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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #372967 > unrolled thread

Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window"

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 08:39 -0700
    Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-27 18:25 +0200
      Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 10:18 -0700
        Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-27 20:05 +0200
          Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:34 -0700
        Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 18:13 +0000
          Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:22 -0700
            Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-27 20:29 +0200
              Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-27 18:57 +0000
                Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:59 -0700
              Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:55 -0700
            Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 18:33 +0000
              Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:53 -0700
                Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 20:01 +0000
                  Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 13:18 -0700
                    Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 21:49 +0000
          Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-27 18:54 +0000
            Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:59 -0700
    Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-09-27 18:09 +0000
      Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-27 18:58 +0000
        Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:59 -0700
      Re: Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window" Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:39 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#372967 — Ping Owl: Your reference to "Script2's window"

Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window in
the following exchange:

  Owl: 
    ----- 
    For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
    window: ... 
    ------ 
    
  Snit: 
    ----- 
    The scripts windows are not even the ones being discussed! It is
    the terminal windows which are having things done with them!
    This is a concept you keep getting wrong over and over and over.
    ----- 
    
  Owl: 
    ----- 
    What the FUCK are you babbling about NOW?  I am NOT talking
    about the script's window you MORON.
    ----- 
    
Not how you asked me about the script's windows but then denied you were
talking about the scripts windows AS you call me names (you could not help
yourself from trolling). So I noted what you were claiming:

  Snit: 
    ----- 
    Ah, so when you said: "Script1 inadvertently sends something to
    Script2's window" you did not mean Script2's window.
    ----- 
    
And instead of actually noting how much you screwed up, you tried to turn
things around: 

  Owl: 
    ----- 
    What did you mean by "the scripts windows"?
    ----- 
    
Even though you were trolling and working to turn things around after your
complete and utter screw up, I answered in great detail (and I quote it
below). But you have yet to answer a very simple question. When you said:

  Owl: 
    ----- 
    For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
    window: ... 
    ------ 

What "script's window" did you mean?

And, as promised, the rather detailed answer to your question (even as you
troll me I am happy to help you learn... after all, that focused on
technology and not insults, and THAT is what I am here for -- though bullet
two is a response to your trolling):

* The ONLY windows being controlled by these scripts are the ones from
the terminal. In these cases the windows can be referenced by ID,
index, and more but in NO case are they in a situation where another
script cannot control them at ANY time, even in the middle of one
script running. 

* I am the one who taught you this (and even after you were told you kept
asking) and then you trolled and pretended I did not know this or did not
understand the implication of referencing windows by ID or index!

* Scripts can run in windows but they need not. Even if they do,
though, they are not the ones being controlled, nor do they in any way
"own" any of the windows which are being controlled by the scripts. Again,
ANY script can send messages to ANY window... by index, ID, or more.

* The script editors' windows (the one the scripts are in) are NOT being
controlled by the scripts we have been looking at. They COULD be, but they
are not. These windows (the scripts' windows) are completely irrelevant to
the conversation EXCEPT when you keep talking about them and use the term
"script's windows" to maybe (mean) the terminal's windows because that is
how lost you are! 

* When I respond to you speaking of the "script's windows" and note you are
lost, I mean whichever windows you are talking about: either the windows of
the script editor, which is not relevant, or the windows the scripts are
referencing which are NOT the script's windows but you are too lost to
understand that! 




-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#372975

The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:

> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
> in the following exchange:
> 
>   Owl:
>     -----
>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>     window: ...
>     ------

Stop lying, imbecile

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

#372984

On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
> 
>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
>> in the following exchange:
>> 
>>   Owl:
>>     -----
>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>     window: ...
>>     ------
> 
> Stop lying, imbecile

Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
quote from Owl.

The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.

He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#372989

Snit wrote:

> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>> 
>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>> window in the following exchange:
>>> 
>>>   Owl:
>>>     -----
>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>     window: ...
>>>     ------
>> 
>> Stop lying, imbecile
> 
> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
> quote from Owl.

