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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #68066 > unrolled thread

This forum has gone to crap

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

Contents

  This forum has gone to crap Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 16:49 -0700
    Re: This forum has gone to crap John McCue <jmccue@jmcnet1.bstnma.east.verizon.net> - 2015-08-23 00:03 +0000
    This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 17:22 -0700
      Re: This forum has gone to crap David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-23 22:06 +0200
    Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 17:23 -0700
      Re: This forum has gone to crap Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-08-22 18:04 -0700
      Re: This forum has gone to crap David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-23 22:00 +0200
        Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 13:30 -0700
          Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-23 17:34 -0700
            Re: This forum has gone to crap Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 00:17 -0700
            Re: This forum has gone to crap mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2015-08-26 03:06 -0700
              Re: This forum has gone to crap Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-26 12:50 +0100
                Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 05:19 -0700
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-26 13:45 +0100
                    Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 06:01 -0700
                      Re: This forum has gone to crap Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2015-08-26 16:32 -0700
                        Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 16:46 -0700
                          Re: This forum has gone to crap Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-30 09:30 -0700
                            Re: This forum has gone to crap Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2015-08-30 16:48 +0000
                    Re: This forum has gone to crap David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 14:48 -0700
                Re: This forum has gone to crap Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-26 13:45 +0100
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 06:00 -0700
                    Re: This forum has gone to crap Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-26 10:12 -0700
                      Re: This forum has gone to crap "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 10:31 -0700
                        Re: This forum has gone to crap Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-08-26 19:38 +0200
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-26 14:38 +0100
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 18:21 -0700
                    Re: This forum has gone to crap Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-06 18:33 -0700
                Re: This forum has gone to crap mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2015-08-27 09:02 -0700
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-27 09:49 -0700
          Re: This forum has gone to crap Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 00:11 -0700
            Re: This forum has gone to crap David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-24 11:09 +0200
              Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 02:30 -0700
                Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 02:58 -0700
              Re: This forum has gone to crap raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-25 21:00 +0000
                Re: This forum has gone to crap David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-26 13:18 +0200
            Re: This forum has gone to crap Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-24 10:43 -0700
              Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 09:24 -0700
                Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 09:47 -0700
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 09:56 -0700
                Re: This forum has gone to crap David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-24 17:45 -0700
                  Re: This forum has gone to crap Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-24 18:30 -0700
                    Re: This forum has gone to crap David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 19:21 -0700
                      Re: This forum has gone to crap Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-26 00:00 -0700
              Re: This forum has gone to crap gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-08-24 16:47 +0000
              Re: This forum has gone to crap glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 20:13 +0000
    Re: This forum has gone to crap luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 02:53 -0700
    Re: This forum has gone to crap Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 16:32 +0000
      Re: This forum has gone to crap gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-08-26 21:29 +0000
        Re: This forum has gone to crap Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-08-26 23:30 +0000

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#68281

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 9:24:30 AM UTC-7, fir wrote:
> W dniu poniedziałek, 24 sierpnia 2015 18:12:47 UTC+2 użytkownik Keith Thompson napisał:
> > Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> writes:
> > > fir, [SNIP]
> > 
> > Chad, a day or so ago you said something about adding fir to
> > your killfile.  I encourage you to do so.  Whether you do or not,
> > *please* stop provoking him.  You are directly and indirectly
> > harming the signal-to-noise ratio of this newsgroup by "feeding
> > the troll" [insert debate about the exact definition of "troll"].
> 
> If use your primitive definition (used by simpletons, but categories are contagious and when talking with simpletons im closer tu use something that is noramlly far below my inteligence, but this use is somewhat faked)
> that troll is somewhere who is doing offensive blabla, they are not feeding the troll they ARE
> the trolls, they  act as a kind of stalkers,
> Im not a troll i am a free gramatic form user
> and blabla disliker - you are also a troll Keith Tompson (in your own simpletonic criteria) just becouse this troll naming  becouse  you are tu stupid to rethink
> some definition (thus youre insulting and l;owering this forum inteligence level as usual)

The long line problem seems to be as follows:

(1) Many (perhaps half) of the people posting to comp.lang.c use a 
kind of program called a "newsreader"
(2) The rest of the people posting to comp.lang.c use Google Groups.
(3) There is a flag in the messages that are interchanged that sets  
whether of not the messages will wrap around at the end of a line.
(4) Google (doubtlessly deploring the existence of newsreaders) does
not set this flag
(5) Many (perhaps most) newsreaders default to not wrapping.
(6) It seems to be impossible to get through to Google and ask it to
set that flag.
(7) As a work-around if you are entering text in Google it is only
fair of you to compensate for Google's oblivion and hit the ENTER key
every 65-70 characters.

