Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #453161 > unrolled thread
| Started by | oOze <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-06-01 21:57 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-06-14 09:08 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 763 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-01 21:57 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit ignores the 9th amendment <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-01 18:58 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fred <Fred.rscmdffjf@l.invalid> - 2018-06-01 19:05 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Sam E <why.should.this@be.email.invalid> - 2018-06-02 10:06 -0500
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 08:34 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2018-06-03 23:42 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Big Al <Big_Al@invalid.com> - 2018-06-01 22:13 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-06-02 07:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 05:41 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-08 07:30 -0500
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github SilverSlimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-08 11:12 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-08 08:13 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-06-08 21:56 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 13:45 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github "F. Russell" <fr@random.info> - 2018-06-09 23:08 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 16:20 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-09 23:29 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:40 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 17:23 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 18:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-09 17:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 20:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 08:22 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:02 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:16 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 09:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:46 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 09:52 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:17 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 11:50 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:54 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:06 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 12:17 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:47 -0700
Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 13:28 -0700
Re: Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 13:39 -0700
Re: Is Mike on (prescription) drugs, or not ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:01 -0700
Get your story straight, please. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 14:16 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 17:41 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:53 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:42 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 16:00 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 19:39 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:22 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:27 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:32 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:39 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:54 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 18:08 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:19 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:30 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:21 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:32 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:38 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:53 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:59 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 23:02 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 03:07 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 20:13 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:24 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 20:41 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:45 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 20:18 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:03 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 01:10 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:27 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 01:41 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:15 -0700
Random egos, Random games, and Random religions. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-10 23:55 -0700
Re: Random egos, Random games, and Random religions. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:58 -0700
More lizard than human. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 13:45 -0700
Re: More lizard than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 13:50 -0700
More bot than human. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 14:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 14:21 -0700
Does not compute. Beep ! Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 14:52 -0700
Re: Does not compute. Beep ! Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 15:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 15:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-11 19:43 -0400
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 16:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 17:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 20:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 20:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 17:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 19:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 20:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 21:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 21:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 09:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 09:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 11:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 11:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 11:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 12:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 15:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 19:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 19:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 09:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 10:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 11:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 12:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 14:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-13 14:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 11:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 14:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-14 22:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 09:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-15 11:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-15 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-15 23:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 09:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 10:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 12:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 12:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 13:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 14:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 16:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 18:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 20:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 21:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-16 22:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-16 23:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 10:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-17 09:56 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 11:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 11:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 15:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 19:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 20:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 21:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 21:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 22:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 22:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 23:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 05:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 08:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 09:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 10:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 17:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 12:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 12:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 13:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 13:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 21:24 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 21:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 16:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-18 19:57 -0400
Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-18 18:55 -0700
Re: Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-06-19 19:22 +0000
Re: Is a woman "lying" when she spends thousands on cosmetic surgery ? Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 12:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-18 14:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-18 16:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 17:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 18:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 18:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 20:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 22:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 20:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 10:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 21:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 21:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 22:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 10:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 11:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 11:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 12:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 12:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 15:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 18:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 09:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 13:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 18:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 12:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 13:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-21 02:08 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 19:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-21 02:50 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 20:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 20:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 13:05 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 13:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 15:49 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 15:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:01 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 16:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 18:08 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-21 17:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 17:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 08:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 09:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 11:44 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 13:45 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 13:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 14:29 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 14:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 15:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 15:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 15:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-22 15:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-23 11:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 12:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 12:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 11:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 15:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 13:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 13:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 14:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 15:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 15:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 15:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-25 15:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 09:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 13:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 14:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 15:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 16:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-26 16:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-27 03:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-01 08:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 09:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 10:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 10:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-01 23:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-02 01:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-02 09:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-13 11:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 11:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-13 12:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 02:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 10:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 11:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-14 21:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 14:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 09:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 09:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 09:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 16:43 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 10:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 10:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 11:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 11:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 13:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 14:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 14:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 23:26 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-16 00:04 +0000
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 00:16 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 01:04 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 20:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 21:43 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 17:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 00:58 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 18:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 01:59 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 19:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 02:31 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 20:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 11:02 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 04:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:43 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 15:45 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 16:03 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 16:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 17:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 18:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 10:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 11:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 12:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 15:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 16:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 17:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 00:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 20:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 01:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 19:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 23:17 -0400
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 22:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 23:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 18:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 17:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 17:32 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 11:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 20:46 +0000
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 17:01 -0400
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 21:39 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-16 22:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 22:58 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-16 20:20 -0400
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 00:30 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 00:32 +0000
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:57 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 10:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 10:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 12:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 12:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 13:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:53 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 15:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 14:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 15:52 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 08:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:31 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:07 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 13:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 13:32 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:24 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:51 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:25 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 13:11 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:36 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 13:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:25 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 14:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 14:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 15:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 11:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 11:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 13:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:23 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:11 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:48 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:40 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:33 -0500
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 17:02 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 07:51 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 08:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-19 15:40 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 09:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 11:41 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 09:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 10:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-19 15:46 -0400
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-19 15:02 -0500
Re: More bot than human. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-07-19 20:47 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-20 07:14 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:53 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:57 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 15:03 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:41 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 14:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:22 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 14:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 15:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 17:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 18:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 11:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 16:32 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 18:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-19 11:55 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 08:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 08:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 11:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 11:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 13:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 13:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 14:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 15:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 15:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:08 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 16:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 16:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 09:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-20 17:19 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 13:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 20:57 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-21 16:06 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 14:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-21 16:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 10:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-22 11:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 11:29 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 13:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-22 11:09 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-25 13:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 15:04 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-25 14:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 10:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 12:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 14:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:37 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 16:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-19 12:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-19 12:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-20 12:38 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:54 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 14:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 15:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:12 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 10:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:31 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 12:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:49 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 09:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 19:46 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 17:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-22 14:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 13:35 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 07:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 08:58 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 16:12 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:35 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-18 09:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:38 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:00 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 15:01 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:41 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:11 -0700
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:09 -0500
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 16:12 +0000
Re: More bot than human. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-18 11:59 -0500
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:42 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-18 20:10 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 13:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-18 12:31 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 17:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carrol Busted.... Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carrol Busted.... Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:59 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:00 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-17 01:14 +0000
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 01:33 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 19:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-17 15:56 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-17 16:27 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-17 09:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-16 21:06 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 15:34 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 16:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 21:04 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 23:02 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 02:23 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 18:05 -0700
Re: More bot than human. SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-15 22:51 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-15 17:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 10:36 -0700
Re: More bot than human. RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2018-07-16 03:26 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-16 03:37 +0000
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-15 20:40 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 13:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 14:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-14 10:17 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-14 11:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 10:09 -0600
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 09:55 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-23 10:19 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 10:26 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 20:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 13:48 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 14:20 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 20:51 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:16 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-20 21:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 02:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 01:41 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-21 10:10 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:06 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:21 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:27 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:33 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:44 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:15 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 09:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 10:12 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 10:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 14:01 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 14:14 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 14:13 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 15:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 15:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:39 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:47 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 19:03 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:50 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 17:18 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:45 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 16:56 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 16:59 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 11:28 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-19 08:49 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 08:30 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-17 10:46 -0700
Re: More bot than human. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-17 10:52 -0700
Re: More bot than human,talk.politics.guns Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 23:24 +0000
Re: More bot than human,talk.politics.guns Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-13 07:32 -0400
Re: More bot than human, Whistle Blower <wbedward@gmail.com> - 2018-06-13 21:14 +0000
How much do you think it's worth ? Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2018-06-11 15:19 -0700
Re: How much do you think it's worth ? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 15:26 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 18:23 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:32 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:22 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:33 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:02 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:34 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:46 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:51 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 19:49 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 19:54 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 22:59 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:42 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:37 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 18:29 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 21:42 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:55 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:33 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:39 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 20:56 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:55 -0700
Re: Get your story straight, please. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 18:10 -0400
Re: Get your story straight, please. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:28 +0000
Re: Get your story straight, please. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:32 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 13:42 -0700
An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:03 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:15 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 21:26 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 14:43 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Horace <skinnydude@a1c.org> - 2018-06-10 17:48 -0400
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 14:47 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 22:01 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:48 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:29 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 17:29 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 17:37 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2018-06-12 17:54 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 11:22 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-12 13:22 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 15:59 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2018-06-12 23:02 +0000
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 16:10 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:46 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-13 06:53 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-12 16:45 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 09:20 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 15:35 -0700
Re: An example of how snit trolls. !Jones <jones@fobahor.com> - 2018-06-10 16:52 -0500
Re: An example of how snit trolls. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 15:30 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github simon singh <ss1988singh980@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 16:13 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 09:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 11:49 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 11:52 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2018-06-10 11:53 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-10 12:18 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:56 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-12 04:11 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 12:28 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Pabst Blue Ribbon <pabst@blue.ribbon> - 2018-06-17 11:02 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Stumpee McGee <stumpeemcgee49@inoverter.net> - 2018-06-17 08:05 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-06-11 06:23 +0000
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-10 23:33 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 05:02 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 09:00 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 11:09 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-11 11:25 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 11:36 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-11 10:57 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-06-09 16:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-02 22:28 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2018-06-02 22:55 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github oOze <.m@nsn.s> - 2018-06-03 09:38 -0400
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:38 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Steven Petruzzellis <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 09:39 -0700
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-06-02 11:42 +0100
Re: Microsoft to purchase Github Fuck Snit <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-06-02 03:52 -0700
what are all these Linux Developers going to do Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 05:55 -0700
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2018-06-14 13:55 +0000
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2018-06-14 09:17 -0500
how can Microsoft be the great evil if Linux is all over their site? Simon bar Sinister <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 07:38 -0700
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2018-06-14 15:54 +0100
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2018-06-16 06:33 -0400
Re: what are all these Linux Developers going to do Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-06-14 09:08 -0700
Page 6 of 39 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 39 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 11:21 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <foah8eF7dffU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #454943 |
On 6/12/18 9:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:33:06 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 6/12/18 9:17 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On Monday, June 11, 2018 at 10:27:50 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 6/11/18 9:10 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, June 11, 2018 at 9:08:36 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/11/18 7:42 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, June 11, 2018 at 6:20:43 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking for full sentences? Key words? Would be curious to hear what you
>>>>>>>>>>>> are doing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No answer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm showing you what it does with just keywords,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is responding to sentences, mostly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With only a few words, so as to highlight the keywords.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oy. No words are highlighted.
>>>>>
>>>>> And the literal retard routine returns ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I can make a guess, but it is just that, a guess.
>>>>>
>>>>> A guess? LOL! The 2 longest statements I used had 4 words in them, all the rest
>>>>> were between 1 and 3 words. You can't spot the keyword(s) from this log of my
>>>>> statements? Seriously!?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Anyone here?
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>> What's up?
>>>>> Not much
>>>>> Are you a chatbot?
>>>>> Clever
>>>>> talk to me
>>>>> Ok
>>>>> so talk tech
>>>>> NOt really
>>>>> you're crazy...
>>>>> crazy!
>>>>> So talk
>>>>> Talk about opinions?
>>>>> you have nay opinions?
>>>>> You are crazy...
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see what this 'conversation' would've been like ;)
>>>>>
>>>> I cannot see from those, alone, if the responses are from a keyword or
>>>> if you have them set to a full sentence. Of course not. Nobody can. Now
>>>> if one were to play with it they could.
>>>
>>> Blah, blah. ML works differently than the way you did it, by "highlight"
>>> I meant the words that the algorithm will focus on, things like nouns
>>> and verbs, etc. (I don't have an actual list of keywords yet). With what
>>> you're doing, you have to 'tend' it; this doesn't require that, at least,
>>> not to the same degree and it doesn't need exact word matches.