That is *not* a quote.
It his your misquoting, incidentally without MSg-ID (who would have thought 
*that* )

Lets guess: You don't provide Msg-IDs since then it would be even easier to 
see that you are lying again, imbecile

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

#373017

On 9/27/16, 11:05 AM, in article nsecci$qck$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Snit wrote:
> 
>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>> 
>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>>> window in the following exchange:
>>>> 
>>>>   Owl:
>>>>     -----
>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>     window: ...
>>>>     ------
>>> 
>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>> 
>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>> quote from Owl.
> 
> That is *not* a quote.
> It his your misquoting, incidentally without MSg-ID (who would have thought
> *that* )
> 
> Lets guess: You don't provide Msg-IDs since then it would be even easier to
> see that you are lying again, imbecile
> 
> 
> 
Seriously, Peter, I am NOT William Shatner. STOP treating me like the folks
in this skit treat him: <https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>!


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#372996

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>> 
>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
>>> in the following exchange:
>>> 
>>>   Owl:
>>>     -----
>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>     window: ...
>>>     ------
>> 
>> Stop lying, imbecile
> 
> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
> quote from Owl.
> 

Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while referring
to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the waters.
When I then tell you that NO that is NOT the window I am talking about,
you start dancing.  Keep it up though.  The more you do it, the dumber
you look.


> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
> 
> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
> 
> 

Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.

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

#373000

On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
>> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>> 
>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
>>>> in the following exchange:
>>>> 
>>>>   Owl:
>>>>     -----
>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>     window: ...
>>>>     ------
>>> 
>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>> 
>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>> quote from Owl.
> 
> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while referring
> to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the waters.

I *responded* to your use. You then asked why. I gave you a very full answer
you ran from. Here part of it is again:

* The ONLY windows being controlled by these scripts are the ones from
the terminal. In these cases the windows can be referenced by ID,
index, and more but in NO case are they in a situation where another
script cannot control them at ANY time, even in the middle of one
script running. 

* I am the one who taught you this (and even after you were told you kept
asking) and then you trolled and pretended I did not know this or did not
understand the implication of referencing windows by ID or index!

* Scripts can run in windows but they need not. Even if they do,
though, they are not the ones being controlled, nor do they in any way
"own" any of the windows which are being controlled by the scripts. Again,
ANY script can send messages to ANY window... by index, ID, or more.

* The script editors' windows (the one the scripts are in) are NOT being
controlled by the scripts we have been looking at. They COULD be, but they
are not. These windows (the scripts' windows) are completely irrelevant to
the conversation EXCEPT when you keep talking about them and use the term
"script's windows" to maybe (mean) the terminal's windows because that is
how lost you are! 

* When I respond to you speaking of the "script's windows" and note you are
lost, I mean whichever windows you are talking about: either the windows of
the script editor, which is not relevant, or the windows the scripts are
referencing which are NOT the script's windows but you are too lost to
understand that! 

> When I then tell you that NO that is NOT the window I am talking about,
> you start dancing.  Keep it up though.  The more you do it, the dumber
> you look.

By all means DO explain what you mean. I have asked you half a dozen times
or more only to have you try to turn things around...

  Owl: 
    ----- 
    For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
    window: ... 
    ------ 
    
  Snit: 
    ----- 
    The scripts windows are not even the ones being discussed! It is
    the terminal windows which are having things done with them!
    This is a concept you keep getting wrong over and over and over.
    ----- 
    
  Owl: 
    ----- 
    What the FUCK are you babbling about NOW?  I am NOT talking
    about the script's window you MORON.
    ----- 

You screwed up. You could have just admitted to it and moved on... but you
opted to troll instead, so I am rubbing your nose in your mess.

>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>> 
>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
> 
> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.

See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#373003

The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:

> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>> 
>>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>>>> window in the following exchange:
>>>>> 
>>>>>   Owl:
>>>>>     -----
>>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>>     window: ...
>>>>>     ------
>>>> 
>>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>>> 
>>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>>> quote from Owl.
>> 
>> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while
>> referring to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the
>> waters.
> 
> I *responded* to your use. 

