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

Too bad this group is gone

Started by	"BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com>
First post	2011-08-06 23:55 -0500
Last post	2011-08-15 17:03 +0000
Articles	20 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 4 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 Next page →

#9339

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Date	2011-08-13 08:39 -0400
Message-ID	<j25ra6$bah$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9296

On 08/13/2011 04:02 AM, Jed wrote:
> "John Gordon" <gordon@panix.com> wrote in message 
> news:j24534$408$1@reader1.panix.com...
...
>> Even if my intent were to insult the character of usenet groups (which 
>> it
>> was not), whom would I have been trying to influence?  Everyone in this
>> thread already knows very well how usenet and voting sites work.
> 
> You said you though long and hard about your choice of words, yet while 
> before you used "community sites", now you are using "voting sites". Why 
> the change?

Perhaps because you objected to the phrase "community sites"? A
sufficiently polite person will sometimes make unnecessary changes to
avoid conflict with someone else who incorrectly thinks that they're
necessary.
-- 
James Kuyper

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

#9350

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-13 16:34 +0000
Message-ID	<j2692e$n6p$1@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9296

In <j25b1g$jgu$1@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:

> > Even if my intent were to insult the character of usenet groups (which 
> > it
> > was not), whom would I have been trying to influence?  Everyone in this
> > thread already knows very well how usenet and voting sites work.

> You said you though long and hard about your choice of words, yet while 
> before you used "community sites", now you are using "voting sites". Why 
> the change?

My choice of words was apparently objectionable to some, so I chose new
ones.  Simple as that.

(And I don't believe I ever said I "thought long and hard" about them.
The question was "Did I think about them at all?", and my answer was yes.
I don't know where you picked up the "long and hard" bit.)

-- 
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]

#9364

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-13 20:18 +0000
Message-ID	<j26m6p$ioa$2@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9350

In <j26inb$2a2$3@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:

> > My choice of words was apparently objectionable to some, so I chose
> > new ones.  Simple as that.

> Objectionable? I don't think anyone found your chosen words 
> objectionable. Some were wondering about your purpose in choosing them. 

I find it odd that you would have no objections to my choice of words
and yet still ask "What should we make of your choice of words?"

What is that but an objection?

-- 
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]

#9516

From	Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
Date	2011-08-18 06:34 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnj4pcii.1e7k.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net>
In reply to	#9364

On 2011-08-18, Jed <jedidiah@yourrape.com> wrote:
> Tell me. I do want to know. Ech. Time/age doesn't matter. Intelligence 
> doesn't matter. You got it all wrapped up, yes. Untill some takes your 
> "politics" and shoves them up your ass. Huh.I don't do anything, I just 
> watch. That's maybe a lie, because I see. 

If some of the quantum physics people are right, there exists a universe
in which I don't plonk you.

-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]

#9520

From	Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk>
Date	2011-08-18 12:20 +0300
Message-ID	<87ei0jgjpa.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org>
In reply to	#9516

Rather than a normal citation, here's a screendump of what 
caused this reply:

"""
R  [  18: Jed                 ] Re: Too bad this group is gone
R      <  21: Jed                 > 
R          [  15: Seebs               ] 
       <  11: Jed                 > 
       <  11: Jed                 > 
   [   3: Jed                 ] you suck
--00:---F1  Gnus: c.l.c [88563] {3 more}   12:12PM Mail   (Summary)--L9--C17--Bot------
From: Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
Subject: Re: Too bad this group is gone
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Date: 18 Aug 2011 06:34:05 GMT
Organization: Megabitz - More USENET, Faster USENET

On 2011-08-18, Jed <jedidiah@yourrape.com> wrote:
> Tell me. I do want to know. Ech. Time/age doesn't matter. Intelligence
> doesn't matter. You got it all wrapped up, yes. Untill some takes your
> "politics" and shoves them up your ass. Huh.I don't do anything, I just
> watch. That's maybe a lie, because I see.

If some of the quantum physics people are right, there exists a universe
in which I don't plonk you.
"""

Beautifully worded!

Apparently spontanious symmetry breaking has now occured, and
plonk functions are collapsing everywhere...