>>
>> THAT is what I was asking about before. Thank you.
>>
>>>> And, of course, I did not go back and study it (or even glance at it)
>>>> once you said it was responding to key words and opposed to sentences.
>>>> And even then when one is speaking of "key words" one might mean a
>>>> phrase. For example, my AIM bot responded to the keyword of "is a"...
>>>> even though, of course, that is more than one word!
>>>>
>>>> Looking now, it is a pretty long function:
>>>> --------
>>>> on isa
>>>
>>> ... nightmare to look at.
>>
>> Yes. Agreed.
>>
>>>> Caught a typo in there and fixed it... of you care you can look at the
>>>> original to see if you can find it. :)
>>>
>>> Yeah, right <eyeroll>... that gives me a headache.
>>>
>>> What you have is basically Mad Libs with some hand fed context.
>>
>> To some extent, I suppose.
>>
>>> I can see why it'd work but geezus... that's tedious as hell.
>>
>> It did take some time. But it also worked better than any other bot I saw.
>>
>>> The code
>>> would be a *lot* easier to read if you didn't have all the responses
>>> in there. You want that stuff separated, like you do with those terms.
>>> From the 'easier' example you gave earlier...
>>> (usenet is a terrible medium for this):
>>>
>>> function animetext (someText) {
>>>
>>> const rndItem = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
>>>
>>> const theList = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira", "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop", "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam", "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon", "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d", "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
>>>
>>> const myWord = rndItem(theList);
>>> const filteredList = theList.filter(item => item !== myWord);
>>> const yourWord = rndItem(filteredList);
>>> console.log('myWord:',myWord,'- yourWord:',yourWord);
>>> }
>>> animetext("gasaraki");
>>
>> Wouldn't that leave out reaction scores, the users name, if they mention
>> me or not, etc.?
>
> This is not a rewrite, it's merely a concept you might want to follow.
To convert it to JavaScript, if I decide to do that... OK. Thanks.
>>> You'll use the same concept (separating data from logic) to deal with
>>> your text strings. For the massaged stuff you have (this must have taken
>>> you forever!) you can used array names that are coded so you can
>>> intelligently refer to them. For the variables within text strings you can
>>> use regex to read where they're located and replace them with variables
>>> using template literals. This might sound scary, it isn't. In any event,
>>> you should seek to get all that data out of the code, this is what DFS
>>> was probably turned off by. You'll grimace how it isn't 'English-like' but
>>> it's also not brittle, not prone to as many typos (and you can actually
>>> see them easier), not as inflexible and not unportable or redundant.
>>> How many functions like these do you have?
>>
>> Tons. Yeah... I am sure it could be done better.
>
> This'll give you an idea of how to deal with the strings:
>
> function animetext (someText) {
>
> const rndItem = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
>
> const theList = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira", "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop", "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam", "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon", "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d", "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
>
> const goodText = ["I like & yourword", "I don't think that there is anything better than & yourword", "I love & yourword", "I can't imagine the amount of work put in to & yourword"];
>
> const myWord = rndItem(theList);
> const filteredList = theList.filter(item => item !== myWord);
> const yourWord = rndItem(filteredList);
> let GTOutput = rndItem(goodText);
> let output = GTOutput.replace('& yourword', yourWord)
> console.log(output);
> }
> animetext("gasaraki");
>
> <https://streamable.com/9pzna>
Just for that one function it would take some time to do a full
conversion... and I have a lot of functions. :)
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 11:43 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <3c9d4bf3-0f74-4d1c-b926-1a2d16949197@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #454949 |
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 12:21:06 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> Just for that one function it would take some time to do a full
> conversion...
I just read your post here about 5 minutes ago; since then, I added pretty
much the rest of what you'd need relative to these pages and I made a
screencast of it working (a good editor is the key). How many functions
are there? Or rather, how many pages like this with data, which is all I'm
using of yours?
function animetext (someText) {
const rnd = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
// the data
const theList = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira", "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop", "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam", "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon", "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d", "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
const goodTextList = ["I like the amount of *swap1* yourword has, but I prefer the *swap2* in myword","I like yourword, ", " ANIME!, ", " I don't think that there is anything better than yourword, ", " I love yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of work yourword must have taken"]
const neutralTextList = ["yourword has quality animation, but myword has better drawn figures, ", " myword has better still imagery in their animation, yourword has better animation., ", " the animator's put in large amounts of time in yourword's work., ", " yourword is not as mature as myword, ", " I don't really like anime, but I have my few favorites, ", " I don't watch as much anime as I used to but I still like myword, ", " subtitled is better than dubbed anime, because dubbing takes it away from it's purest form."]
const badTextList = ["I hate yourword, ", " ANIME SUCKS!, ", "I don't think that there is anything worse than yourword, ", " anime is OK for little kids, ", " yourword is all the rage in the prepubescent crowd, ", " I can't stand yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of wasted time yourword has taken"];
const swap1 = ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"];
const swap2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"];
// process the data
const myWord = rnd(theList);
const filteredList = theList.filter(item => item !== myWord);
const yourWord = rnd(filteredList);
const gTRnd = rnd(goodTextList);
const nTRnd = rnd(neutralTextList);
const bTRnd = rnd(badTextList);
const goodText = gTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword',myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
const neutralText = nTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword', myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
const badText = bTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword', myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
console.log('%c goodText:','color: red',goodText);
console.log('%c neutralText:','color: red',neutralText);
console.log('%c badText:','color: red',badText);
}
animetext("gasaraki");
This deals with the massaged stuff, uses the same idea:
<https://streamable.com/2rxtr>
> and I have a lot of functions. :)
That sit there... never to be used again ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 12:34 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <foalhcF885pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #454952 |
On 6/12/18 11:43 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 12:21:06 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>
>
>> Just for that one function it would take some time to do a full
>> conversion...
>
> I just read your post here about 5 minutes ago; since then, I added pretty
> much the rest of what you'd need relative to these pages and I made a
> screencast of it working (a good editor is the key). How many functions
> are there? Or rather, how many pages like this with data, which is all I'm
> using of yours?
>
> function animetext (someText) {
>
> const rnd = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
> // the data
> const theList = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira", "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop", "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam", "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon", "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d", "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
>
> const goodTextList = ["I like the amount of *swap1* yourword has, but I prefer the *swap2* in myword","I like yourword, ", " ANIME!, ", " I don't think that there is anything better than yourword, ", " I love yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of work yourword must have taken"]
>
> const neutralTextList = ["yourword has quality animation, but myword has better drawn figures, ", " myword has better still imagery in their animation, yourword has better animation., ", " the animator's put in large amounts of time in yourword's work., ", " yourword is not as mature as myword, ", " I don't really like anime, but I have my few favorites, ", " I don't watch as much anime as I used to but I still like myword, ", " subtitled is better than dubbed anime, because dubbing takes it away from it's purest form."]
>
> const badTextList = ["I hate yourword, ", " ANIME SUCKS!, ", "I don't think that there is anything worse than yourword, ", " anime is OK for little kids, ", " yourword is all the rage in the prepubescent crowd, ", " I can't stand yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of wasted time yourword has taken"];
>
> const swap1 = ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"];
>
> const swap2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"];
>
> // process the data
> const myWord = rnd(theList);
> const filteredList = theList.filter(item => item !== myWord);
> const yourWord = rnd(filteredList);
> const gTRnd = rnd(goodTextList);
> const nTRnd = rnd(neutralTextList);
> const bTRnd = rnd(badTextList);
> const goodText = gTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword',myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
> const neutralText = nTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword', myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
> const badText = bTRnd.replace('yourword', yourWord).replace('myword', myWord).replace('*swap1*', rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2));
> console.log('%c goodText:','color: red',goodText);
> console.log('%c neutralText:','color: red',neutralText);
> console.log('%c badText:','color: red',badText);
> }
> animetext("gasaraki");
>
> This deals with the massaged stuff, uses the same idea:
> <https://streamable.com/2rxtr>
Cool... thanks. Really does much the same though I do like the swapping
of "yourword" and "myword" as a separate function. That does make a lot
of sense. Other than that it seems to use pretty much the same
structure... which would make it easier to convert if I ever decide to.
>> and I have a lot of functions. :)
>
> That sit there... never to be used again ;)
They have not been used in years... who knows, maybe some day I will.
Right now my hobbies have taken me to different places (crafting items
for my home RPG and other similar things).
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 15:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <8f62fdf1-4e90-4d80-959d-397e6f3c913a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #454956 |
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 1:34:08 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>Cool... thanks. Really does much the same
For the end result, sure... 'cuz all you're doing is generating random text.
> though I do like the swapping
> of "yourword" and "myword" as a separate function. That does make a lot
> of sense. Other than that it seems to use pretty much the same
> structure...
No, this structure separates the data from the processing of it. This
makes it easy to add data without introducing potential errors into the
processing section; it also makes it easy to swap out entire data sets
in seconds. You could easily randomize the sets you use, as well. When
you use utility functions (like rnd) they aren't repeated all throughout
your code so there is far less redundancy, which further minimizes
errors and requires less code). I wrote it in a way you can understand
it (no regex, either )so you can tweak or add to it easily, but it really
needs to be nothing more than this. Even as funky as it is, you should
be able to see how easy it'd be to add, say, another swap set or change
to different sets of data altogether as based on a response.
> which would make it easier to convert if I ever decide to.
>
> >> and I have a lot of functions. :)
> >
> > That sit there... never to be used again ;)
>
> They have not been used in years... who knows, maybe some day I will.
If you ever decide to, the first thing you may want to consider would be
writing some functions that convert the data automatically. They would
not only pay dividends in getting the work done, you'd also learn some
new stuff, good stuff. This isn't perfect but it took about a minute to do,
from your 'isaText' function, on the Mac, I ran:
gsed -i 's/"/'\''/g' applescript-text.txt
Then I took one of the "mentioneMe" portions, put it in a var with double quotes...
let str = " 'why do you think I am ', \r useName & ', I wish you would stop saying that ', \r 'how did *I* suddendly become a bot? ', \r 'can someone be half bot and half ' { 'human ', 'jewish ', 'hindu ', 'jewish ', 'not '} & '? ', \r useName & ' is more of a bot than I am ', \r 'ever noticed how all humans look alike? ', \r 'the only 'smart' bot in here is ' & useName, \r 'how do you figure I am a bot? ', \r 'what definition of bot are you using ' & useName, \r 'in what way am I a bot? ', \r useName & ', apparently you have no idea what a bot is ', \r 'do you know what a bot is ' & useName & '? ', \r 'why would you think I am a bot? ', \r 'the bot joke is getting old ', \r useName & ' is a bot ', \r useName & ', please stop telling people I am a bot ', \r useName & ', that is no longer funny ', \r 'if one more person says I am a bot I just might become one! '";
... and used it in code you can turn into a little function:
let ns = str.replace(/\r/g, '**').replace(/\s'/g, ' ');
if(ns.includes('&')) {
ns = ns.replace(/&/g, '').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ');
}
mentioneMeList = ns.split('**');
<https://streamable.com/u958c>
(Note: what will be the 'swap' on line 3 is preserved)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 16:43 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fob44iFarecU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #454964 |
On 6/12/18 3:57 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 1:34:08 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>
>> Cool... thanks. Really does much the same
>
> For the end result, sure... 'cuz all you're doing is generating random text.
Sure. Absolutely NOTHING resembling AI or anything more than just some
somewhat clever and combined lookup tables. As you have noted, it just
took a long time to keep adding to them. By the time I had all the
topics and response ratings and checking for duplicate responses and
selecting of whom it was talking to it was pretty darn good. I am
sincere when I say my bot was, as far as I know, the best one of its
kind on AIM, and I know there were quite a few.