You quoted out of context. As usual. In short: You lied. Again

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

#373008

On 2016-09-27, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>
>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>>>>> window in the following exchange:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   Owl:
>>>>>>     -----
>>>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>>>     window: ...
>>>>>>     ------
>>>>> 
>>>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>>>> 
>>>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>>>> quote from Owl.
>>> 
>>> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while
>>> referring to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the
>>> waters.
>> 
>> I *responded* to your use. 
>
> You quoted out of context. As usual. In short: You lied. Again
>
Sandman really has this clown snit down to a science.
Personally, I think snit is a pathological liar.

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

#373023

On 9/27/16, 11:57 AM, in article e4vtomFd2baU2@mid.individual.net, "Jim
Polaski" <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote:

> On 2016-09-27, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>> 
>>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>>>>>> window in the following exchange:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   Owl:
>>>>>>>     -----
>>>>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>>>>     window: ...
>>>>>>>     ------
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>>>>> quote from Owl.
>>>> 
>>>> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while
>>>> referring to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the
>>>> waters.
>>> 
>>> I *responded* to your use.
>> 
>> You quoted out of context. As usual. In short: You lied. Again
>> 
> Sandman really has this clown snit down to a science.
> Personally, I think snit is a pathological liar.
> 

I know it is hard for you to understand, but I am NOT your personal William
Shatner: <https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>!



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#373021

On 9/27/16, 11:29 AM, in article nsedqc$dh$2@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
> 
>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's
>>>>>> window in the following exchange:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   Owl:
>>>>>>     -----
>>>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>>>     window: ...
>>>>>>     ------
>>>>> 
>>>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>>>> 
>>>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>>>> quote from Owl.
>>> 
>>> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while
>>> referring to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the
>>> waters.
>> 
>> I *responded* to your use.
> 
> You quoted out of context. As usual. In short: You lied. Again
> 

I am STILL not your personal William Shatner: <https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>.

Face it... you have no point to make, no actual complain, no actual
information to impart... you are just trolling. It is not as if my point has
not been proved repeatedly... but you want my attention anyway.

<https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>

THAT is you... treating me as the people in the sketch treat Shatner.


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#373004

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> 

>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>> 
>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>> 
>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
> 
> See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.
> 

Tard, your boneheaded script wrote to whatever window had focus and
you argued that that was a good design.  Moron.  Stay away from computers.
 

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

#373019

On 9/27/16, 11:33 AM, in article hjgdavuc793.gji@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> 
> 
>>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>>> 
>>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>>> 
>>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
>> 
>> See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.
>> 
> 
> Tard, your boneheaded script wrote to whatever window had focus and
> you argued that that was a good design.

Please quote the argument you mean.

> Moron.  Stay away from computers.

You also never showed a single instance where the script would fail... but
then whined a whole lot. With that said, when you asked if it could run into
trouble if another script was running at the same time I noted it could...
as could a script which referenced those same windows by ID and not index!

But so be it... you wanted your task to be hard and it was not. It was
pretty easy.

You and Marek make the mistake of thinking the idea of these tasks is to be
hard or to trip up others and even to target others for trolling. It is
weird.



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#373033

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/16, 11:33 AM, in article hjgdavuc793.gji@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>>>> 
>>>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>>>> 
>>>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
>>> 
>>> See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.
>>> 
>> 
>> Tard, your boneheaded script wrote to whatever window had focus and
>> you argued that that was a good design.
> 
> Please quote the argument you mean.
> 

So now you don't think your script was a good design?  I agree.


>> Moron.  Stay away from computers.
> 
> You also never showed a single instance where the script would fail...

Sure I did.  I demonstrated your hair-brained method of writing to
the top window in a video, showing how commands from different scripts
get intermixed. 

> but
> then whined a whole lot. With that said, when you asked if it could run into
> trouble if another script was running at the same time I noted it could...
> as could a script which referenced those same windows by ID and not index!
> 

No they would not.  A script targeting a window by windowid is not going
to write to the wrong window.

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

#373038

On 9/27/16, 1:01 PM, in article ahfadgji3033.34@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:

> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 9/27/16, 11:33 AM, in article hjgdavuc793.gji@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>>>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>> 
>>>>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>>>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>>>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
>>>> 
>>>> See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Tard, your boneheaded script wrote to whatever window had focus and
>>> you argued that that was a good design.
>> 
>> Please quote the argument you mean.
> 
> So now you don't think your script was a good design?  I agree.

