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 | 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 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 07:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f72a2e78-edfb-4b54-acb4-b985aa274913@d7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #9128 |
On Aug 9, 11:23 pm, John Gordon <gor...@panix.com> wrote: > > Tell me, when you go to a restaurant and receive bad service and complain > to the waitress, and her answer is "Nobody forced you to eat here", would > you accept that as a valid defense? > It depends. A lot of people fuss about McDonald's, but to a first approximation the answer is, if you don't like it, don't eat there, don't turn your dislike of Big Macs into some kind of religion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 22:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e459831$0$31420$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9128 |
John Gordon wrote: > Tell me, when you go to a restaurant and receive bad service and complain > to the waitress, and her answer is "Nobody forced you to eat here", would > you accept that as a valid defense? You are implying that usenet provides "bad service". If your only complaint is that you are unable to perform basic searches on a search engine then you can't complain that you are being subjected to bad service. It would be like you were handed the menu, couldn't find a specific meal due to being illiterate, and then complaining that the restaurant offered bad service because you experienced problems caused by your own personal shortcomings. And meanwhile, the other patrons are quite capable of ordering exactly what they want, some of which ordering exactly what you've intended to order. > It strikes me that your defense of usenet seems to be of the same > character as the waitresses' defense of her poor service. Not quite. In fact, your criticism amounts to a craftsman blaming his tools. > Yes, you're right, I'm not forced to search through hundreds of old usenet > posts. I can always choose to abandon my search. > > But this entire discussion is taking place under the assumption that I > actually want to find an answer to my question, and the quality of the > tools that are provided for pursuing that end. Again, the craftsman blaming his tools. > Saying "Nobody is forcing you to look" is not a useful objection under > those circumstances. You will be hard-pressed to find anyone who is forced to comb through a series of individual messages to find something which has in fact been posted to a newsgroup. This is simply unrealistic. Nowadays, if you failed to find a relevant post in the first or second page of a search result you either botched your search terms or no such topic is available in the search engine's backlog. Either case is easily fixed, either by rethinking a new search term which is more appropriate or simply by posting a new message. And the thing is, this applies both to any web forum and usenet. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 22:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j249dl$58b$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9294 |
In <4e459831$0$31420$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> John Gordon wrote:
> > Tell me, when you go to a restaurant and receive bad service and complain
> > to the waitress, and her answer is "Nobody forced you to eat here", would
> > you accept that as a valid defense?
> You are implying that usenet provides "bad service". If your only complaint
> is that you are unable to perform basic searches on a search engine then you
> can't complain that you are being subjected to bad service. It would be
> like you were handed the menu, couldn't find a specific meal due to being
> illiterate, and then complaining that the restaurant offered bad service
> because you experienced problems caused by your own personal shortcomings.
The only point I was (trying to) make was this:
If you want to look at old content in a discussion, usenet makes you
jump through hoops to do so. You may get good results with a search
aggregator such as Google Groups, but again you may not.
Voting sites do a much better job presenting all the content on a
particular topic in one place.
Your response to this was "If you don't like combing through old content,
then don't."
That comment adds nothing to the discussion, and I wonder what the point
of it was.
--
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 | Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 11:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2011.08.10.11.16.10@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #9114 |
On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:45:53 +0000, John Gordon wrote: [snip] > I object when it is used as justification for providing bad service. Do you pay for usenet? If not, I don't see how you an legitimately call it a "service" that you are subscribing to - let alone complain about "bad service". If you don't like it, don't use it. Todd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 14:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1u6ca$ei2$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9140 |
In <pan.2011.08.10.11.16.10@gmail.com> Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:45:53 +0000, John Gordon wrote:
> [snip]
> > I object when it is used as justification for providing bad service.
> Do you pay for usenet? If not, I don't see how you an legitimately call
> it a "service" that you are subscribing to - let alone complain about
> "bad service". If you don't like it, don't use it.
So if a service is free, I'm not allowed to comment on how it might be
improved or how another service is better?
