can experience that in first hand. > Not with Google. Not with ISPs shutting down their NNTP servers as fast as they can. > >> In fact, it can be argued that those sites actually do the users a > >> disservice when compared with what people get with Usenet. > > > Not convincingly. > > Only if you aren't aware of what Usenet provides. > > >> So, what exactly is there to be gained? > > > Avoiding self-importance and pomposity. > > You are seeking that in a public forum which is dedicated to provide > incentives for contributions in exchange of popularity brownie points? That > isn't very realistic. > I see far fewer raging egos on SO than here, especially among the posters with the highest reps. I'm pretty sure there's a correlation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-15 17:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j2bjgg$dls$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #9428 |
In article <63f5a097-6e8f-4451-a1fe-fa9a40b28f51@y24g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> wrote: ... >> Precisely. That form of quantifier, which is interpreted by some as a >> validity and correctness indicator, is useless and irrelevant. In general >> it doesn't correlate with the best answer or even, in some cases, with the >> right answer. > >That is not true IME. Even though the highest-voted answer isn't >*always* the right one, more often than not it is. From what I've >seen, there *is* a strong correlation between vote count and >correctness. One of the core tenets of CLC-think/speak is that there's no such thing as "most of the time" or "almost always". In keeping with pure mathematics, if something isn't true 100% of the time, the CLC-denizen will pooh-pooh it as being irrelevant and useless. Rui's position (that voting proves nothing and is less then useless) throughout this thread has been consistent with this belief. -- Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as foolish, and by the rulers as useful. (Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web