Please quote the argument you mean.

Do not run off. Do not ask other questions. Do not dodge or move goal posts
or otherwise wiggle out of your claim.

Please quote the argument you mean.

>>> Moron.  Stay away from computers.
>> 
>> You also never showed a single instance where the script would fail...
> 
> Sure I did. 

Ah, then I missed it. My apologies. Link?

> I demonstrated your hair-brained method of writing to the top window in a
> video, showing how commands from different scripts get intermixed.

By all means please do re-post the link. I missed it and apologize.

>> but then whined a whole lot. With that said, when you asked if it could run
>> into trouble if another script was running at the same time I noted it
>> could... as could a script which referenced those same windows by ID and not
>> index!
> 
> No they would not.

LOL! Keep in mind I have shown you videos proving what I told you.

And below you show you STILL do not get it: a script targeting the TOP
window will send the messages to the TOP window. A script targeting a window
with ID 1234 will send the messages to the window with ID 1234.

Whether they are the right or wrong window depends on what you, the
programmer, WANT. The script does not know what it is "supposed" to do in
any way other than doing what it is told!

> A script targeting a window by windowid is not going to write to the wrong
> window.



-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#373051

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/16, 1:01 PM, in article ahfadgji3033.34@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/27/16, 11:33 AM, in article hjgdavuc793.gji@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/27/16, 11:13 AM, in article ahjdguer003.g@perch.invalid, "Octavian W.
>>>>> Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>>>>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>>>>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
>>>>> 
>>>>> See: you screwed up, got ashamed, and are STILL trolling.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Tard, your boneheaded script wrote to whatever window had focus and
>>>> you argued that that was a good design.
>>> 
>>> Please quote the argument you mean.
>> 
>> So now you don't think your script was a good design?  I agree.
> 
> Please quote the argument you mean.
> 
> Do not run off. Do not ask other questions. Do not dodge or move goal posts
> or otherwise wiggle out of your claim.
> 
> Please quote the argument you mean.
> 

I'm not digging back through last week's posts.  If you now agree that
your script design was crap, then fine.  On the other hand if you still
cling to the idea that it was a good design, then there's no need to
dig back.  I point you here.


>>>> Moron.  Stay away from computers.
>>> 
>>> You also never showed a single instance where the script would fail...
>> 
>> Sure I did. 
> 
> Ah, then I missed it. My apologies. Link?
> 

You didn't miss it.  You commented on it.

https://vid.me/nR1G

I suppose I should clarify about how your script "failed".  It failed
as a design.  It did not fail to execute a broken design.  It succeeded
masterfully at that.
  


>> I demonstrated your hair-brained method of writing to the top window in a
>> video, showing how commands from different scripts get intermixed.
> 
> By all means please do re-post the link. I missed it and apologize.
> 
>>> but then whined a whole lot. With that said, when you asked if it could run
>>> into trouble if another script was running at the same time I noted it
>>> could... as could a script which referenced those same windows by ID and not
>>> index!
>> 
>> No they would not.
> 
> LOL! Keep in mind I have shown you videos proving what I told you.
> 

Nope.
(Nice splitting to remove context, though).

> And below you show you STILL do not get it:

I don't get what?  That you implemented a broken design?  Of course
I get that.

> a script targeting the TOP
> window will send the messages to the TOP window.

Do tell.

> A script targeting a window
> with ID 1234 will send the messages to the window with ID 1234.
> 

More nuggets of arcana.


> Whether they are the right or wrong window depends on what you, the
> programmer, WANT. The script does not know what it is "supposed" to do in
> any way other than doing what it is told!
> 

Yes, if you tell it to do retarded things, that's what it will do.


>> A script targeting a window by windowid is not going to write to the wrong
>> window.
> 
 

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

#373006

On 2016-09-27, Octavian W. Lagrange <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
>> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>> 
>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
>>>> in the following exchange:
>>>> 
>>>>   Owl:
>>>>     -----
>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>     window: ...
>>>>     ------
>>> 
>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>> 
>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>> quote from Owl.
>> 
>
> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while referring
> to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the waters.
> When I then tell you that NO that is NOT the window I am talking about,
> you start dancing.  Keep it up though.  The more you do it, the dumber
> you look.
>

Snit busted yet again.
What a surprise.