But that is in a group chat with a lot of people... in that setting it
engaged people and they often thought it was a real person (remember,
while you can see what it is responding to in the logs you cannot in the
actual chats). In a one-on-one discussion, however, it was very apparent
very quickly that it was not human.
>> though I do like the swapping
>> of "yourword" and "myword" as a separate function. That does make a lot
>> of sense. Other than that it seems to use pretty much the same
>> structure...
>
> No, this structure separates the data from the processing of it. This
> makes it easy to add data without introducing potential errors into the
> processing section; it also makes it easy to swap out entire data sets
> in seconds.
How would you handle something like:
some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
Some of my functions do a lot of that... for example, a real line from
my bot:
"can someone be half bot and half " & some item in {"human", "jewish",
"hindu", "jewish", "not"} & "?"
Note I have Jewish in there twice, presumably to make it show up more
(or it could have been a mistake -- too long ago to recall). And I
should have had at least one of those capitalized... though I did not
want it to have perfect grammar and the like.
> You could easily randomize the sets you use, as well. When
> you use utility functions (like rnd) they aren't repeated all throughout
> your code so there is far less redundancy, which further minimizes
> errors and requires less code). I wrote it in a way you can understand
> it (no regex, either )so you can tweak or add to it easily, but it really
> needs to be nothing more than this. Even as funky as it is, you should
> be able to see how easy it'd be to add, say, another swap set or change
> to different sets of data altogether as based on a response.
My functions are different from each other in many details, but, sure, I
do not think it would be that hard to convert over.
>> which would make it easier to convert if I ever decide to.
>>
>>>> and I have a lot of functions. :)
>>>
>>> That sit there... never to be used again ;)
>>
>> They have not been used in years... who knows, maybe some day I will.
>
> If you ever decide to, the first thing you may want to consider would be
> writing some functions that convert the data automatically. They would
> not only pay dividends in getting the work done, you'd also learn some
> new stuff, good stuff. This isn't perfect but it took about a minute to do,
> from your 'isaText' function, on the Mac, I ran:
>
> gsed -i 's/"/'\''/g' applescript-text.txt
>
> Then I took one of the "mentioneMe" portions, put it in a var with double quotes...
>
> let str = " 'why do you think I am ', \r useName & ', I wish you would stop saying that ', \r 'how did *I* suddendly become a bot? ', \r 'can someone be half bot and half ' { 'human ', 'jewish ', 'hindu ', 'jewish ', 'not '} & '? ', \r useName & ' is more of a bot than I am ', \r 'ever noticed how all humans look alike? ', \r 'the only 'smart' bot in here is ' & useName, \r 'how do you figure I am a bot? ', \r 'what definition of bot are you using ' & useName, \r 'in what way am I a bot? ', \r useName & ', apparently you have no idea what a bot is ', \r 'do you know what a bot is ' & useName & '? ', \r 'why would you think I am a bot? ', \r 'the bot joke is getting old ', \r useName & ' is a bot ', \r useName & ', please stop telling people I am a bot ', \r useName & ', that is no longer funny ', \r 'if one more person says I am a bot I just might become one! '";
I would prefer one sentence per line though that is not really an issue
here.
> ... and used it in code you can turn into a little function:
>
> let ns = str.replace(/\r/g, '**').replace(/\s'/g, ' ');
>
> if(ns.includes('&')) {
> ns = ns.replace(/&/g, '').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ');
> }
> mentioneMeList = ns.split('**');
I admit that is far beyond what I could do.
> <https://streamable.com/u958c>
> (Note: what will be the 'swap' on line 3 is preserved)
>
I assume that would not actually pick one of those items... would have
to work that in, too.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 19:07 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <08420fea-1e05-498d-a794-509bba55baf3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #454970 |
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 5:43:18 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
(snip)
> In a one-on-one discussion, however, it was very apparent
> very quickly that it was not human.
One thing puzzles me, you already had 'theList' and it was there from the
start. So why didn't you do the same with the text strings?
> How would you handle something like:
>
> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
> Some of my functions do a lot of that... for example, a real line from
> my bot:
>
> "can someone be half bot and half " & some item in {"human", "jewish",
> "hindu", "jewish", "not"} & "?"
?? This example isn't a nested structure like the one above. In a previous
screencast I showed this line from 'animetext' being dealt with, which has
even more going on (but the concept is the same):
Repost: <https://streamable.com/2rxtr>
> My functions are different from each other in many details, but, sure, I
> do not think it would be that hard to convert over.
They don't follow the same basic idea you've shown in the last two? What
kind of "many details"... that don't have to do with the data?
> > let str = " 'why do you think I am ', \r useName & ', I wish you would stop saying that ', \r 'how did *I* suddendly become a bot? ', \r 'can someone be half bot and half ' { 'human ', 'jewish ', 'hindu ', 'jewish ', 'not '} & '? ', \r useName & ' is more of a bot than I am ', \r 'ever noticed how all humans look alike? ', \r 'the only 'smart' bot in here is ' & useName, \r 'how do you figure I am a bot? ', \r 'what definition of bot are you using ' & useName, \r 'in what way am I a bot? ', \r useName & ', apparently you have no idea what a bot is ', \r 'do you know what a bot is ' & useName & '? ', \r 'why would you think I am a bot? ', \r 'the bot joke is getting old ', \r useName & ' is a bot ', \r useName & ', please stop telling people I am a bot ', \r useName & ', that is no longer funny ', \r 'if one more person says I am a bot I just might become one! '";
>
> I would prefer one sentence per line though that is not really an issue
> here.
The point of the above is solely to aid the conversion process. IOW, that
string is for the computer to look at, not you.
> > ... and used it in code you can turn into a little function:
> >
> > let ns = str.replace(/\r/g, '**').replace(/\s'/g, ' ');
Above, I replace the \r (globally, 'g') with **, then I replace all space characters
that are followed by a single quote with 1 space. I also give it a reference, "ns",
so I can use it. Look closely, you'll see it... similar thing for below:
> > if(ns.includes('&')) {
> > ns = ns.replace(/&/g, '').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ');
> > }
> > mentioneMeList = ns.split('**');
The split method creates a new array from a string. Here, I split on ** and
I simultaneously name the array (I even add a typo) so I can refer to it.
> I admit that is far beyond what I could do.
I doubt it. Don't the 2 new explanations above makes sense?
For reference: <https://regexr.com> (good site to practice on)
> > <https://streamable.com/u958c>
> > (Note: what will be the 'swap' on line 3 is preserved)
> >
> I assume that would not actually pick one of those items... would have
> to work that in, too.
Correct, but you should take a look at the stuff I've shown you and
you'll probably figure it out (I gotta leave something for you to do ;)
On the plus side, all you need to do is replace the curlies with square
brackets and you have a JS array.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-12 19:55 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fobfdqFcjm7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #454975 |
On 6/12/18 7:07 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 5:43:18 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> (snip)
>> In a one-on-one discussion, however, it was very apparent
>> very quickly that it was not human.
>
> One thing puzzles me, you already had 'theList' and it was there from the
> start. So why didn't you do the same with the text strings?
Was not that way with the Apple code I stole. :)
No, because it fit my mind to do it with shorter phrases but not longer.
>> How would you handle something like:
>>
>> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
>
> I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
So that "foo foo" happens 50% of the time and "foo bar" and "foo blah"
happen less often. This is good for longer strings to give them
variability.
>> Some of my functions do a lot of that... for example, a real line from
>> my bot:
>>
>> "can someone be half bot and half " & some item in {"human", "jewish",
>> "hindu", "jewish", "not"} & "?"
>
> ?? This example isn't a nested structure like the one above.
Sorry -- was not clear: that is just one sentence from it. Another is:
"useName & " is a bot"
So it would claim the person accusing it was a bot as often as it would
ask if you could be half bot and half... whatever.
> In a previous
> screencast I showed this line from 'animetext' being dealt with, which has
> even more going on (but the concept is the same):
>
> Repost: <https://streamable.com/2rxtr>
I see: the "swap1" and "swap2". Means tracking more variables. Ideally
they would be better named than that... or maybe not if there are not
that many, I suppose. I do see how you could use the same names in
different functions with no issue.
>> My functions are different from each other in many details, but, sure, I
>> do not think it would be that hard to convert over.
>
> They don't follow the same basic idea you've shown in the last two? What
> kind of "many details"... that don't have to do with the data?
At risk of having you later say I pointed to my site so it is OK for you
to do so in other contexts, here is one of the files:
<http://prescottcomputerguy.com/turing/code/TuringText.txt>
Check out "doMath", "helloText", and "osText"
Same basic ideas... but more complexity there.
>>> let str = " 'why do you think I am ', \r useName & ', I wish you would stop saying that ', \r 'how did *I* suddendly become a bot? ', \r 'can someone be half bot and half ' { 'human ', 'jewish ', 'hindu ', 'jewish ', 'not '} & '? ', \r useName & ' is more of a bot than I am ', \r 'ever noticed how all humans look alike? ', \r 'the only 'smart' bot in here is ' & useName, \r 'how do you figure I am a bot? ', \r 'what definition of bot are you using ' & useName, \r 'in what way am I a bot? ', \r useName & ', apparently you have no idea what a bot is ', \r 'do you know what a bot is ' & useName & '? ', \r 'why would you think I am a bot? ', \r 'the bot joke is getting old ', \r useName & ' is a bot ', \r useName & ', please stop telling people I am a bot ', \r useName & ', that is no longer funny ', \r 'if one more person says I am a bot I just might become one! '";
>>
>> I would prefer one sentence per line though that is not really an issue
>> here.
>
> The point of the above is solely to aid the conversion process. IOW, that
> string is for the computer to look at, not you.
Sure... makes sense. And I appreciate it.
>>> ... and used it in code you can turn into a little function:
>>>
>>> let ns = str.replace(/\r/g, '**').replace(/\s'/g, ' ');
>
> Above, I replace the \r (globally, 'g') with **, then I replace all space characters
> that are followed by a single quote with 1 space. I also give it a reference, "ns",
> so I can use it. Look closely, you'll see it... similar thing for below:
I used to do this with vi back in the '80s and '90s... so I have SOME
familiarity with it but been a long time. :)
>>> if(ns.includes('&')) {
>>> ns = ns.replace(/&/g, '').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ').replace(/\s\s/g, ' ');
>>> }
>>> mentioneMeList = ns.split('**');
>
> The split method creates a new array from a string. Here, I split on ** and
> I simultaneously name the array (I even add a typo) so I can refer to it.
OK.
>> I admit that is far beyond what I could do.
>
> I doubt it. Don't the 2 new explanations above makes sense?
> For reference: <https://regexr.com> (good site to practice on)
I get the concept but would take me some time to be able to write it.
>>> <https://streamable.com/u958c>
>>> (Note: what will be the 'swap' on line 3 is preserved)
>>>
>> I assume that would not actually pick one of those items... would have
>> to work that in, too.
>
> Correct, but you should take a look at the stuff I've shown you and
> you'll probably figure it out (I gotta leave something for you to do ;)
I saw your "swap1" and "swap2" before but did not spend the time to
really look... now I get it. Thanks.
> On the plus side, all you need to do is replace the curlies with square
> brackets and you have a JS array.
Yeah... it is not like the two are THAT different from each other (at
least in these areas).
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 09:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <dd24262a-d7f1-4c51-89a5-353b6cfcaca5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #454976 |
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:55:57 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
(snip)
> >> How would you handle something like:
> >>
> >> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
> >
> > I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
>
> So that "foo foo" happens 50% of the time and "foo bar" and "foo blah"
> happen less often. This is good for longer strings to give them
> variability.