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

#68286

David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> The long line problem seems to be as follows:
>
[...]
> (3) There is a flag in the messages that are interchanged that sets  
> whether of not the messages will wrap around at the end of a line.
[...]

As far as I know there is no such flag.

This message will appear word-wrapped to anyone who reads it because its
body contains explicit end-of-line markers ('\n' characters, possibly
translated to and/or from CRLF pairs at one or more points between my
machine and yours) no more than about 75 bytes apart.  I happen to be
using a text editor that makes it easy to do that.

I could just as easily have written each paragraph without internal line breaks, like this one (though actually I have to go to a little extra effort to tell my editor *not* to wrap it).

A message posted by a Google Groups user who does not explicitly insert
line breaks simply does not have those explicit end-of-line markers.  A
paragraph within such an article might consist of several hundred
characters with no embedded newlines.

How such long lines are displayed varies depending on the client
software in use.  The program I use wraps long lines, but not at
word boundaries; it can probably be configured to do something
else, but I've never bothered to find out how.  Web interfaces
like Google Groups typically display very long lines in some more
or less reasonable fashion.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

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

#68364

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 6:27:06 PM UTC-7, Keith Thompson wrote:
> David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> writes:
> [...]
> > The long line problem seems to be as follows:
> >
> [...]
> > (3) There is a flag in the messages that are interchanged that sets  
> > whether of not the messages will wrap around at the end of a line.
> [...]
> 
> As far as I know there is no such flag.
 
I'm out of my depth here. The "flag" in question is "flow" as nearly
as I can remember. It's in the mime of the message or some such place.
I regret I am doing this all from (inadequate) memory and cannot get
back to the original.




> This message will appear word-wrapped to anyone who reads it because its
> body contains explicit end-of-line markers ('\n' characters, possibly
> translated to and/or from CRLF pairs at one or more points between my
> machine and yours) no more than about 75 bytes apart.  I happen to be
> using a text editor that makes it easy to do that.
> 
> I could just as easily have written each paragraph without internal line breaks, like this one (though actually I have to go to a little extra effort to tell my editor *not* to wrap it).
> 
> A message posted by a Google Groups user who does not explicitly insert
> line breaks simply does not have those explicit end-of-line markers.  A
> paragraph within such an article might consist of several hundred
> characters with no embedded newlines.
> 
> How such long lines are displayed varies depending on the client
> software in use.  The program I use wraps long lines, but not at
> word boundaries; it can probably be configured to do something
> else, but I've never bothered to find out how.  Web interfaces
> like Google Groups typically display very long lines in some more
> or less reasonable fashion.
> 
> -- 
> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
> Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
> "We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
>     -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

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

#68372

David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> writes:
> On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 6:27:06 PM UTC-7, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> writes:
>> [...]
>> > The long line problem seems to be as follows:
>> >
>> [...]
>> > (3) There is a flag in the messages that are interchanged that sets  
>> > whether of not the messages will wrap around at the end of a line.
>> [...]
>> 
>> As far as I know there is no such flag.
>  
> I'm out of my depth here. The "flag" in question is "flow" as nearly
> as I can remember. It's in the mime of the message or some such place.
> I regret I am doing this all from (inadequate) memory and cannot get
> back to the original.

Oh, right, you're thinking of "format=flowed".  I forgot about that.

https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2646.txt
http://joeclark.org/ffaq.html

I don't know how common it is.

And I think I've mentioned this before:

>> This message will appear word-wrapped to anyone who reads it because its
>> body contains explicit end-of-line markers ('\n' characters, possibly
>> translated to and/or from CRLF pairs at one or more points between my
>> machine and yours) no more than about 75 bytes apart.  I happen to be
>> using a text editor that makes it easy to do that.
>> 
>> I could just as easily have written each paragraph without internal line breaks, like this one (though actually I have to go to a little extra effort to tell my editor *not* to wrap it).
>> 
>> A message posted by a Google Groups user who does not explicitly insert
>> line breaks simply does not have those explicit end-of-line markers.  A
>> paragraph within such an article might consist of several hundred
>> characters with no embedded newlines.
>> 
>> How such long lines are displayed varies depending on the client
>> software in use.  The program I use wraps long lines, but not at
>> word boundaries; it can probably be configured to do something
>> else, but I've never bothered to find out how.  Web interfaces
>> like Google Groups typically display very long lines in some more
>> or less reasonable fashion.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
>> Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
>> "We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
>>     -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

*Please* trim quoted text when you post a followup, *especially* the sig
block, unless you're replying to it.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

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

#68245

In article <lny4h0y42v.fsf@kst-u.example.com>,
Keith Thompson  <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
...
>Please knock it off or join them in *my* killfile.
>
>I also request that you insert line breaks in your posts so that
>each line is about 72 columns or less.  Long lines are more difficult
>to read in most Usenet newsreader programs.