>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>> 
>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>> 
>> 
>
> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
 
Where is tmelmosfire when you need him :)

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

#373022

On 9/27/16, 11:54 AM, in article e4vtjpFd2baU1@mid.individual.net, "Jim
Polaski" <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote:

> On 2016-09-27, Octavian W. Lagrange <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
>> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/27/16, 9:25 AM, in article nse6hd$2u4$3@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
>>> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
>>>> 
>>>>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window
>>>>> in the following exchange:
>>>>> 
>>>>>   Owl:
>>>>>     -----
>>>>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>>>>     window: ...
>>>>>     ------
>>>> 
>>>> Stop lying, imbecile
>>> 
>>> Ah, those damned unquotable lies of mine. Keep in mind that is an exact
>>> quote from Owl.
>>> 
>> 
>> Out of context.  You later referenced "the script's window" while referring
>> to the script editor's window, in a lame attempt to muddy the waters.
>> When I then tell you that NO that is NOT the window I am talking about,
>> you start dancing.  Keep it up though.  The more you do it, the dumber
>> you look.
>> 
> 
> Snit busted yet again.
> What a surprise.
> 
> 
>>> The fact he was ignorant is not a shame for him at all... but the fact he
>>> trolled me over it is. That is why he is running... and why I find it so
>>> amusing to keep posting the same post in an effort to get him to reply.
>>> 
>>> He never will, though... he, like you, is ashamed of his ignorance.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Oh yeah.  I am so ashamed for pwning you.
>  
> Where is tmelmosfire when you need him :)
> 
I know it is hard for you to understand, but I am NOT your personal William
Shatner: <https://goo.gl/ZMXDjt>!


-- 
* OS X / Linux: What is a file?     <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI>
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux:     <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

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

#372992

Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window in
> the following exchange:
> 
>   Owl: 
>     ----- 
>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>     window: ... 
>     ------ 
>     
>   Snit: 
>     ----- 
>     The scripts windows are not even the ones being discussed! It is
>     the terminal windows which are having things done with them!
>     This is a concept you keep getting wrong over and over and over.
>     ----- 
>     
>   Owl: 
>     ----- 
>     What the FUCK are you babbling about NOW?  I am NOT talking
>     about the script's window you MORON.
>     ----- 
>     
> Not how you asked me about the script's windows but then denied you were
> talking about the scripts windows AS you call me names (you could not help
> yourself from trolling). So I noted what you were claiming:
> 
>   Snit: 
>     ----- 
>     Ah, so when you said: "Script1 inadvertently sends something to
>     Script2's window" you did not mean Script2's window.
>     ----- 
>     
> And instead of actually noting how much you screwed up, you tried to turn
> things around: 
> 
>   Owl: 
>     ----- 
>     What did you mean by "the scripts windows"?
>     ----- 
>     
> Even though you were trolling and working to turn things around after your
> complete and utter screw up, I answered in great detail (and I quote it
> below). But you have yet to answer a very simple question. When you said:
> 
>   Owl: 
>     ----- 
>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>     window: ... 
>     ------ 
> 
> What "script's window" did you mean?
> 
> And, as promised, the rather detailed answer to your question (even as you
> troll me I am happy to help you learn... after all, that focused on
> technology and not insults, and THAT is what I am here for -- though bullet
> two is a response to your trolling):
> 
> * The ONLY windows being controlled by these scripts are the ones from
> the terminal. In these cases the windows can be referenced by ID,
> index, and more but in NO case are they in a situation where another
> script cannot control them at ANY time, even in the middle of one
> script running. 
> 
> * I am the one who taught you this (and even after you were told you kept
> asking) and then you trolled and pretended I did not know this or did not
> understand the implication of referencing windows by ID or index!
> 
> * Scripts can run in windows but they need not. Even if they do,
> though, they are not the ones being controlled, nor do they in any way
> "own" any of the windows which are being controlled by the scripts. Again,
> ANY script can send messages to ANY window... by index, ID, or more.
> 
> * The script editors' windows (the one the scripts are in) are NOT being
> controlled by the scripts we have been looking at. They COULD be, but they
> are not. These windows (the scripts' windows) are completely irrelevant to
> the conversation EXCEPT when you keep talking about them and use the term
> "script's windows" to maybe (mean) the terminal's windows because that is
> how lost you are! 
> 
> * When I respond to you speaking of the "script's windows" and note you are
> lost, I mean whichever windows you are talking about: either the windows of
> the script editor, which is not relevant, or the windows the scripts are
> referencing which are NOT the script's windows but you are too lost to
> understand that! 
> 