I would think the highest number of phrases you could get your hands
on, coupled with adding typos and delaying text, would be the best way
of providing the highest degree of realism. Many of the lines can have
very tiny changes in the text and, in essence, provide a form of weighting
without the expense in the code, plus you get the added benefit of even
greater variation. I've never built a bot so maybe I'm missing something.
> I see: the "swap1" and "swap2". Means tracking more variables. Ideally
> they would be better named than that... or maybe not if there are not
> that many, I suppose. I do see how you could use the same names in
> different functions with no issue.
As long as they're scoped properly... 'let' and 'const' use block scope.
> >> My functions are different from each other in many details, but, sure, I
> >> do not think it would be that hard to convert over.
> >
> > They don't follow the same basic idea you've shown in the last two? What
> > kind of "many details"... that don't have to do with the data?
>
> At risk of having you later say I pointed to my site so it is OK for you
> to do so in other contexts, here is one of the files:
>
> <http://prescottcomputerguy.com/turing/code/TuringText.txt>
>
> Check out "doMath", "helloText", and "osText"
>
> Same basic ideas... but more complexity there.
I'm not even gonna look... I just want to know if the bot's functions
are drastically different from one another. If they are, you have a
lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;) The example I gave you is just that,
it can and should be refactored (see all the calls to replace?). The data
is better off living outside of the processing function. What I showed
you is a first step towards organizing, here's another:
<https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
Note the use of 'map' and think of others places it might be used.
(I'm not leaving that up there indefinitely so if you're interested, grab it)
> I saw your "swap1" and "swap2" before but did not spend the time to
> really look... now I get it. Thanks.
No prob. The replace method rules here. Notice I'm not using that many
methods, just includes, filter and replace. Even with this newer example,
where I add map, if you remove the data there isn't much to look at. Also
note I use a template string in the console.log(), another handy thing to
(among other things) avoid concatenation headaches.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 10:45 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fod3h1Fm6neU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455002 |
On 6/13/18 9:27 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:55:57 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> (snip)
>
>>>> How would you handle something like:
>>>>
>>>> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
>>>
>>> I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
>>
>> So that "foo foo" happens 50% of the time and "foo bar" and "foo blah"
>> happen less often. This is good for longer strings to give them
>> variability.
>
> I would think the highest number of phrases you could get your hands
> on, coupled with adding typos and delaying text, would be the best way
> of providing the highest degree of realism. Many of the lines can have
> very tiny changes in the text and, in essence, provide a form of weighting
> without the expense in the code, plus you get the added benefit of even
> greater variation.
Certain phrases are OK to repeat more than others. For example, it is
fine to have "LOL" show up a fair amount but to have "I find your
comment to lack substantial humor" would not be good to show up often.
> I've never built a bot so maybe I'm missing something.
:)
>> I see: the "swap1" and "swap2". Means tracking more variables. Ideally
>> they would be better named than that... or maybe not if there are not
>> that many, I suppose. I do see how you could use the same names in
>> different functions with no issue.
>
> As long as they're scoped properly... 'let' and 'const' use block scope.
Good to know about "let" and "const". Thanks.
>>>> My functions are different from each other in many details, but, sure, I
>>>> do not think it would be that hard to convert over.
>>>
>>> They don't follow the same basic idea you've shown in the last two? What
>>> kind of "many details"... that don't have to do with the data?
>>
>> At risk of having you later say I pointed to my site so it is OK for you
>> to do so in other contexts, here is one of the files:
>>
>> <http://prescottcomputerguy.com/turing/code/TuringText.txt>
>>
>> Check out "doMath", "helloText", and "osText"
>>
>> Same basic ideas... but more complexity there.
>
> I'm not even gonna look... I just want to know if the bot's functions
> are drastically different from one another.
Depends on how you rate "drastically" but they are quite different. For
example, "doMath" has to convert written numbers to numbers it can do
math with, and then decide if the math is too hard for a human to do
quickly in their head (with some randomization as to that to decide if
the bot "feels" like it). It also looks to make sure that the "/" or "-"
symbol is being used in some other way, such as in "9/11", "9-11",
"24/7", etc.
In short, the logic of that function is quite different than the ones we
have looked at.
With things like osText, if your "reaction" score is low it is more
likely to say an OS you seem to like is bad, and one you seem to dislike
is good. It is more agreeable if your "reaction" score is higher. It
also has quite a few things like:
"is it hard to " & some item in {"pirate", "play games", "watch
movies", "hack", "clone people", "get software"} & " on " & yourword
Which any on of those options should come up a lot less than:
"who made " & yourword
And it also has:
"they will completely change computers in " & (random number from 5
to 15) & " years"
For that, though, you would just need to send the swap function the
random number (as text?)
> If they are, you have a
> lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;)
Good description of the bot!
> The example I gave you is just that,
> it can and should be refactored (see all the calls to replace?). The data
> is better off living outside of the processing function. What I showed
> you is a first step towards organizing, here's another:
>
> <https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
>
> Note the use of 'map' and think of others places it might be used.
>
> (I'm not leaving that up there indefinitely so if you're interested, grab it)
For posterity:
-----
const getResponse = function(userInput) {
'use strict';
// data sets
const keywords = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira",
"bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop",
"dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam",
"gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja
scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon",
"techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d",
"Bubble Gum Crisis"];
const good = ["I like the amount of *swap1* yourword has, but I
prefer the *swap2* in myword","I like yourword, ", " ANIME!, ", " I
don't think that there is anything better than yourword, ", " I love
yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of work yourword must have taken"]
const neutral = ["yourword has quality animation, but myword has
better drawn figures, ", " myword has better still imagery in their
animation, yourword has better animation., ", " the animator's put in
large amounts of time in yourword's work., ", " yourword is not as
mature as myword, ", " I don't really like anime, but I have my few
favorites, ", " I don't watch as much anime as I used to but I still
like myword, ", " subtitled is better than dubbed anime, because dubbing
takes it away from it's purest form."]
const bad = ["I hate yourword, ", " ANIME SUCKS!, ", "I don't think
that there is anything worse than yourword, ", " anime is OK for little
kids, ", " yourword is all the rage in the prepubescent crowd, ", " I
can't stand yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of wasted time
yourword has taken"];
const swap1 = ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"];
const swap2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"];
// utility functions
const rnd = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
const generateResponse = (function(userInput) {
if(keywords.includes(userInput)) {
const myWord = rnd(keywords);
const filteredList = keywords.filter(item => item !== myWord);
const yourWord = rnd(filteredList);
const gRnd = rnd(good);
const nRnd = rnd(neutral);
const bRnd = rnd(bad);
const textLists = [gRnd,nRnd,bRnd];
const output = textLists.map(item =>
item.replace('yourword',
yourWord).replace('myword',myWord).replace('*swap1*',
rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2)));
console.log(output);
} else {
console.log(`"${userInput}" was not found in 'keywords'`);
}
})(userInput);
};
-----
Looks like I would need, with that structure, my butt-load of functions
in one. That would not work... but I could use something similar for
different functions. Or maybe I am missing something.
>> I saw your "swap1" and "swap2" before but did not spend the time to
>> really look... now I get it. Thanks.
>
> No prob. The replace method rules here. Notice I'm not using that many
> methods, just includes, filter and replace. Even with this newer example,
> where I add map, if you remove the data there isn't much to look at. Also
> note I use a template string in the console.log(), another handy thing to
> (among other things) avoid concatenation headaches.
Might be easier, for me, to have the "common" swaps done as you say (the
word "myword" is pretty clear... but NOT use "swap1" and "swap2". Not
sure how I would do that inline in JavaScript but I am sure it can be
done. :)
In any case, sincerely appreciate your help on this. I am not likely to
actually convert the bot (lots of time and I do not even know where I
would run it... in a one-on-one chat it does not do well, it is designed
for a room).
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 11:56 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <b5f0db30-fb54-4cff-a56c-f420b78f3424@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455004 |
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 11:45:08 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 6/13/18 9:27 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:55:57 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> >>>> How would you handle something like:
> >>>>
> >>>> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
> >>>
> >>> I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
> >>
> >> So that "foo foo" happens 50% of the time and "foo bar" and "foo blah"
> >> happen less often. This is good for longer strings to give them
> >> variability.
> >
> > I would think the highest number of phrases you could get your hands
> > on, coupled with adding typos and delaying text, would be the best way
> > of providing the highest degree of realism. Many of the lines can have
> > very tiny changes in the text and, in essence, provide a form of weighting
> > without the expense in the code, plus you get the added benefit of even
> > greater variation.
>
> Certain phrases are OK to repeat more than others. For example, it is
> fine to have "LOL" show up a fair amount but to have "I find your
> comment to lack substantial humor" would not be good to show up often.
I was thinking more along the lines having lots of minute variations that
all keep to a certain 'tone' (preferably more 'human-like'). Even LOL!, if
used too often, can give it away, so... LOL! LOl! lol... lol! Lol!, Haha, Yuk,
etc.
> > I'm not even gonna look... I just want to know if the bot's functions
> > are drastically different from one another.
>
> Depends on how you rate "drastically" but they are quite different. For
> example, "doMath" has to convert written numbers to numbers it can do
> math with, and then decide if the math is too hard for a human to do
> quickly in their head (with some randomization as to that to decide if
> the bot "feels" like it). It also looks to make sure that the "/" or "-"
> symbol is being used in some other way, such as in "9/11", "9-11",
> "24/7", etc.
Where does this get called from and how often is it likely to be?
> In short, the logic of that function is quite different than the ones we
> have looked at.
But aren't the vast majority of them like those? How many are not and
how and when are they called?
> With things like osText, if your "reaction" score is low it is more
> likely to say an OS you seem to like is bad, and one you seem to dislike
> is good. It is more agreeable if your "reaction" score is higher. It
> also has quite a few things like:
>
> "is it hard to " & some item in {"pirate", "play games", "watch
> movies", "hack", "clone people", "get software"} & " on " & yourword
>
> Which any on of those options should come up a lot less than:
>
> "who made " & yourword
>
> And it also has:
>
> "they will completely change computers in " & (random number from 5
> to 15) & " years"
>
> For that, though, you would just need to send the swap function the
> random number (as text?)
You can just run 'rnd', it can be rewritten to facilitate a min and a max.
I'd decouple it from '* array.length' and just make that a parameter.
> > If they are, you have a
> > lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;)
>
> Good description of the bot!
How many functions are there that differ from 'animetext' and
how many are like it?
> > The example I gave you is just that,
> > it can and should be refactored (see all the calls to replace?). The data
> > is better off living outside of the processing function. What I showed
> > you is a first step towards organizing, here's another:
> >
> > <https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
> >
> > Note the use of 'map' and think of others places it might be used.
> >
> > (I'm not leaving that up there indefinitely so if you're interested, grab it)
>
> For posterity:
>
> -----
> const getResponse = function(userInput) {
> 'use strict';
> // data sets
> const keywords = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira",
> "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop",
> "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam",
> "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja
> scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon",
> "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d",
> "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
> const good = ["I like the amount of *swap1* yourword has, but I
> prefer the *swap2* in myword","I like yourword, ", " ANIME!, ", " I
> don't think that there is anything better than yourword, ", " I love
> yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of work yourword must have taken"]
> const neutral = ["yourword has quality animation, but myword has
> better drawn figures, ", " myword has better still imagery in their
> animation, yourword has better animation., ", " the animator's put in
> large amounts of time in yourword's work., ", " yourword is not as
> mature as myword, ", " I don't really like anime, but I have my few
> favorites, ", " I don't watch as much anime as I used to but I still
> like myword, ", " subtitled is better than dubbed anime, because dubbing
> takes it away from it's purest form."]