If you are about to killfile him, why should you care about his line
lengths?

-- 
People seem to think that Youtube (and Facebook and Twitter and so on) is
(are) some sort of resource created for the public good.  Why they delude
themselves into believing this is beyond my ability to comprehend.

Thank goodness for Usenet!

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

#68263

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:

(snip)

> I also request that you insert line breaks in your posts so that
> each line is about 72 columns or less.  Long lines are more difficult
> to read in most Usenet newsreader programs.

Even more, some news hosts will only accept posts with lines less
than 80 characters. I go someone less so that after a few follow-ups
it will still be small enough.

-- glen

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

#68293

On Saturday, August 22, 2015 at 6:49:36 PM UTC-5, Chad wrote:
> I remember the first time I read this forum was when I was an undergrad at UW Madison back in the stone age. This place was dominated by knowledgeable people that gave eloquent responses. Over the years, a lot of these people disappeared, and I their place showed up some not so bright people who chose to make this place their home. 
> 
> And now we have some dipshits that can barely form a coherent English sentence. What's next? I guess the only thing that could be sucking is if we get people that use Internet slang.

I do sympathize. But rather that complaining (thus adding
to the noise) you could try posting something interesting
and on topic (thus becoming "part of the solution").

-- 
that's what I've been trying to do.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!profile/comp.lang.c/APn2wQdEi5QhcIEsQrxdk6niB-YTnHceZ8BNwOwDaO1mP9ZUb0vnXhb5R0jLrzuhhxfJbB0dlzQl

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

#68448

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 04:49:26PM -0700, Chad wrote:
> I remember the first time I read this forum was when I was an undergrad at UW Madison back in the stone age. This place was dominated by knowledgeable people that gave eloquent responses. Over the years, a lot of these people disappeared, and I their place showed up some not so bright people who chose to make this place their home. 
> 
> And now we have some dipshits that can barely form a coherent English sentence. What's next? I guess the only thing that could be sucking is if we get people that use Internet slang.

The problems with this newsgroup does not fully reduce to those who
are functionally illterate in the English language.

IMNSHO, the largest threat to Usenet are the fucking Creationists,
making over the Internet in their God's image -- which is to say a
playground for corrupt, lying, hypocritical bigots.  These are most
often people who do not make their deviant ideology explicit (we
wouldn't understand), and may have enough formal eduation to pass
themselves off as 'learned', at least superficially.  But their
religious extremism underpins their values and they tend to place
themselves above mere civil considerations.  After all, they are
special people and not dirty commoners who are unable to fully
appreciate The Trvth.

Some of you will imagine I am speaking of Rick Hodgin but you would be wrong.  Rick is a distraction.


Regards,

Steve Thompson

-- 
"If I had a nickel for every time some idiot called me about a
computer problem that turned out to be user error, I would be able to
retire and spend the rest of my days cultivating clues in my backyard
hillside garden."  -- MysteryDog in 24hoursupport.helpdesk.

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

#68452

In article <0WZzRT.b3R.T7oRL@gmail.com>,
Steve Thompson  <stevet810@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>Some of you will imagine I am speaking of Rick Hodgin but you would be wrong. 
>Rick is a distraction.

Well, then, who *are* you talking about?

(Not that I dispute your thesis, mind you...)

-- 
Watching ConservaLoons playing with statistics and facts is like watching a
newborn play with a computer.  Endlessly amusing, but totally unproductive.

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

#68777

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 09:29:51PM +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <0WZzRT.b3R.T7oRL@gmail.com>,
> Steve Thompson  <stevet810@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> >Some of you will imagine I am speaking of Rick Hodgin but you would be wrong. 
> >Rick is a distraction.
> 
> Well, then, who *are* you talking about?
> 
> (Not that I dispute your thesis, mind you...)

A bunch of people.  If I was certain of their ideological position I
would name names, but I would hate to be mistaken in any given
instance.  I mentioned it primarily to describe the notion and leave
others to read between the lines of the newsgroup traffic and make
their own assesment.



Regards,

Steve Thompson

-- 
"If I had a nickel for every time some idiot called me about a
computer problem that turned out to be user error, I would be able to
retire and spend the rest of my days cultivating clues in my backyard
hillside garden."  -- MysteryDog in 24hoursupport.helpdesk.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

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

csiph-web