Phil
-- 
Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious
belief has a cozy little classification in the DSM.
-- David Melville (on r.a.s.f1)

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

#9536

From	BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com>
Date	2011-08-18 17:36 +0000
Message-ID	<j2jii7$khs$2@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#9520

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:20:01 +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:

> Rather than a normal citation, here's a screendump of what caused this
> reply:
> 
> """
> R  [  18: Jed                 ] Re: Too bad this group is gone R      < 
> 21: Jed                 >
> R          [  15: Seebs               ]
>        <  11: Jed                 >
>        <  11: Jed                 >
>    [   3: Jed                 ] you suck
> --00:---F1  Gnus: c.l.c [88563] {3 more}   12:12PM Mail  
> (Summary)--L9--C17--Bot------ From: Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
> Subject: Re: Too bad this group is gone Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
> Date: 18 Aug 2011 06:34:05 GMT
> Organization: Megabitz - More USENET, Faster USENET
> 
> On 2011-08-18, Jed <jedidiah@yourrape.com> wrote:
>> Tell me. I do want to know. Ech. Time/age doesn't matter. Intelligence
>> doesn't matter. You got it all wrapped up, yes. Untill some takes your
>> "politics" and shoves them up your ass. Huh.I don't do anything, I just
>> watch. That's maybe a lie, because I see.
> 
> If some of the quantum physics people are right, there exists a universe
> in which I don't plonk you.
> """
> 
> Beautifully worded!
> 
> Apparently spontanious symmetry breaking has now occured, and plonk
> functions are collapsing everywhere...

There's a number that describes the ratio between the number of Jed's 
incoherent posts and the number of killfiles in which he resides.  It's 
called Plonk's Constant.

Oh, and I call "bot".

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

#9523

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Date	2011-08-18 07:10 -0400
Message-ID	<j2irvt$23s$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9516

On 08/18/2011 02:34 AM, Seebs wrote:
> On 2011-08-18, Jed <jedidiah@yourrape.com> wrote:
>> Tell me. I do want to know. Ech. Time/age doesn't matter. Intelligence 
>> doesn't matter. You got it all wrapped up, yes. Untill some takes your 
>> "politics" and shoves them up your ass. Huh.I don't do anything, I just 
>> watch. That's maybe a lie, because I see. 
> 
> If some of the quantum physics people are right, there exists a universe
> in which I don't plonk you.

There's also a universe in which all of the air molecules in Jeb's room
spontaneously just happen to collide with each other in such a pattern
that they end up occupying, for a split second, only the top half of the
room. He might end up more coherent in that universe than he is in ours.
-- 
James Kuyper

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

#9351

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-13 16:39 +0000
Message-ID	<j269cj$n6p$2@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9296

In <j25c3n$ov0$1@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:


> > You said you though long and hard about your choice of words, yet while 
> > before you used "community sites", now you are using "voting sites". 
> > Why the change?

> Typo. 'though' should have been 'thought' (if that wasn't obvious). 
> Pondering further though:

> Maybe you didn't actually think about it at all until it was brought to 
> your attention, but your silly pride got in the way of admitting that? 
> How is one to guage anything you say if posturing is more important to 
> you, even on trivial issues, than honest communication?

Let me see if I have this straight:

Someone objects to my choice of words, and (eventually) explains why.
I pick new words and start using them.
You criticize me for it.

What gives?

-- 
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]

#9363

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-13 20:15 +0000
Message-ID	<j26m1h$ioa$1@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9351

In <j26ina$2a2$1@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:

> > Let me see if I have this straight:
> >
> > Someone objects to my choice of words, and (eventually) explains why.
> > I pick new words and start using them.
> > You criticize me for it.
> >
> > What gives?

> Who objected to your choice of words?

You said: "What should we make of your choice of words?".

I interpreted that as feedback from you that my choice of words was
incorrect, ambiguous, prejudicial, or otherwise not up to snuff.

In other words, criticism.  Is it not so?

> And why should you even care if someone did

Because I'm interested in having a productive discussion, and if I can
accommodate other participants by choosing new terms that are equally
acceptable to me, then I will do so.