> const bad = ["I hate yourword, ", " ANIME SUCKS!, ", "I don't think
> that there is anything worse than yourword, ", " anime is OK for little
> kids, ", " yourword is all the rage in the prepubescent crowd, ", " I
> can't stand yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of wasted time
> yourword has taken"];
> const swap1 = ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"];
> const swap2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"];
>
> // utility functions
> const rnd = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
>
> const generateResponse = (function(userInput) {
> if(keywords.includes(userInput)) {
> const myWord = rnd(keywords);
> const filteredList = keywords.filter(item => item !== myWord);
> const yourWord = rnd(filteredList);
> const gRnd = rnd(good);
> const nRnd = rnd(neutral);
> const bRnd = rnd(bad);
> const textLists = [gRnd,nRnd,bRnd];
> const output = textLists.map(item =>
> item.replace('yourword',
> yourWord).replace('myword',myWord).replace('*swap1*',
> rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2)));
> console.log(output);
> } else {
> console.log(`"${userInput}" was not found in 'keywords'`);
> }
> })(userInput);
> };
> -----
>
> Looks like I would need, with that structure, my butt-load of functions
> in one. That would not work... but I could use something similar for
> different functions. Or maybe I am missing something.
Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
> >> I saw your "swap1" and "swap2" before but did not spend the time to
> >> really look... now I get it. Thanks.
> >
> > No prob. The replace method rules here. Notice I'm not using that many
> > methods, just includes, filter and replace. Even with this newer example,
> > where I add map, if you remove the data there isn't much to look at. Also
> > note I use a template string in the console.log(), another handy thing to
> > (among other things) avoid concatenation headaches.
>
> Might be easier, for me, to have the "common" swaps done as you say (the
> word "myword" is pretty clear... but NOT use "swap1" and "swap2".
Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
anime = {
keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
good: ["I love %yourword%"],
neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
}
Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
this is a good way to structure the data. BYW, don't ever do a
ton of stuff until you test it with a subset of data ;)
> Not sure how I would do that inline in JavaScript but I am sure it can
> be done. :)
This isn't for a browser so that's not a consideration, nor is the DOM.
> In any case, sincerely appreciate your help on this. I am not likely to
> actually convert the bot (lots of time and I do not even know where I
> would run it... in a one-on-one chat it does not do well, it is designed
> for a room).
If you ever do a node server is a good candidate as it'll handle lots
of concurrent connections:
<https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 12:01 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <696bb339-6452-47ff-abd6-cb143f0c38a7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455007 |
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 12:56:28 PM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > Might be easier, for me, to have the "common" swaps done as you say (the
> > word "myword" is pretty clear... but NOT use "swap1" and "swap2".
>
> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
>
> anime = {
> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
>
> }
I hit the spacebar and it posted! After that comma (which should
not be there if it's the last property) I intended to add a function:
anime = {
keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
good: ["I love %yourword%"],
neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
myFunc: function(some_parameter) {
// some specialized (to this object) function
// that does work that may be needed here
}
} ;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 14:31 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fodgpgFon9fU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455008 |
On 6/13/18 12:01 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 12:56:28 PM UTC-6, Steve Carroll wrote:
>
>>> Might be easier, for me, to have the "common" swaps done as you say (the
>>> word "myword" is pretty clear... but NOT use "swap1" and "swap2".
>>
>> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
>> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
>>
>> anime = {
>> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
>> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
>> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
>> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
>> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
>> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
>>
>> }
>
> I hit the spacebar and it posted! After that comma (which should
> not be there if it's the last property) I intended to add a function:
>
> anime = {
> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
> myFunc: function(some_parameter) {
> // some specialized (to this object) function
> // that does work that may be needed here
> }
> } ;
>
Fair enough.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-13 14:30 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fodgnvFon9fU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455007 |
On 6/13/18 11:56 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 11:45:08 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>> On 6/13/18 9:27 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:55:57 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>
>>>>>> How would you handle something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> some item in {"foo foo", "foo " & some item in {"bar", "blah"}}
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd ask why you have it nested when they're just text strings.
>>>>
>>>> So that "foo foo" happens 50% of the time and "foo bar" and "foo blah"
>>>> happen less often. This is good for longer strings to give them
>>>> variability.
>>>
>>> I would think the highest number of phrases you could get your hands
>>> on, coupled with adding typos and delaying text, would be the best way
>>> of providing the highest degree of realism. Many of the lines can have
>>> very tiny changes in the text and, in essence, provide a form of weighting
>>> without the expense in the code, plus you get the added benefit of even
>>> greater variation.
>>
>> Certain phrases are OK to repeat more than others. For example, it is
>> fine to have "LOL" show up a fair amount but to have "I find your
>> comment to lack substantial humor" would not be good to show up often.
>
> I was thinking more along the lines having lots of minute variations that
> all keep to a certain 'tone' (preferably more 'human-like'). Even LOL!, if
> used too often, can give it away, so... LOL! LOl! lol... lol! Lol!, Haha, Yuk,
> etc.
Sure... you do not want to use any phrase too often, but some are OK to
repeat more often than others. A joke, for example, gets old.
>>> I'm not even gonna look... I just want to know if the bot's functions
>>> are drastically different from one another.
>>
>> Depends on how you rate "drastically" but they are quite different. For
>> example, "doMath" has to convert written numbers to numbers it can do
>> math with, and then decide if the math is too hard for a human to do
>> quickly in their head (with some randomization as to that to decide if
>> the bot "feels" like it). It also looks to make sure that the "/" or "-"
>> symbol is being used in some other way, such as in "9/11", "9-11",
>> "24/7", etc.
>
> Where does this get called from and how often is it likely to be?
People who were testing to see if the bot was a bot would sometimes ask
a question about math. I tried to get it to give a "human-like"
response. From memory it worked reasonably well. Also took more time on
that than most functions.
This was over a decade ago so I cannot be specific with how often it
came up, though I could do a search though the logs (at least the ones
where I log what function was invoked).
>> In short, the logic of that function is quite different than the ones we
>> have looked at.
>
> But aren't the vast majority of them like those? How many are not and
> how and when are they called?
>
>> With things like osText, if your "reaction" score is low it is more
>> likely to say an OS you seem to like is bad, and one you seem to dislike
>> is good. It is more agreeable if your "reaction" score is higher. It
>> also has quite a few things like:
>>
>> "is it hard to " & some item in {"pirate", "play games", "watch
>> movies", "hack", "clone people", "get software"} & " on " & yourword
>>
>> Which any on of those options should come up a lot less than:
>>
>> "who made " & yourword
>>
>> And it also has:
>>
>> "they will completely change computers in " & (random number from 5
>> to 15) & " years"
>>
>> For that, though, you would just need to send the swap function the
>> random number (as text?)
>
> You can just run 'rnd', it can be rewritten to facilitate a min and a max.
> I'd decouple it from '* array.length' and just make that a parameter.
Not sure what you mean by decoupling from '* array.length". I mean I get
that is the length of the array, but not how it ties to the rnd function.
>>> If they are, you have a
>>> lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;)
>>
>> Good description of the bot!
>
> How many functions are there that differ from 'animetext' and
> how many are like it?
Depends on how you rate "like it" but most are fairly similar to it.
Others do not have the "reaction" variable passed, and others do have a
"mentionMe" variable passed, but these are not that big of differences.
>>> The example I gave you is just that,
>>> it can and should be refactored (see all the calls to replace?). The data
>>> is better off living outside of the processing function. What I showed
>>> you is a first step towards organizing, here's another:
>>>
>>> <https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
>>>
>>> Note the use of 'map' and think of others places it might be used.
>>>
>>> (I'm not leaving that up there indefinitely so if you're interested, grab it)
>>
>> For posterity:
>>
>> -----
>> const getResponse = function(userInput) {
>> 'use strict';
>> // data sets
>> const keywords = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira",
>> "bubblegum crisis", "card captor sakura", "chobits", "cowboy bebop",
>> "dragon half", "dragon ball", "dragon ball gt", "escaflowne", "gundam",
>> "gunsmithcats", "hacksign", " lain ", "ninja resurrection", "ninja
>> scroll", "outlaw star", "perfect blue", "robotech", "sailor moon",
>> "techi muyo", "tenchi in tokyo", "tenchi in space", "vampire hunter d",
>> "Bubble Gum Crisis"];
>> const good = ["I like the amount of *swap1* yourword has, but I
>> prefer the *swap2* in myword","I like yourword, ", " ANIME!, ", " I
>> don't think that there is anything better than yourword, ", " I love
>> yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of work yourword must have taken"]
>> const neutral = ["yourword has quality animation, but myword has
>> better drawn figures, ", " myword has better still imagery in their
>> animation, yourword has better animation., ", " the animator's put in
>> large amounts of time in yourword's work., ", " yourword is not as
>> mature as myword, ", " I don't really like anime, but I have my few
>> favorites, ", " I don't watch as much anime as I used to but I still
>> like myword, ", " subtitled is better than dubbed anime, because dubbing
>> takes it away from it's purest form."]
>> const bad = ["I hate yourword, ", " ANIME SUCKS!, ", "I don't think
>> that there is anything worse than yourword, ", " anime is OK for little
>> kids, ", " yourword is all the rage in the prepubescent crowd, ", " I
>> can't stand yourword, ", " I can't imagine the amount of wasted time
>> yourword has taken"];
>> const swap1 = ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"];
>> const swap2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"];
>>
>> // utility functions
>> const rnd = array => array[Math.floor(Math.random() * array.length)];
>>
>> const generateResponse = (function(userInput) {
>> if(keywords.includes(userInput)) {
>> const myWord = rnd(keywords);
>> const filteredList = keywords.filter(item => item !== myWord);
>> const yourWord = rnd(filteredList);
>> const gRnd = rnd(good);
>> const nRnd = rnd(neutral);
>> const bRnd = rnd(bad);
>> const textLists = [gRnd,nRnd,bRnd];
>> const output = textLists.map(item =>
>> item.replace('yourword',
>> yourWord).replace('myword',myWord).replace('*swap1*',
>> rnd(swap1)).replace('*swap2*',rnd(swap2)));
>> console.log(output);
>> } else {
>> console.log(`"${userInput}" was not found in 'keywords'`);
>> }
>> })(userInput);
>> };
>> -----
>>
>> Looks like I would need, with that structure, my butt-load of functions
>> in one. That would not work... but I could use something similar for
>> different functions. Or maybe I am missing something.
>
> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
Will try later... thanks.
> Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
That alone would... but would not want to have a bunch of
"sub-functions" in one function.
>>>> I saw your "swap1" and "swap2" before but did not spend the time to
>>>> really look... now I get it. Thanks.
>>>
>>> No prob. The replace method rules here. Notice I'm not using that many
>>> methods, just includes, filter and replace. Even with this newer example,
>>> where I add map, if you remove the data there isn't much to look at. Also
>>> note I use a template string in the console.log(), another handy thing to
>>> (among other things) avoid concatenation headaches.
>>
>> Might be easier, for me, to have the "common" swaps done as you say (the
>> word "myword" is pretty clear... but NOT use "swap1" and "swap2".
>
> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
>
> anime = {
> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
>
> }
>
> Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
> this is a good way to structure the data.
With the added swaps not sure I see the benefit of just doing it inline.
Would have to figure out how to do that in JavaScript but I am sure it
is not hard.
And ALL of this is hypothetical... not sure I will ever even try it.
