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

Groups > comp.lang.php > #12668 > unrolled thread

A modest proposal

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

Contents

  A modest proposal Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2014-01-14 22:29 +0000
    Re: A modest proposal The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2014-01-14 23:16 +0000
    Re: A modest proposal Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-14 23:23 +0000
    Re: A modest proposal "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> - 2014-01-15 00:23 +0000
      Re: A modest proposal Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-15 01:03 +0000
    Re: A modest proposal Ed Mullen <ejOBVIOUSLYREMOVE@edmullen.net> - 2014-01-14 20:12 -0500
      Re: A modest proposal Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2014-01-15 01:42 +0000
    Re: A modest proposal richard <noreply@example.com> - 2014-01-15 10:00 -0500
      Re: A modest proposal Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com.invalid> - 2014-01-15 07:32 -0800
      Re: A modest proposal Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2014-01-15 15:48 +0000
        Re: A modest proposal richard <noreply@example.com> - 2014-01-15 13:12 -0500
          Re: A modest proposal Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com.invalid> - 2014-01-18 20:59 -0800

#12668 — A modest proposal

In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time 
richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his 
errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or abuse.

I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12669

On 14/01/14 22:29, Doug Miller wrote:
> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time
> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his
> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or abuse.
>
> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?
>
he's already in my killfile


-- 
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to 
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the 
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are 
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a 
diminishing number of producers.

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

#12670

In article <XnsA2B5B1C70752Adougmilmaccom@78.46.70.116>, Doug Miller
<doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> wrote:

> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree
> that the next time 
> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or
> explain his 
> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for
> the insult or abuse.
> 
> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?

He's far too clueless for anyone to bother "helping" him; he doesn't
have the capacity to make progress. So while I might watch what
happens, I'll not be wasting time responding.

-- 
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to
 lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores 
 the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them
 into it in the first place."                             - Douglas Adams

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

#12671

Doug Miller wrote:

> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all
> agree that the next time richard insults or abuses anyone who is
> attempting to answer his questions or explain his errors, none of us
> shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or
> abuse.
> 
> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?

It's always one of two things that causes me to respond to him:  

	1) His complete lack of skills and ability to learn
	2) His rudeness

Usually both.   ;-)   (But I won't write any code for him.)

-- 
   -bts
   -This space for rent, but the price is high

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

#12672

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:23:53 +0000, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Doug Miller wrote:
> 
>> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all
>> agree that the next time richard insults or abuses anyone who is
>> attempting to answer his questions or explain his errors, none of us
>> shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or
>> abuse.
>> 
>> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?
> 
> It's always one of two things that causes me to respond to him:
> 
> 	1) His complete lack of skills and ability to learn 2) His 
rudeness
> 
> Usually both.   ;-)   (But I won't write any code for him.)

I won't write his code for him, but I will write code (like the 
following) which might demonstrate (if he runs it and reads and studies 
carefully the output) to him what he's still failing to comprehend. 
Doubtful though.

<?php

if ( 0 == "A" ) echo "0 == \"A\" is true\n";
else echo "0 == \"A\" is false\n";

if ( 0 <= "A" ) echo "0 <= \"A\" is true\n";
else echo "0 <= \"A\" is false\n";

if ( 0 >= "A" ) echo "0 >= \"A\" is true\n";
else echo "0 >= \"A\" is false\n";

if ( 0 == "Z" ) echo "0 == \"Z\" is true\n";
else echo "0 == \"Z\" is false\n";

if ( 0 <= "Z" ) echo "0 <= \"Z\" is true\n";
else echo "0 <= \"Z\" is false\n";

if ( 0 >= "Z" ) echo "0 >= \"Z\" is true\n";
else echo "0 >= \"Z\" is false\n";

if ( "text" ) echo "\"text\" is true\n";
else echo "\"text\" is false\n";

if ( "A" ) echo "\"A\" is true\n";
else echo "\"A\" is false\n";

if ( "A" || "B" || "C" ) echo "\"A\" || \"B\" || \"C\" is true\n";
else echo "\"A\" || \"B\" || \"C\" is false\n";

switch ( "text" ) {

    case "A" || "B": 
        echo "\"text\" == (\"A\" || \"B\") because \"text\" and (\"A\" || 
\"B\") both evaluate as true\n"; 
        break;

    default:
        echo "\"text\" != (\"A\" || \"B\") because \"text\" and (\"A\" || 
\"B\") do not both evaluate as true\n"; 
        break;

}

-- 
Denis McMahon, denismfmcmahon@gmail.com

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

#12673

Doug Miller wrote:
> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time
> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his
> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or abuse.
>
> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?
>

No.