-- 
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]

#9379

From	Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date	2011-08-13 18:21 -0700
Message-ID	<lnipq04wkw.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
In reply to	#9351

"Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:
> John Gordon wrote:
[...]
>> Let me see if I have this straight:
>>
>> Someone objects to my choice of words, and (eventually) explains why.
>> I pick new words and start using them.
>> You criticize me for it.
>>
>> What gives?
>
> Who objected to your choice of words? And why should you even care if 
> someone did, especially since you choose them after much thought? Are you 
> "wishy washy"? 

Perhaps you should consider dropping this.  It seems to me you're
spending far more time and effort on this trivial issue than
it's worth.

Or you can continue obsessing about it.  I don't believe you've
written anything interesting or related to C since you started
posting here, and there's plenty of room in my killfile.

-- 
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]

#9237

From	"J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk>
Date	2011-08-12 04:36 +0100
Message-ID	<j2273f$c53$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9161

James Kuyper wrote:
> On 08/11/2011 12:58 AM, Jed wrote:
>> "John Gordon" <gordon@panix.com> wrote in message 
>> news:j1ufaj$92m$1@reader1.panix.com...
>>> In <j1udml$s12$1@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> "usenet groups" vs. "community sites". What should we make of your 
>>>> choice
>>>> of words?
>>> I don't understand your comment.  Was my "choice of words" unclear in 
>>> some
>>> way?  Do you not understand what I mean by "usenet groups" or 
>>> "community
>>> sites"?
>> Do you understand what you meant by those? Did you think about them at 
>> all before you selected them?
> 
> I would assume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the
> answers to both questions are yes. The fact that you bothered to ask
> suggests that you've seen something that you do consider "evidence to
> the contrary". Could you explain what that evidence was?
> 
>>> If you don't understand or don't like the terms, it would be much more
>>> productive for you to say so and then go on to explain why, instead of
>>> making vague comments about word choices.
>> What is vague about wondering (I wasn't really asking a question) if you 
>> recognized the potential connotations of the words your choose (and I 
> 
> They carry no special connotations that I'm aware of. "usenet news
> groups" is the single most complete and accurate name I know of for the
> thing described by that phrase, and carries no special connotations that
> I'm aware of. Shortening the phrase by removing the word "news" doesn't
> introduce any significant connotations that I'm aware of. It removes the
> concept that usenet is a medium for conveying news, which seems
> appropriate, because most usenet groups, like this one, are more about
> discussion than news. I suppose it might have been different in the days
> when the term "news group" was first invented.
> 
> The term "community sites" is less conventional, but as far as I know,
> there is no specific widely known term for the kinds of web sites he's
> describing. "sites" is clearly just short for "web sites", and doesn't
> convey any special connotations that I'm aware of. They are web sites
> where a community of people work together to try to answer questions,
> which is probably where he got the "community" from. I suppose that the
> term "community" conveys a little bit of a "warm and fuzzy" connotation,
> but one that I think is intrinsic to the very nature of those sites.
> 
>> singled them out) and whether you thought long and hard about the choice 
>> of words or just used "any old words"? Quite relevant and valid a 
>> wondering considering that the discussion is about the merits of two 
>> different avenues for threaded textual communication and that you chose 
>> the words you did to describe them.
>>
>> So, just wondering is all.
> 
> It would help a great deal to understand what it is you're wondering
> about, if you could tell us what unintended connotations you're reading
> into those phrases. Another thing that would help is suggestions for
> alternative phrasing that does not, in your opinion, carry those
> connotations (possibly by reason of carrying contrary connotations).
> 
> That's why I asked you early to provide examples of such alternatives -
> and I'm still waiting.

You seem to be making heavy weather of this. Kenny hit the nail on the 
head (good grief, did I really just say that) and described it well. 
"Community sites" seemed an odd term, not a standard one as far as I'm 
aware, and I had to think briefly to realise what was meant. It looked 
like it might have been very deliberately chosen. The term "community" 
is often used as a "warm and fuzzy" implying something good we should 
all approve of.