you got pwned.  deal.
 
 

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

#373009

On 2016-09-27, Octavian W. Lagrange <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote:
> Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> Curious why you denied you were the one talking about the script's window in
>> the following exchange:
>> 
>>   Owl: 
>>     ----- 
>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>     window: ... 
>>     ------ 
>>     
>>   Snit: 
>>     ----- 
>>     The scripts windows are not even the ones being discussed! It is
>>     the terminal windows which are having things done with them!
>>     This is a concept you keep getting wrong over and over and over.
>>     ----- 
>>     
>>   Owl: 
>>     ----- 
>>     What the FUCK are you babbling about NOW?  I am NOT talking
>>     about the script's window you MORON.
>>     ----- 
>>     
>> Not how you asked me about the script's windows but then denied you were
>> talking about the scripts windows AS you call me names (you could not help
>> yourself from trolling). So I noted what you were claiming:
>> 
>>   Snit: 
>>     ----- 
>>     Ah, so when you said: "Script1 inadvertently sends something to
>>     Script2's window" you did not mean Script2's window.
>>     ----- 
>>     
>> And instead of actually noting how much you screwed up, you tried to turn
>> things around: 
>> 
>>   Owl: 
>>     ----- 
>>     What did you mean by "the scripts windows"?
>>     ----- 
>>     
>> Even though you were trolling and working to turn things around after your
>> complete and utter screw up, I answered in great detail (and I quote it
>> below). But you have yet to answer a very simple question. When you said:
>> 
>>   Owl: 
>>     ----- 
>>     For example, Script1 inadvertently sends something to Script2's
>>     window: ... 
>>     ------ 
>> 
>> What "script's window" did you mean?
>> 
>> And, as promised, the rather detailed answer to your question (even as you
>> troll me I am happy to help you learn... after all, that focused on
>> technology and not insults, and THAT is what I am here for -- though bullet
>> two is a response to your trolling):
>> 
>> * The ONLY windows being controlled by these scripts are the ones from
>> the terminal. In these cases the windows can be referenced by ID,
>> index, and more but in NO case are they in a situation where another
>> script cannot control them at ANY time, even in the middle of one
>> script running. 
>> 
>> * I am the one who taught you this (and even after you were told you kept
>> asking) and then you trolled and pretended I did not know this or did not
>> understand the implication of referencing windows by ID or index!
>> 
>> * Scripts can run in windows but they need not. Even if they do,
>> though, they are not the ones being controlled, nor do they in any way
>> "own" any of the windows which are being controlled by the scripts. Again,
>> ANY script can send messages to ANY window... by index, ID, or more.
>> 
>> * The script editors' windows (the one the scripts are in) are NOT being
>> controlled by the scripts we have been looking at. They COULD be, but they
>> are not. These windows (the scripts' windows) are completely irrelevant to
>> the conversation EXCEPT when you keep talking about them and use the term
>> "script's windows" to maybe (mean) the terminal's windows because that is
>> how lost you are! 
>> 
>> * When I respond to you speaking of the "script's windows" and note you are
>> lost, I mean whichever windows you are talking about: either the windows of
>> the script editor, which is not relevant, or the windows the scripts are
>> referencing which are NOT the script's windows but you are too lost to
>> understand that! 
>> 
>
> you got pwned.  deal.
>  
>  
Get ready for the snit sock brigade to mobilize.

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web