> BYW, don't ever do a
> ton of stuff until you test it with a subset of data ;)
Of course not! And before I would do this I would want to know where it
would be running and make sure I have the I/O for that. My AIM bot
actually started as a way to auto-kill bots... and then, well, it became
one. :)
>> Not sure how I would do that inline in JavaScript but I am sure it can
>> be done. :)
>
> This isn't for a browser so that's not a consideration, nor is the DOM.
I mean inline in the text selection. Something like my AppleScript:
set foo to some item in {"bar", "blah " & some item in {"blah",
"moo"}}
>> In any case, sincerely appreciate your help on this. I am not likely to
>> actually convert the bot (lots of time and I do not even know where I
>> would run it... in a one-on-one chat it does not do well, it is designed
>> for a room).
>
> If you ever do a node server is a good candidate as it'll handle lots
> of concurrent connections:
>
> <https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
Do you mean if I hosted this on my own server? If so that is not likely
to ever happen. :)
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-14 09:33 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <56d63d5b-2ec6-4883-9d73-5a900d60669b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455015 |
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 3:30:42 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
(snip)
> This was over a decade ago so I cannot be specific with how often it
> came up, though I could do a search though the logs (at least the ones
> where I log what function was invoked).
From a conversion perspective, the main point is it's not an integral part
of the basic functionality.
> > You can just run 'rnd', it can be rewritten to facilitate a min and a max.
> > I'd decouple it from '* array.length' and just make that a parameter.
>
> Not sure what you mean by decoupling from '* array.length". I mean I get
> that is the length of the array, but not how it ties to the rnd function.
Even a dynamic array reference doesn't need to be in this function.
> >>> If they are, you have a
> >>> lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;)
> >>
> >> Good description of the bot!
> >
> > How many functions are there that differ from 'animetext' and
> > how many are like it?
>
> Depends on how you rate "like it" but most are fairly similar to it.
I thought so... and that'd make things *much* easier.
> Others do not have the "reaction" variable passed, and others do have a
> "mentionMe" variable passed, but these are not that big of differences.
Regarding the "isaText" function:
Where is "mentionedMe" assigned a value? And why is "reaction"
being passed in (and out) when you're not using it in this function
(and you're also doing that with "animeText")?
> > Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
> > Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
> > variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
> > so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
>
> Will try later... thanks.
(if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
> > Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
>
> That alone would... but would not want to have a bunch of
> "sub-functions" in one function.
Why not? Most of the JS you've ever used is written like this.
> > Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
> > But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
> >
> > anime = {
> > keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
> > good: ["I love %yourword%"],
> > neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
> > bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
> > variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
> > variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
> >
> > }
> >
> > Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
> > this is a good way to structure the data.
The newer version on the Gist shows a funky (contrived) example
of using that method in the'anime' object that you might like, and
it fixes the typo this one has: "variation2 =..."
> With the added swaps not sure I see the benefit of just doing it inline.
> Would have to figure out how to do that in JavaScript but I am sure it
> is not hard.
>
> And ALL of this is hypothetical... not sure I will ever even try it.
Yeah...I got it. I'm not trying to make you feel obligated, just talking tech.
> > BYW, don't ever do a
> > ton of stuff until you test it with a subset of data ;)
>
> Of course not! And before I would do this I would want to know where it
> would be running and make sure I have the I/O for that. My AIM bot
> actually started as a way to auto-kill bots... and then, well, it became
> one. :)
That's a leap.
> > <https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
>
> Do you mean if I hosted this on my own server? If so that is not likely
> to ever happen. :)
I was thinking one of the free node servers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-14 11:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <fofs5gF7t26U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455065 |
On 6/14/18 9:33 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 3:30:42 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> (snip)
>
>> This was over a decade ago so I cannot be specific with how often it
>> came up, though I could do a search though the logs (at least the ones
>> where I log what function was invoked).
>
> From a conversion perspective, the main point is it's not an integral part
> of the basic functionality.
Right. There are some of the "topics" that would have to be more hand
crafted, if you will, but many of the basics are the same.
>>> You can just run 'rnd', it can be rewritten to facilitate a min and a max.
>>> I'd decouple it from '* array.length' and just make that a parameter.
>>
>> Not sure what you mean by decoupling from '* array.length". I mean I get
>> that is the length of the array, but not how it ties to the rnd function.
>
> Even a dynamic array reference doesn't need to be in this function.
Got it. I think. :)
>>>>> If they are, you have a
>>>>> lovingly, hand crafted nightmare ;)
>>>>
>>>> Good description of the bot!
>>>
>>> How many functions are there that differ from 'animetext' and
>>> how many are like it?
>>
>> Depends on how you rate "like it" but most are fairly similar to it.
>
> I thought so... and that'd make things *much* easier.
Agreed.
>> Others do not have the "reaction" variable passed, and others do have a
>> "mentionMe" variable passed, but these are not that big of differences.
>
> Regarding the "isaText" function:
> Where is "mentionedMe" assigned a value? And why is "reaction"
> being passed in (and out) when you're not using it in this function
> (and you're also doing that with "animeText")?
Most of the time "reaction" is passed is because of calling "makereply":
-----
on makeReply(good, neutral, bad, mood)
if mood > 10 then -- 10 or higher = super great
set theList to good as list
else if mood > 8 then -- 8 to 10 = great
set theList to {good, good, good, neutral} as list
else if mood > 2 then -- 2 to 8 = good
set theList to {good, neutral} as list
else if mood > -2 then -- -2 to 2 = OK
set theList to neutral as list
else if mood > -8 then -- -8 to -2 = bad
set theList to {bad, neutral} as list
else if mood > -10 then -- -8 to -10 = horrid
set theList to {bad, bad, bad, neutral} as list
else -- -10 or lower = super horrid
set theList to bad as list
end if
return some item in theList as string
end makeReply
-----
There are times it is passed without that -- I am sure that was from my
copying and pasting other functions and just forgetting to remove it.
I see I passed "reaction" to makeReply as "mood" -- I am guessing
because "reaction" is global"? Still it does not change the value so
that does not really make sense. I only use "setreaction", it seems,
when "meText" is used (when I think someone is mentioning the bot).
Would have to dig through to understand my thinking from back then.
Could be I could have just used the global "reaction".
>>> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
>>> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
>>> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
>>> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
>>
>> Will try later... thanks.
>
> (if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
Yes, I saw that. Thanks.
>>> Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
>>
>> That alone would... but would not want to have a bunch of
>> "sub-functions" in one function.
>
> Why not? Most of the JS you've ever used is written like this.
What I had was a structure like this:
createText
call meText
call hateText
call godText
call beliefText
call fromText
...
end
It was more complex than that but you get the idea. From what I
understand of your script (and I could be wrong) you had something like
my createText (called getResponse) and then had the swaps and the like
in that. Since each of those sub-functions has different "myWord" and
"yourWord" and other things to swap that would not work unless you had a
BUNCH of swaps and then you have things that to me logically fit in
those functions being pulled from them. The function, I would think,
should return the full response.
I also see I had error checking to fix "a" and "an" mistakes. Would have
to check the code but I think the "Response" always assumed "a". There
is also a function to fix double spaces... maybe from my replace I was
doing that? I do not recall.
As a side note to that... the full response CAN be changed after that...
the code did add occasional typos (with option corrections in a separate
post) or made it so longer lines were split between two posts. Looking
at my "makeTypo" function I have double-typing of characters more common
than adding some additional one, and when one is added it is not an
uncommon character so it looks more natural. I suppose I could have had
replacements for any give character to look like a key one-away was
pressed, but I did not. If someone is looking THAT closely at the
replies I bet they would already know it was a bot. :)
I really should have added more comments to my code. :)
>>> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
>>> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
>>>
>>> anime = {
>>> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
>>> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
>>> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
>>> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
>>> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
>>> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
>>> this is a good way to structure the data.
>
> The newer version on the Gist shows a funky (contrived) example
> of using that method in the'anime' object that you might like, and
> it fixes the typo this one has: "variation2 =..."
The code here:
<https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
Would have to dig through that a bit to really understand. Seems all of
that should be in one function (what I called "animeText") and not just
in "getResponse"... and I am not sure I get the "variation1" etc. Are
you doing something similar to my "some item in" within the lines of text?
>> With the added swaps not sure I see the benefit of just doing it inline.
>> Would have to figure out how to do that in JavaScript but I am sure it
>> is not hard.
>>
>> And ALL of this is hypothetical... not sure I will ever even try it.
>
> Yeah...I got it. I'm not trying to make you feel obligated, just talking tech.
Fair enough. Seriously, I think this is the best conversation I have
ever had with you. I like it.
>>> BYW, don't ever do a
>>> ton of stuff until you test it with a subset of data ;)
>>
>> Of course not! And before I would do this I would want to know where it
>> would be running and make sure I have the I/O for that. My AIM bot
>> actually started as a way to auto-kill bots... and then, well, it became
>> one. :)
>
> That's a leap.
Started with killing known bots and "people" who posted in a bot-like
way... those who pushed links in every comment or the like. Then, I
think, I added the reaction code for the bots that sort of tried. Talked
to this with others and they wanted to know what accounts were being
blocked -- so I added code to respond noting "I just blocked so-and-so".
That was all under my standard account (I think "Snit"). Then decided to
do not on replying and it grow.
That is all from memory from the late 1990s so I am sure I am a bit off
but it was something like that.
>>> <https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
>>
>> Do you mean if I hosted this on my own server? If so that is not likely
>> to ever happen. :)
>
> I was thinking one of the free node servers.
Still would be one-on-one if I understand correctly (or, really, as many
as I could pull in but likely just one-on-one most times).
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-14 14:39 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <3584c8ff-4279-4cf8-a24a-9a00f15352ae@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455073 |
On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 12:57:56 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> > Even a dynamic array reference doesn't need to be in this function.
>
> Got it. I think. :)
This might clear it up a but more...
let rangedRandomNumGenerator = function(min, max) {
// The random method "returns a floating-point, pseudo-random number in the range 0–1 (inclusive of 0, but not 1)"
let randomDecimal = Math.random();
// The floor method "returns the largest integer less than or equal to a given number"
let randomInterval = Math.floor(randomDecimal * 100);
// Create an interval within a range using the min and max parameters
let rangedInterval = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1)) + min;
// log it out
console.log(`
Decimal: ${randomDecimal},
Interval: ${randomInterval},
Ranged interval: ${rangedInterval}
`);
};
rangedRandomNumGenerator();
rangedRandomNumGenerator(10,20);
rangedRandomNumGenerator(12,16);
rangedRandomNumGenerator(1,100);
rangedRandomNumGenerator(500,600);
Note: No mention of any data structures (arrays, objects, etc.)
> > Regarding the "isaText" function:
> > Where is "mentionedMe" assigned a value? And why is "reaction"
> > being passed in (and out) when you're not using it in this function
> > (and you're also doing that with "animeText")?
>
> Most of the time "reaction" is passed is because of calling "makereply":
> -----
> on makeReply(good, neutral, bad, mood)
> if mood > 10 then -- 10 or higher = super great
> set theList to good as list
> else if mood > 8 then -- 8 to 10 = great
> set theList to {good, good, good, neutral} as list
> else if mood > 2 then -- 2 to 8 = good
> set theList to {good, neutral} as list
> else if mood > -2 then -- -2 to 2 = OK
> set theList to neutral as list
> else if mood > -8 then -- -8 to -2 = bad
> set theList to {bad, neutral} as list
> else if mood > -10 then -- -8 to -10 = horrid
> set theList to {bad, bad, bad, neutral} as list
> else -- -10 or lower = super horrid
> set theList to bad as list
> end if
> return some item in theList as string
> end makeReply
> -----
I'd have to see how it all works together... but I think my head
would explode half way through.
