Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #15575
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.php |
| Subject | Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages |
| Date | 2015-07-07 00:00 +0100 |
| Organization | go, ion artisan! |
| Message-ID | <mnf177$ibd$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (21 earlier) <mmuoth$q4s$1@dont-email.me> <559A6843.4020406@arnowelzel.de> <mne8d8$bni$1@dont-email.me> <mnefal$9ag$1@dont-email.me> <mnepr0$lic$1@dont-email.me> |
On 06/07/15 21:54, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 7/6/2015 1:54 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 06/07/15 16:56, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> On 7/6/2015 7:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> <snip> >>>> BTW: F'up to poster. >>> >>> Let's see here... someone who throws a fit and purposely demunges >>> someone else's email address to allow that address to be harvested by >>> spammers... >> >> You have no evidence that he threw a fit, and you don't know that the >> reason you guessed at was actually his reason for posting your correct >> email address (which he is perfectly within his rights to do, and which >> does not, generally speaking, result in an increase in spam emails to >> that address). So you're just making stuff up. >> > > Wrong on two counts. If you would have read the post, you would see he > was throwing a fit. I did read it, and I saw no evidence of a fit. > And why would he purposefully post an unmunged > email address if it weren't to allow it to be harvested by spammers? You'll have to ask him that, but the fact that you can't think of another reason doesn't mean that no other reason exists. > Or maybe it's just something you would do, also. You have no rational grounds for that speculation. >>> Then tries to get the last word in a newsgroup by changing >>> the reply-to. >> >> Since the thread has descended into abusive name-calling, attempting to >> switch to email is actually a reasonable thing to do: "- If you should >> find yourself in a disagreement with one person, make your responses to >> each other via mail rather than continue to send messages to the list or >> the group. If you are debating a point on which the group might have >> some interest, you may summarize for them later" (RFC1855). Arno's >> process for attempting to do this (setting followups and warning you >> that he had done so) was perfectly correct. >> > > If he wanted to stop it, he didn't have to post. But like all trolls, > he needs to have the last word. Perhaps he wanted to continue the discussion with you, but without burdening the newsgroup with it - a reasonable offer, which you declined, de facto, by replying to the group rather than to email. It is clear that you, too, wish to continue the discussion, because you don't have to post either. As for the last word, on Usenet there really is no such thing. > >>> Sounds to me like something a child or psychotic person >>> would do. Or one who's both, like you. >> >> Abusive name-calling may be good for your blood pressure, but it doesn't >> move the debate on. Arno does not strike me as being either childish or >> child-like, and I see no evidence here that would justify a diagnosis of >> "psychotic". If you are not medically qualified, you have no basis for >> the adjective other than that of hyperbole (in which case, learn some >> new adjectives). If you /are/ medically qualified, you should know >> better than to offer a hasty and intemperate diagnosis over Usenet. >> > > I call them like I see them. Trolls are trolls. And psychos are psychos. Assertions are ten a penny on Usenet. Arno is not behaving like a troll. As for "psycho", is that code for "someone who disagrees with Jerry Stuckle"? If so, I suppose you must meet a /lot/ of psychos. >>> I wonder who's the child here? >> >> Tell ya what, let's find out... >> >>> Better go running to your mommy and tell >>> her how the mean old man called you what you are! >> >> ...well, that answered /that/ question! >> > > Yup, he needs to go running to his mommy. You reinforce my point nicely, although probably not intentionally. <more nonsense snipped> -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 06:59 -0700
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 10:18 -0400
Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-10 16:41 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 11:55 -0400
Re: response for server every second Allodoxaphobia <knock_yourself_out@example.net> - 2015-06-10 16:50 +0000
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 13:23 -0400
Re: response for server every second Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2015-06-10 10:37 -0700
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 14:27 -0400
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 23:38 -0700
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 00:14 -0700
Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 12:09 +0200
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 04:16 -0700
Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 14:37 +0200
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 06:20 -0700
Re: response for server every second Matthew Carter <m@ahungry.com> - 2015-06-11 13:45 -0400
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 23:35 -0700
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-12 09:10 -0400
Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 03:59 +0000
[off topic nodejs advertisement] Was Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-15 16:08 +0200
Performance of PHP vs. Node.js (was: [off topic nodejs advertisement]) "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-15 20:42 +0200
Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-16 00:20 +0200
Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-16 00:58 +0200
Re: response for server every second gordonb.890nt@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-13 13:39 -0500
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-18 23:16 -0700
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-19 08:16 -0400
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-21 23:06 -0700
Re: response for server every second "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-22 08:03 -0500
Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:39 +0000
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 07:23 -0400
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:37 +0200
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:42 +0200
Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-23 17:11 +0200
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 00:06 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 19:10 -0400
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 01:45 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 20:21 -0400
Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-23 23:34 -0700
Re: response for server every second bill <william@TechServSys.com> - 2015-06-24 06:58 -0400
Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-25 17:18 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 20:31 -0400
Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages (was: Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:43 +0200
Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:47 +0200
Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 22:19 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 23:07 -0400
Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:21 +0200
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 06:48 -0400
Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 13:48 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 14:29 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-27 14:49 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-27 10:25 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:52 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:08 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-27 22:14 -0500
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:54 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:10 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 09:54 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 08:45 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 16:20 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 15:00 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-07-06 13:36 +0200
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 11:56 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-06 18:54 +0100
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 16:54 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 00:00 +0100
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 22:08 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 07:24 +0100
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-07 10:41 -0400
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-07-09 22:52 -0700
Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 03:07 +0000
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:13 +0200
Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 09:52 +0100
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 09:21 -0400
Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 18:48 +0100
Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0200
Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0100
Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 15:21 -0400
Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:35 +0100
csiph-web