Like Jed, I also wondered whether or not it was deliberately attached to 
the web sites under discussion, and not the Usenet groups, as a means of 
influencing the discussion.

It could be entirely innocent, since almost all Usenet groups are 
communities more or less by definition but the same is not true of web 
sites - it's essentially redundant to say "community Usenet groups" 
whereas "community web sites" distinguishes these from other sorts of 
web sites.

On the other hand it could have been an attempt to sway the argument 
since, in context, we all know what type of web sites are being 
discussed, but calling them "community" websites hints at a warm and 
welcoming friendliness to be found there as opposed to those nasty old 
"not community" newsgroups.

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

#9241

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Date	2011-08-12 00:03 -0400
Message-ID	<j228nl$j5h$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9237

On 08/11/2011 11:36 PM, J. J. Farrell wrote:
> James Kuyper wrote:
...
>> It would help a great deal to understand what it is you're wondering
>> about, if you could tell us what unintended connotations you're reading
>> into those phrases. Another thing that would help is suggestions for
>> alternative phrasing that does not, in your opinion, carry those
>> connotations (possibly by reason of carrying contrary connotations).
>>
>> That's why I asked you early to provide examples of such alternatives -
>> and I'm still waiting.
> 
> You seem to be making heavy weather of this. Kenny hit the nail on the 
> head (good grief, did I really just say that) and described it well. 

I don't read his messages, so I wouldn't know about that.

> "Community sites" seemed an odd term, not a standard one as far as I'm 

I agree; but I don't know of any standard term for such sites. That's
why I've asked for suggested alternatives. So far, no one has suggested
any (unless Kenny did so). If even the people objecting to this wording
can't even come up with alternative wording that they consider superior,
that suggests to me that you shouldn't read too much into John Gordon's
failure to come up with a superior alternative.

> aware, and I had to think briefly to realise what was meant. It looked 
> like it might have been very deliberately chosen. The term "community" 
> is often used as a "warm and fuzzy" implying something good we should 
> all approve of.

Sure, but there's nothing unearned about that feeling in this context.
The community of people participating in that web site work together to
try and give each question the best possible answer.
-- 
James Kuyper

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

#9361

From	James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net>
Date	2011-08-13 15:29 -0400
Message-ID	<j26jb3$5tk$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9241

On 08/13/2011 03:19 PM, Jed wrote:
> James Kuyper wrote:
...
>> I agree; but I don't know of any standard term for such sites. That's
>> why I've asked for suggested alternatives. So far, no one has
>> suggested any (unless Kenny did so). If even the people objecting to
>> this wording can't even come up with alternative wording that they
>> consider superior, that suggests to me that you shouldn't read too
>> much into John Gordon's failure to come up with a superior
>> alternative.
> 
> A SUPERIOR alternative, eh? Now who's stacking the deck? (Kenny or J.J. 
> can explain it well). Again, who is objecting?
...
>> Sure, but there's nothing unearned about that feeling in this context.
>> The community of people participating in that web site work together
>> to try and give each question the best possible answer.
> 
> And of course USENET newsgroups consist just of a bunch of ruffians, 
> right? 

OK - I think I have enough of a pattern now - you make a habit of
reading too much into other people's messages. I've no interest in
playing this game with you.
-- 
James Kuyper

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

#9402

From	Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com>
Date	2011-08-14 04:26 -0700
Message-ID	<316815ee-8b3d-4d93-a4df-56901ac1790a@m18g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#9361

On Aug 14, 8:05 am, "Jed" <jehd...@orbitway.net> wrote:
> James Kuyper wrote:

> > OK - I think I have enough of a pattern now - you make a habit of
> > reading too much into other people's messages. I've no interest in
> > playing this game with you.
>
> Well you just stepped up and down. Your dismissal should be heard upon
> the populace? (Bring it). You are entitled to what? I owe you what? Bring
> it.

and again- but in english this time.

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

#9366

From	Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com>
Date	2011-08-13 20:51 +0000
Message-ID	<pan.2011.08.13.20.51.09@gmail.com>
In reply to	#9241

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 14:19:28 -0500, Jed wrote:

[snip]

> And of course USENET newsgroups consist just of a bunch of ruffians,
> right?