> There are times it is passed without that -- I am sure that was from my
> copying and pasting other functions and just forgetting to remove it.
>
> I see I passed "reaction" to makeReply as "mood" -- I am guessing
> because "reaction" is global"? Still it does not change the value so
> that does not really make sense. I only use "setreaction", it seems,
> when "meText" is used (when I think someone is mentioning the bot).
> Would have to dig through to understand my thinking from back then.
> Could be I could have just used the global "reaction".
If you do what I suggest it's *way* easier to see what's going on.
That alone is worth the price of admission in my mind.
> >>> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
> >>> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
> >>> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
> >>> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
> >>
> >> Will try later... thanks.
> >
> > (if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
>
> Yes, I saw that. Thanks.
You should be able to see how that can provide some of the things
you might be looking to do with certain data sets while keeping
things organized.
> >>> Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
> >>
> >> That alone would... but would not want to have a bunch of
> >> "sub-functions" in one function.
> >
> > Why not? Most of the JS you've ever used is written like this.
>
> What I had was a structure like this:
>
> createText
> call meText
> call hateText
> call godText
> call beliefText
> call fromText
> ...
> end
>
> It was more complex than that but you get the idea. From what I
> understand of your script (and I could be wrong) you had something like
> my createText (called getResponse) and then had the swaps and the like
> in that.
I shouldn't have used that name because it's confusing... sorry.
That function is just a container for a quick demo, nothing more.
> Since each of those sub-functions has different "myWord" and
> "yourWord" and other things to swap that would not work unless you had a
> BUNCH of swaps and then you have things that to me logically fit in
> those functions being pulled from them. The function, I would think,
> should return the full response.
Realize that I'm not recommending anything more than ways to
organize; and I'm not demonstrating anything more than a simple
form of it. It'd be up to you as to how to architect all your various
parts but I think you may not be looking at the bigger picture here,
consider the following...
const anime = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira"];
const isa = [" is a ", " have a ", " want a ", "where is a "];
const baseball = ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"];
const dataSetNames = [anime, isa, baseball];
const userInput = "shortstop";
let keywords = [];
dataSetNames.map(dataSet => dataSet.map(word => word === userInput ? keywords = dataSet : console.log('keywords not set')));
Paste that into Chrome, hit return, type 'keywords' and return again.
What just happened? Being that 'keywords' *could* be an object,
like the one at the bottom of that Gist, all the props are available to
the "generateResponse" func (note: this is merely one way to do it).
> I also see I had error checking to fix "a" and "an" mistakes. Would have
> to check the code but I think the "Response" always assumed "a". There
> is also a function to fix double spaces... maybe from my replace I was
> doing that? I do not recall.
>
> As a side note to that... the full response CAN be changed after that...
> the code did add occasional typos (with option corrections in a separate
> post) or made it so longer lines were split between two posts. Looking
> at my "makeTypo" function I have double-typing of characters more common
> than adding some additional one, and when one is added it is not an
> uncommon character so it looks more natural. I suppose I could have had
> replacements for any give character to look like a key one-away was
> pressed, but I did not. If someone is looking THAT closely at the
> replies I bet they would already know it was a bot. :)
>
> I really should have added more comments to my code. :)
When I do it more seriously, as opposed to a quick demo, I try to
name things in a way where I won't need as many.
> >>> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
> >>> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
> >>>
> >>> anime = {
> >>> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
> >>> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
> >>> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
> >>> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
> >>> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
> >>> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
> >>>
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
> >>> this is a good way to structure the data.
> >
> > The newer version on the Gist shows a funky (contrived) example
> > of using that method in the'anime' object that you might like, and
> > it fixes the typo this one has: "variation2 =..."
>
> The code here:
>
> <https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
>
> Would have to dig through that a bit to really understand. Seems all of
> that should be in one function (what I called "animeText") and not just
> in "getResponse"... and I am not sure I get the "variation1" etc.
Forget the names I used, think about the concepts/structure.
> Are
> you doing something similar to my "some item in" within the lines of text?
I assume 'some item in' randomly picks an item in that structure; if so,
calling my 'rnd' function on an array does the same.
> >> With the added swaps not sure I see the benefit of just doing it inline.
> >> Would have to figure out how to do that in JavaScript but I am sure it
> >> is not hard.
> >>
> >> And ALL of this is hypothetical... not sure I will ever even try it.
> >
> > Yeah...I got it. I'm not trying to make you feel obligated, just talking tech.
>
> Fair enough. Seriously, I think this is the best conversation I have
> ever had with you. I like it.
Beats picking fly sh*t outta pepper with boxing gloves on...
> >> My AIM bot actually started as a way to auto-kill bots... and
> >> then, well, it became one. :)
> >
> > That's a leap.
>
> Started with killing known bots and "people" who posted in a bot-like
> way... those who pushed links in every comment or the like. Then, I
> think, I added the reaction code for the bots that sort of tried. Talked
> to this with others and they wanted to know what accounts were being
> blocked -- so I added code to respond noting "I just blocked so-and-so".
> That was all under my standard account (I think "Snit"). Then decided to
> do not on replying and it grow.
>
> That is all from memory from the late 1990s so I am sure I am a bit off
> but it was something like that.
>
> >>> <https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
> >>
> >> Do you mean if I hosted this on my own server? If so that is not likely
> >> to ever happen. :)
> >
> > I was thinking one of the free node servers.
>
> Still would be one-on-one if I understand correctly (or, really, as many
> as I could pull in but likely just one-on-one most times).
That depends on if people know about it. Node.js can even be used
for multiplayer, online games. Here's info on one of the earlier ones:
<https://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/03/browserquest/>
An that old game is still up:
<http://browserquest.mozilla.org>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-14 22:10 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <foh023Fe1f9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455081 |
On 6/14/18 2:39 PM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 12:57:56 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>
>>> Even a dynamic array reference doesn't need to be in this function.
>>
>> Got it. I think. :)
>
> This might clear it up a but more...
>
> let rangedRandomNumGenerator = function(min, max) {
> // The random method "returns a floating-point, pseudo-random number in the range 0–1 (inclusive of 0, but not 1)"
> let randomDecimal = Math.random();
>
> // The floor method "returns the largest integer less than or equal to a given number"
> let randomInterval = Math.floor(randomDecimal * 100);
>
> // Create an interval within a range using the min and max parameters
> let rangedInterval = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1)) + min;
>
> // log it out
> console.log(`
> Decimal: ${randomDecimal},
> Interval: ${randomInterval},
> Ranged interval: ${rangedInterval}
> `);
> };
> rangedRandomNumGenerator();
> rangedRandomNumGenerator(10,20);
> rangedRandomNumGenerator(12,16);
> rangedRandomNumGenerator(1,100);
> rangedRandomNumGenerator(500,600);
>
> Note: No mention of any data structures (arrays, objects, etc.)
Got it.
>>> Regarding the "isaText" function:
>>> Where is "mentionedMe" assigned a value? And why is "reaction"
>>> being passed in (and out) when you're not using it in this function
>>> (and you're also doing that with "animeText")?
>>
>> Most of the time "reaction" is passed is because of calling "makereply":
>> -----
>> on makeReply(good, neutral, bad, mood)
>> if mood > 10 then -- 10 or higher = super great
>> set theList to good as list
>> else if mood > 8 then -- 8 to 10 = great
>> set theList to {good, good, good, neutral} as list
>> else if mood > 2 then -- 2 to 8 = good
>> set theList to {good, neutral} as list
>> else if mood > -2 then -- -2 to 2 = OK
>> set theList to neutral as list
>> else if mood > -8 then -- -8 to -2 = bad
>> set theList to {bad, neutral} as list
>> else if mood > -10 then -- -8 to -10 = horrid
>> set theList to {bad, bad, bad, neutral} as list
>> else -- -10 or lower = super horrid
>> set theList to bad as list
>> end if
>> return some item in theList as string
>> end makeReply
>> -----
>
> I'd have to see how it all works together... but I think my head
> would explode half way through.
I am the one who wrote it and I admit it would take me some time to
reconstruct. And it was made piecemeal over time with no pre-planning
and no idea it would become as big and complex.
Given that it worked amazingly well for the (eventual) purpose.
>> There are times it is passed without that -- I am sure that was from my
>> copying and pasting other functions and just forgetting to remove it.
>>
>> I see I passed "reaction" to makeReply as "mood" -- I am guessing
>> because "reaction" is global"? Still it does not change the value so
>> that does not really make sense. I only use "setreaction", it seems,
>> when "meText" is used (when I think someone is mentioning the bot).
>> Would have to dig through to understand my thinking from back then.
>> Could be I could have just used the global "reaction".
>
> If you do what I suggest it's *way* easier to see what's going on.
> That alone is worth the price of admission in my mind.
You mean with doing the swapping after?
>>>>> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
>>>>> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
>>>>> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
>>>>> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
>>>>
>>>> Will try later... thanks.
>>>
>>> (if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
>>
>> Yes, I saw that. Thanks.
>
> You should be able to see how that can provide some of the things
> you might be looking to do with certain data sets while keeping
> things organized.
That is basically what mine does... though the "getResponse" is a
specific response based on the text of the message.
>>>>> Why wouldn't yours work inside of a parent function?
>>>>
>>>> That alone would... but would not want to have a bunch of
>>>> "sub-functions" in one function.
>>>
>>> Why not? Most of the JS you've ever used is written like this.
>>
>> What I had was a structure like this:
>>
>> createText
>> call meText
>> call hateText
>> call godText
>> call beliefText
>> call fromText
>> ...
>> end
>>
>> It was more complex than that but you get the idea. From what I
>> understand of your script (and I could be wrong) you had something like
>> my createText (called getResponse) and then had the swaps and the like
>> in that.
>
> I shouldn't have used that name because it's confusing... sorry.
> That function is just a container for a quick demo, nothing more.
At first I thought you were saying that would be for all the responses
-- hence why I was saying I did not want all the sub-functions there.
Got it now.
Well, I think I do. :)
>> Since each of those sub-functions has different "myWord" and
>> "yourWord" and other things to swap that would not work unless you had a
>> BUNCH of swaps and then you have things that to me logically fit in
>> those functions being pulled from them. The function, I would think,
>> should return the full response.
>
> Realize that I'm not recommending anything more than ways to
> organize; and I'm not demonstrating anything more than a simple
> form of it. It'd be up to you as to how to architect all your various
> parts but I think you may not be looking at the bigger picture here,
> consider the following...
>
> const anime = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira"];
> const isa = [" is a ", " have a ", " want a ", "where is a "];
> const baseball = ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"];
> const dataSetNames = [anime, isa, baseball];
> const userInput = "shortstop";
> let keywords = [];
> dataSetNames.map(dataSet => dataSet.map(word => word === userInput ? keywords = dataSet : console.log('keywords not set')));
>
> Paste that into Chrome, hit return, type 'keywords' and return again.
> What just happened? Being that 'keywords' *could* be an object,
> like the one at the bottom of that Gist, all the props are available to
> the "generateResponse" func (note: this is merely one way to do it).
OK, got that to work. :)
Went to about:blank and then Developer > JavaScript Console. Is there a
better way?
>> I also see I had error checking to fix "a" and "an" mistakes. Would have
>> to check the code but I think the "Response" always assumed "a". There
>> is also a function to fix double spaces... maybe from my replace I was
>> doing that? I do not recall.
>>
>> As a side note to that... the full response CAN be changed after that...