--
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 | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 11:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4E42A3FC.6000708@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #9146 |
On 08/10/2011 10:59 AM, John Gordon wrote: > In <pan.2011.08.10.11.16.10@gmail.com> Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:45:53 +0000, John Gordon wrote: > >> [snip] > >>> I object when it is used as justification for providing bad service. > >> Do you pay for usenet? If not, I don't see how you an legitimately call >> it a "service" that you are subscribing to - let alone complain about >> "bad service". If you don't like it, don't use it. > > So if a service is free, I'm not allowed to comment on how it might be > improved or how another service is better? You're free to comment on anything you want; this isn't a moderated newsgroup. However, you can't reasonably expect much sympathy for your complaints when the solution to the problem you're complaining about is as trivial as "don't use it". When a service is free, there's two key consequences: the providers don't have a lot of resources to fix it, and users don't have a lot of leverage to convince them to do so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 16:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1ub3s$oee$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9147 |
In <4E42A3FC.6000708@verizon.net> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes:
> You're free to comment on anything you want; this isn't a moderated
> newsgroup. However, you can't reasonably expect much sympathy for your
> complaints when the solution to the problem you're complaining about is
> as trivial as "don't use it".
> When a service is free, there's two key consequences: the providers don't
> have a lot of resources to fix it, and users don't have a lot of leverage
> to convince them to do so.
I think this discussion has lost sight of the original arguments. Allow
me to restate them:
Person A advocates the use of usenet groups as a resource for seeking
answers to questions.
Person B advocates that community sites such as stackoverflow can be better
than usenet in some situations, one notable situation being that you don't
have to search through lots of old articles to find what you're looking
for.
Person A responds, "Well, if you don't want to search through all those
old articles, you don't have to, so what's the problem?"
Person B responds, "But if I don't search through the old articles then
I won't find the answer to my question, so how is that a useful reply?"
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
-- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 13:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4E42BC62.1080708@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #9149 |
On 08/10/2011 01:04 PM, Jed wrote: > "John Gordon" <gordon@panix.com> wrote in message > news:j1ub3s$oee$1@reader1.panix.com... ... >> I think this discussion has lost sight of the original arguments. >> Allow >> me to restate them: >> >> Person A advocates the use of usenet groups as a resource for seeking >> answers to questions. >> >> Person B advocates that community sites such as stackoverflow can be >> better >> than usenet in some situations, one notable situation being that you >> don't >> have to search through lots of old articles to find what you're looking >> for. > > "usenet groups" vs. "community sites". What should we make of your choice > of words? I'm not sure I understand what the point of your comment is. Would you prefer "usenet news groups" and "community web sites"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-11 08:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j20g95$4rt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9159 |
On 08/11/2011 01:01 AM, Jed wrote: > "James Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote in message > news:4E42BC62.1080708@verizon.net... >> On 08/10/2011 01:04 PM, Jed wrote: ... >>> "usenet groups" vs. "community sites". What should we make of your >>> choice >>> of words? >> >> I'm not sure I understand what the point of your comment is. Would you >> prefer "usenet news groups" and "community web sites"? > > It's got nothing to do with preference. I was just wondering why he chose > the words he did. My guess is that he didn't give it a second thought, > but I'm not sure of that. I wonder how many people are thinking about it > now. My own personal guess is that he gave it very little thought, because he felt, correctly, that it required very little thought. Your question suggests otherwise, for reasons I've been unable to guess, and that is why I have asked you to explain them. If you cannot explain them any better than that, I'll have to assume that you had no particular good reason for asking. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-11 12:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j20h22$e90$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #9202 |
In article <j20g95$4rt$1@dont-email.me>, James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote: ... >My own personal guess is that he gave it very little thought, because he >felt, correctly, that it required very little thought. Your question >suggests otherwise, for reasons I've been unable to guess, and that is >why I have asked you to explain them. If you cannot explain them any >better than that, I'll have to assume that you had no particular good >reason for asking. See my post - where I correctly deduce and explain his point-of-view. -- Windows 95 n. (Win-doze): A 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition. Modern day upgrade --> Windows XP Professional x64: Windows is now a 64 bit tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 00:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j228rr$j5h$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9203 |
On 08/11/2011 11:47 PM, Jed wrote: > "Kenny McCormack" <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote in message > news:j20h22$e90$1@news.xmission.com... ... >> See my post - where I correctly deduce and explain his point-of-view. >> > > Yes, do that and be enlightened. Getting enlightenment from Kenny would be like getting drinking water from a sewer; I'll pass. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 00:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j22apk$s0q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9242 |
On 08/12/2011 12:28 AM, Jed wrote: > "James Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> wrote in message > news:j228rr$j5h$2@dont-email.me... ... >> Getting enlightenment from Kenny would be like getting drinking water >> from a sewer; I'll pass. > > See J.J. Farrell's post in this thread. I have; I had already responded to it before I sent the message that you're responding to. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 17:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1ufaj$92m$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9149 |
In <j1udml$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"?
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.
--
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 | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-10 23:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1v3cq$1qj$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #9161 |
In article <j1ufaj$92m$1@reader1.panix.com>,
John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> wrote:
>In <j1udml$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"?