Sometimes... It depends on the group. :)

Todd

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

#9383

From	"J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk>
Date	2011-08-14 03:15 +0100
Message-ID	<j27b3p$fns$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#9241

James Kuyper wrote:
> On 08/11/2011 11:36 PM, J. J. Farrell wrote:
>> James Kuyper wrote:
> ...
>>> It would help a great deal to understand what it is you're wondering
>>> about, if you could tell us what unintended connotations you're reading
>>> into those phrases. Another thing that would help is suggestions for
>>> alternative phrasing that does not, in your opinion, carry those
>>> connotations (possibly by reason of carrying contrary connotations).
>>>
>>> That's why I asked you early to provide examples of such alternatives -
>>> and I'm still waiting.
>> You seem to be making heavy weather of this. Kenny hit the nail on the 
>> head (good grief, did I really just say that) and described it well. 
> 
> I don't read his messages, so I wouldn't know about that.
> 
>> "Community sites" seemed an odd term, not a standard one as far as I'm 
> 
> I agree; but I don't know of any standard term for such sites.

Nor do I, which why the wording may have been entirely innocent; but in 
the context of this discussion "web sites" would have unambiguously 
identified the things in question, which made me wonder why he'd used 
"community sites" in preference.

> That's
> why I've asked for suggested alternatives. So far, no one has suggested
> any (unless Kenny did so). If even the people objecting to this wording
> can't even come up with alternative wording that they consider superior,
> that suggests to me that you shouldn't read too much into John Gordon's
> failure to come up with a superior alternative.

I'm not aware of anyone objecting to this wording, just a few people 
wondering about the details of the intention of the wording in this 
discussion. It's a fine term for such sites as far as I'm concerned, but 
also a novel one (to me, at least); its invention in this context, where 
the more obvious "web sites" would have been unambiguous, may (or may 
not) have had an intent other than simply identifying the things.

>> aware, and I had to think briefly to realise what was meant. It looked 
>> like it might have been very deliberately chosen. The term "community" 
>> is often used as a "warm and fuzzy" implying something good we should 
>> all approve of.
> 
> Sure, but there's nothing unearned about that feeling in this context.
> The community of people participating in that web site work together to
> try and give each question the best possible answer.

Agreed, just like most Usenet groups; but for some reason "community" 
wasn't used with "Usenet groups".

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

#9385

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-14 02:29 +0000
Message-ID	<j27btk$mjv$1@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9383

In <j27b3p$fns$1@dont-email.me> "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> writes:

> Nor do I, which why the wording may have been entirely innocent; but in 
> the context of this discussion "web sites" would have unambiguously 
> identified the things in question, which made me wonder why he'd used 
> "community sites" in preference.

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.

-- 
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]

#9387

From	Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net>
Date	2011-08-14 05:48 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnj4eo81.q9n.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net>
In reply to	#9385

On 2011-08-14, John Gordon <gordon@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.

Not saying it's wrong, mind.  :)

-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]

#9388

From	John Gordon <gordon@panix.com>
Date	2011-08-14 06:24 +0000
Message-ID	<j27pnq$kb3$1@reader1.panix.com>
In reply to	#9387

In <slrnj4eo81.q9n.usenet-nospam@guild.seebs.net> Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> writes:

> On 2011-08-14, John Gordon <gordon@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.

> Not saying it's wrong, mind.  :)

Barriers to entry are generally much lower on voting sites than on usenet,
which may have the effect of making usenet seem less community-friendly.

-- 
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]

#9394

From	Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl>
Date	2011-08-14 08:12 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnj4f0rs.8dg.willem@toad.stack.nl>
In reply to	#9387

Seebs wrote:
) On 2011-08-14, John Gordon <gordon@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."


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]

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

csiph-web

Too bad this group is gone

Contents

#9339

#9350

#9364

#9516

#9520

#9536

#9523

#9351

#9363

#9379

#9237

#9241

#9361

#9402

#9366

#9383

#9385

#9387

#9388

#9394