It's just too much fun to give him real answers and watch him 
self-destruct.  We cannot do any better, eh? Than to let him prove his 
ignorance?

It's certainly time comsuming but, honestly, it is, on some level, 
pretty funny to watch him self-destruct isn't it?

-- 
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Everyone has a right to be stupid. Some just abuse the privilege.

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

#12674

Ed Mullen <ejOBVIOUSLYREMOVE@edmullen.net> wrote in news:771crb.n39.19.1
@news.alt.net:

> It's just too much fun to give him real answers and watch him 
> self-destruct.  We cannot do any better, eh? Than to let him prove his 
> ignorance?

If he would actually self-destruct (figuratively, anyway) and -- as he has been repeatedly 
advised to do -- find a new hobby, I could see some merit in this. But he won't.

The problem, Ed, is that richard does not realize the depths of his own ignorance, and 
probably never will. Witness this most recent episode, in which he continues to insist that the 
PHP interpreter conform its behavior to his expectations of it, instead of conforming his 
expectations to its defined and published behavior. This is far from the first time something 
of this nature has occurred. He honestly, truly thinks that there is something wrong with PHP 
because it does not behave the way he mistakenly believes it does or should.

richard appears to me to be completely, totally incapable of recognizing the flaws in his 
own code, and in his understanding of how software is supposed to work. *Every time* 
something does not work as he expects it to, he places the blame everywhere *except* the 
one place where it belongs: himself.

Bottom line: richard has already amply proven his ignorance to everyone in the universe 
except the one person that would benefit from proof of his ignorance, he himself.
 
> It's certainly time comsuming but, honestly, it is, on some level, 
> pretty funny to watch him self-destruct isn't it?

Granted, he does bring some entertainment value. And I suppose his truculent, combative 
attitude is part of the entertainment... Just the same, it gets old after a while.

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

#12675

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:29:02 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:

> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time 
> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his 
> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or abuse.
> 
> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?

Ah yes, the self proclaimed "God" of the newsgroup speaks up.
You say I am rude?
Excuse me mister high and mighty, but YOU and your prescious sheep have
been more rude to me!

I ask a simple question.
Most times the replies all deal with bashing my intelligence and lack of
ability to do it right.

YOU have personally bashed me over very very minor mistakes.
Even a simple typo takes you into bashing mode royally.

I find it amusing that those that have replied, are the first ones to do
the bashing with some rather rude remarks.

Practice what you preach.
If you can't take being bashed, then don't bash.
I don't bash someone because they posted a question.
That is what YOU do.

Where is your functional and working web site?
At least my web site validates, works as intended and has no major flaws
that causes any crashes.

I'll finish this rant with this:
"Sieg Heil, Meinen Fuhrer! Sieg Heil!"

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

#12676

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 10:00:28 -0500, richard <noreply@example.com>
wrote:

>I'll finish this rant with this:
>"Sieg Heil, Meinen Fuhrer! Sieg Heil!"

Usually takes much longer to invoke Godwin's Law.
-- 
To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious and .invalid from my e-mail address.

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

#12677

richard <noreply@example.com> wrote in news:m86frkvycsqq$.ehjfqu4hw8jd.dlg@
40tude.net:

> On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:29:02 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
> 
>> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time 
>> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his 
>> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or 
abuse.
>> 
>> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?
> 
> Ah yes, the self proclaimed "God" of the newsgroup speaks up.
> You say I am rude?
> Excuse me mister high and mighty, but YOU and your prescious sheep have
> been more rude to me!
> 
> I ask a simple question.
> Most times the replies all deal with bashing my intelligence and lack of
> ability to do it right.