>
>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.
It's subtle, but the implication is that your choice of words "loads the
deck" in favor of your position - something just about every Usenet poster
eos, some consciously, some not so.
It is like when anti-abortion nutcases^Wpeople refer to "murdering babies",
when, in the terminology of sensible people, it is neither murder, nor is it
a baby.
So, in your case, you refer to "usenet groups", with a tinge of
disparagement, while you refer to "community sites", where presence of the
word "community" is designed to make people think favorable about these
sites.
--
Some of the more common characteristics of Asperger syndrome include:
* Inability to think in abstract ways (eg: puns, jokes, sarcasm, etc)
* Difficulties in empathising with others
* Problems with understanding another person's point of view
* Hampered conversational ability
* Problems with controlling feelings such as anger, depression
and anxiety
* Adherence to routines and schedules, and stress if expected routine
is disrupted
* Inability to manage appropriate social conduct
* Delayed understanding of sexual codes of conduct
* A narrow field of interests. For example a person with Asperger
syndrome may focus on learning all there is to know about
baseball statistics, politics or television shows.
* Anger and aggression when things do not happen as they want
* Sensitivity to criticism
* Eccentricity
* Behaviour varies from mildly unusual to quite aggressive
and difficult
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-11 14:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j20nd1$f3g$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9161 |
In <j1vnga$1nn$1@dont-email.me> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> writes:
> "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?
Yes and yes.
I used the term "usenet groups" because it is:
a) correct.
b) descriptive.
c) a widely recognized term (at least within usenet itself).
I used the term "community sites" because:
a) the entities i was describing are almost always websites, and the term
"site" is widely understood to mean a website.
b) the particular mechanism under discussion (asking questions,
providing answers, and voting on them) is driven by human
participation, i.e. community.
--
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 | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 21:49 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e45951d$0$31424$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9210 |
John Gordon wrote: > Yes and yes. > > I used the term "usenet groups" because it is: > a) correct. > b) descriptive. > c) a widely recognized term (at least within usenet itself). > > I used the term "community sites" because: > a) the entities i was describing are almost always websites, and the term > "site" is widely understood to mean a website. > b) the particular mechanism under discussion (asking questions, > providing answers, and voting on them) is driven by human > participation, i.e. community. The inadverted consequence of your choice of words is that if you compare two alternatives, usenet and a web forum, and you describe usenet as being "usenet" while contrasting it with something that you describe as "community sites", you are implying that usenet is not a community site, or community- oriented, or community-friendly. Besides being false, you are also implying the presence or absence of qualities which needlessly denigrate the subject of your comparisson. To give you a clearer picture, it would be like comparing you with someone else, and referring to you as "John Gordon" and the other person as "a reasonably intelligent person". As you explained, both terms could be correct, descriptive and widely recognized. Yet, I bet you woudn't enjoy being subjected to that comparisson or what it could imply. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 21:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j24534$408$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9293 |
In <4e45951d$0$31424$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> The inadverted consequence of your choice of words is that if you compare
> two alternatives, usenet and a web forum, and you describe usenet as being
> "usenet" while contrasting it with something that you describe as "community
> sites", you are implying that usenet is not a community site, or community-
> oriented, or community-friendly. Besides being false, you are also implying
> the presence or absence of qualities which needlessly denigrate the subject
> of your comparisson.
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.
I understand the point you're making, but I think it is misplaced in the
context of a discussion among informed participants.
--
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 | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-12 17:49 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4E45A005.4060700@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #9296 |
On 08/12/2011 05:14 PM, John Gordon wrote: ... > 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. Everyone reading this thread knows at least some basics about how usenet works, because this is usenet. It's not necessarily true that everyone reading it knows how voting sites work. In particular, Rui seems to have some misconceptions about them, and other participants might be completely unfamiliar with them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-13 01:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0.550814f8d3db4d2eea8a.20110813014611BST.8739h6jfzg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #9299 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > On 08/12/2011 05:14 PM, John Gordon wrote: > ... >> 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. > > Everyone reading this thread knows at least some basics about how usenet > works, because this is usenet. Many c.l.c postings are scraped onto websites and those readers may have no idea about Usenet. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-13 09:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pan.2011.08.13.09.19.31@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #9312 |
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 01:46:11 +0100, Ben Bacarisse wrote: [snip] > Many c.l.c postings are scraped onto websites and those readers may have > no idea about Usenet. If *this* thread is scraped onto websites, not only will readers not know about usenet, they won't read anything worthwhile about C either. Todd
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web