Not really -- most of the time, the replies deal with your persistent inability to either proofread 
or to learn from past mistakes. When you make the same mistake dozens of times without 
learning from that experience, I'd say a bit of bashing is justified.
> 
> YOU have personally bashed me over very very minor mistakes.
> Even a simple typo takes you into bashing mode royally.

= for == isn't a typo, RtS, you don't understand the difference.
> 
> I find it amusing that those that have replied, are the first ones to do
> the bashing with some rather rude remarks.
> 
> Practice what you preach.
> If you can't take being bashed, then don't bash.
> I don't bash someone because they posted a question.

No, you just insult and abuse the very people you're seeking help from. Has it ever 
occurred to you that that's the reason so few people have any interest in helping you?

> That is what YOU do.
> 
> Where is your functional and working web site?

www.milmac.com -- all written in php.

> At least my web site validates, works as intended and has no major flaws
> that causes any crashes.

LMAO

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

#12680

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:48:19 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:

> richard <noreply@example.com> wrote in news:m86frkvycsqq$.ehjfqu4hw8jd.dlg@
> 40tude.net:
> 
>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:29:02 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller wrote:
>> 
>>> In anticipation of what is sure to be coming soon, I suggest we all agree that the next time 
>>> richard insults or abuses anyone who is attempting to answer his questions or explain his 
>>> errors, none of us shall respond to any of his posts until he apologizes for the insult or 
> abuse.
>>> 
>>> I'm in, if others agree. Who's with me? BTS? Denis? PointedHead?
>> 
>> Ah yes, the self proclaimed "God" of the newsgroup speaks up.
>> You say I am rude?
>> Excuse me mister high and mighty, but YOU and your prescious sheep have
>> been more rude to me!
>> 
>> I ask a simple question.
>> Most times the replies all deal with bashing my intelligence and lack of
>> ability to do it right.
> 
> Not really -- most of the time, the replies deal with your persistent inability to either proofread 
> or to learn from past mistakes. When you make the same mistake dozens of times without 
> learning from that experience, I'd say a bit of bashing is justified.
>> 
>> YOU have personally bashed me over very very minor mistakes.
>> Even a simple typo takes you into bashing mode royally.
> 
> = for == isn't a typo, RtS, you don't understand the difference.
>> 
>> I find it amusing that those that have replied, are the first ones to do
>> the bashing with some rather rude remarks.
>> 
>> Practice what you preach.
>> If you can't take being bashed, then don't bash.
>> I don't bash someone because they posted a question.
> 
> No, you just insult and abuse the very people you're seeking help from. Has it ever 
> occurred to you that that's the reason so few people have any interest in helping you?

Then they shouldn't be bashing me.
Bash me, I bash back.
You wouldn't be bashing me on a professional forum that is controlled now
would you?
If you did that, you'd get your ass kicked off.


>> That is what YOU do.
>> 
>> Where is your functional and working web site?
> 
> www.milmac.com -- all written in php.
> 
>> At least my web site validates, works as intended and has no major flaws
>> that causes any crashes.
> 
> LMAO

Now I can nitpick on you for once.
"There is no attibute "align""!
Dumbass, use CSS.
<h2 align="left"> is not proper coding.

 Line 6, Column 48: character "&" is the first character of a delimiter but
occurred as data
It should be coded as "&amp;".

And that crazy "weave" look just plain sucks.

At least ALL of my pages are html5!

If you're going to use an accordion menu, at least change colors for each
new section opened. A little indenting on lower levels would be better.

That's why I chose to use a dropline.

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

#12701

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:12:24 -0500, richard <noreply@example.com>
wrote:

>Then they shouldn't be bashing me.
>Bash me, I bash back.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you. If you want help - especially
since you aren't paying for it, it's best not to bash those who help
you.

>You wouldn't be bashing me on a professional forum that is controlled now
>would you?
>If you did that, you'd get your ass kicked off.

And you'd get your troll ass kicked off said professional forum even
quicker.

Notice you post on misc.legal? And it's constantly bad or incorrect
legal advice?

I challenge you to post to any of the moderated legal groups.

Didn't think so.
-- 
To reply via e-mail, remove The Obvious and .invalid from my e-mail address.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web