>> the code did add occasional typos (with option corrections in a separate
>> post) or made it so longer lines were split between two posts. Looking
>> at my "makeTypo" function I have double-typing of characters more common
>> than adding some additional one, and when one is added it is not an
>> uncommon character so it looks more natural. I suppose I could have had
>> replacements for any give character to look like a key one-away was
>> pressed, but I did not. If someone is looking THAT closely at the
>> replies I bet they would already know it was a bot. :)
>>
>> I really should have added more comments to my code. :)
>
> When I do it more seriously, as opposed to a quick demo, I try to
> name things in a way where I won't need as many.
I certainly get that concept... and did an OK job but surely could have
done better. For example, "mood" is confusing to me.
>>>>> Like I suggested, you can name them in a way that facilitates your data.
>>>>> But it seems it would be better to just map over the data sets:
>>>>>
>>>>> anime = {
>>>>> keywords: ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke"],
>>>>> good: ["I love %yourword%"],
>>>>> neutral: ["I don't really like anime, but I do like %myword%"],
>>>>> bad: ["ANIME SUCKS!"],
>>>>> variation1: ["action", "violence", "plot twists", "intrigue"],
>>>>> variation2 = ["dialog", "art", "music", "subtlety"],
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> Being that each object will have their own variations (swaps),
>>>>> this is a good way to structure the data.
>>>
>>> The newer version on the Gist shows a funky (contrived) example
>>> of using that method in the'anime' object that you might like, and
>>> it fixes the typo this one has: "variation2 =..."
>>
>> The code here:
>>
>> <https://gist.github.com/SteveCarroll/6355711ff9f35547ee0926b8f61659ab>
>>
>> Would have to dig through that a bit to really understand. Seems all of
>> that should be in one function (what I called "animeText") and not just
>> in "getResponse"... and I am not sure I get the "variation1" etc.
>
> Forget the names I used, think about the concepts/structure.
Fair enough... though was making sure I understood the scope of what
that is. Just one "topic".
>> Are
>> you doing something similar to my "some item in" within the lines of text?
>
> I assume 'some item in' randomly picks an item in that structure; if so,
> calling my 'rnd' function on an array does the same.
Got it. But you are doing outside of the text... for some things this
fits my brain (the user name for example). But "off cases" though, to me
it seems it is better inline.
>>>> With the added swaps not sure I see the benefit of just doing it inline.
>>>> Would have to figure out how to do that in JavaScript but I am sure it
>>>> is not hard.
>>>>
>>>> And ALL of this is hypothetical... not sure I will ever even try it.
>>>
>>> Yeah...I got it. I'm not trying to make you feel obligated, just talking tech.
>>
>> Fair enough. Seriously, I think this is the best conversation I have
>> ever had with you. I like it.
>
> Beats picking fly sh*t outta pepper with boxing gloves on...
Oy.
>>>> My AIM bot actually started as a way to auto-kill bots... and
>>>> then, well, it became one. :)
>>>
>>> That's a leap.
>>
>> Started with killing known bots and "people" who posted in a bot-like
>> way... those who pushed links in every comment or the like. Then, I
>> think, I added the reaction code for the bots that sort of tried. Talked
>> to this with others and they wanted to know what accounts were being
>> blocked -- so I added code to respond noting "I just blocked so-and-so".
>> That was all under my standard account (I think "Snit"). Then decided to
>> do not on replying and it grow.
>>
>> That is all from memory from the late 1990s so I am sure I am a bit off
>> but it was something like that.
>>
>>>>> <https://blog.jayway.com/2015/04/13/600k-concurrent-websocket-connections-on-aws-using-node-js/>
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean if I hosted this on my own server? If so that is not likely
>>>> to ever happen. :)
>>>
>>> I was thinking one of the free node servers.
>>
>> Still would be one-on-one if I understand correctly (or, really, as many
>> as I could pull in but likely just one-on-one most times).
>
> That depends on if people know about it. Node.js can even be used
> for multiplayer, online games. Here's info on one of the earlier ones:
> <https://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/03/browserquest/>
>
> An that old game is still up:
> <http://browserquest.mozilla.org>
I am not really interested in starting a community just to see if my bot
can "fool" them... even hypothetically. :)
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-15 09:59 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <317fc3c2-dd0a-4d7d-aae0-13742c47566d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455093 |
On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 11:10:31 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> > If you do what I suggest it's *way* easier to see what's going on.
> > That alone is worth the price of admission in my mind.
>
> You mean with doing the swapping after?
I'm talking about the way it's organized.
> >>>>> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
> >>>>> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
> >>>>> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
> >>>>> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Will try later... thanks.
> >>>
> >>> (if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
> >>
> >> Yes, I saw that. Thanks.
> >
> > You should be able to see how that can provide some of the things
> > you might be looking to do with certain data sets while keeping
> > things organized.
>
> That is basically what mine does... though the "getResponse" is a
> specific response based on the text of the message.
I was referring to methods that can be associated with objects and
how they can be used to create custom outputs that might fill a
variations slot or be used in some other way.
> > Realize that I'm not recommending anything more than ways to
> > organize; and I'm not demonstrating anything more than a simple
> > form of it. It'd be up to you as to how to architect all your various
> > parts but I think you may not be looking at the bigger picture here,
> > consider the following...
> >
> > const anime = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira"];
> > const isa = [" is a ", " have a ", " want a ", "where is a "];
> > const baseball = ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"];
> > const dataSetNames = [anime, isa, baseball];
> > const userInput = "shortstop";
> > let keywords = [];
> > dataSetNames.map(dataSet => dataSet.map(word => word === userInput ? keywords = dataSet : console.log('keywords not set')));
> >
> > Paste that into Chrome, hit return, type 'keywords' and return again.
> > What just happened? Being that 'keywords' *could* be an object,
> > like the one at the bottom of that Gist, all the props are available to
> > the "generateResponse" func (note: this is merely one way to do it).
>
> OK, got that to work. :)
And what happened? Describe what you see.
> Went to about:blank and then Developer > JavaScript Console. Is there a
> better way?
I guess you could use an online site like repl.it, but the browser is
already there.
> >> Are
> >> you doing something similar to my "some item in" within the lines of text?
> >
> > I assume 'some item in' randomly picks an item in that structure; if so,
> > calling my 'rnd' function on an array does the same.
>
> Got it. But you are doing outside of the text... for some things this
> fits my brain (the user name for example). But "off cases" though, to me
> it seems it is better inline.
It depends on how many variation sets you need, if hundreds, you
have a mess you can't untangle. IMO there'd be no need for more
than a few. You can add as many as you want to what I'm doing
but IMO it'd be better to structure your responses so you don't need
a ton of them. In any event, looks like we're wrapping this up so I'll
leave it with the following screencast containing funky phrases...
which is just a matter of dialing in the matches. This has 2 variation
groups and it still uses the 'yourword' and 'myword' concept, as well
as the early 'rnd' func (which works fine in this context). I've already
given you all the pieces to do this so if you're truly interested you'll
study them and piece it together.
<https://streamable.com/70szt>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-15 11:42 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <foifliFmu8vU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #455109 |
On 6/15/18 9:59 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 11:10:31 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
>
>>> If you do what I suggest it's *way* easier to see what's going on.
>>> That alone is worth the price of admission in my mind.
>>
>> You mean with doing the swapping after?
>
> I'm talking about the way it's organized.
You mean for the individual functions... like animeText?
>>>>>>> Technically, they should all live in 1 enclosure to avoid globals.
>>>>>>> Take that code and paste to Chrome, you can't type in any of the
>>>>>>> variables or constants used because they live with 'getResponse',
>>>>>>> so you can type 'getResponse' or 'getResponse()' but that's it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Will try later... thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> (if you do, paste the object I added at the bottom of the Gist, as well)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I saw that. Thanks.
>>>
>>> You should be able to see how that can provide some of the things
>>> you might be looking to do with certain data sets while keeping
>>> things organized.
>>
>> That is basically what mine does... though the "getResponse" is a
>> specific response based on the text of the message.
>
> I was referring to methods that can be associated with objects and
> how they can be used to create custom outputs that might fill a
> variations slot or be used in some other way.
This is going over my head.. but sounds like the replacement solution
you have, doing it after creating the text instead of as I create it (I
actually do some after as well).
>>> Realize that I'm not recommending anything more than ways to
>>> organize; and I'm not demonstrating anything more than a simple
>>> form of it. It'd be up to you as to how to architect all your various
>>> parts but I think you may not be looking at the bigger picture here,
>>> consider the following...
>>>
>>> const anime = ["gasaraki", "evangelion", "monoke", "akira"];
>>> const isa = [" is a ", " have a ", " want a ", "where is a "];
>>> const baseball = ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"];
>>> const dataSetNames = [anime, isa, baseball];
>>> const userInput = "shortstop";
>>> let keywords = [];
>>> dataSetNames.map(dataSet => dataSet.map(word => word === userInput ? keywords = dataSet : console.log('keywords not set')));
>>>
>>> Paste that into Chrome, hit return, type 'keywords' and return again.
>>> What just happened? Being that 'keywords' *could* be an object,
>>> like the one at the bottom of that Gist, all the props are available to
>>> the "generateResponse" func (note: this is merely one way to do it).
>>
>> OK, got that to work. :)
>
> And what happened? Describe what you see.
["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"]
>> Went to about:blank and then Developer > JavaScript Console. Is there a
>> better way?
>
> I guess you could use an online site like repl.it, but the browser is
> already there.
Fair enough
>>>> Are
>>>> you doing something similar to my "some item in" within the lines of text?
>>>
>>> I assume 'some item in' randomly picks an item in that structure; if so,
>>> calling my 'rnd' function on an array does the same.
>>
>> Got it. But you are doing outside of the text... for some things this
>> fits my brain (the user name for example). But "off cases" though, to me
>> it seems it is better inline.
>
> It depends on how many variation sets you need, if hundreds, you
> have a mess you can't untangle.
I would say dozens if not hundreds. Each function would have fewer of
course.
> IMO there'd be no need for more
> than a few.
To have lots of variations I used a lot.
> You can add as many as you want to what I'm doing
> but IMO it'd be better to structure your responses so you don't need
> a ton of them.
Part of what made it successful is having so many. For longer sentences
it did not repeat much.
> In any event, looks like we're wrapping this up so I'll
> leave it with the following screencast containing funky phrases...
> which is just a matter of dialing in the matches. This has 2 variation
> groups and it still uses the 'yourword' and 'myword' concept, as well
> as the early 'rnd' func (which works fine in this context). I've already
> given you all the pieces to do this so if you're truly interested you'll
> study them and piece it together.
Sincerely appreciate the help.
> <https://streamable.com/70szt>
Good example of the value of the "some item in" feature I have. Look at
your neutralText, you have;
My favorite position is shortstop
With swapping you could change positions easily without having it
repeatedly talking about the favorite position.
--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They
cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel
somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-15 13:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: More bot than human. |
| Message-ID | <e6434565-c3aa-4faf-8064-5f33941381e0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #455118 |
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 12:43:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> On 6/15/18 9:59 AM, Steve Carroll wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 11:10:31 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote:
> >
> >>> If you do what I suggest it's *way* easier to see what's going on.
> >>> That alone is worth the price of admission in my mind.
> >>
> >> You mean with doing the swapping after?
> >
> > I'm talking about the way it's organized.
>
> You mean for the individual functions... like animeText?
On any function that mixes things the way you are; it's *the* reason
you'd have trouble converting. If you had used a data structure like I
showed in the Gist, converting would be a lot easier, as would adding
new topics. As it is, even if you had the time, you're undoubtedly
flabbergasted by the amount of work it'd take to convert and it's based
on how you architected it. Sure, there are functions you can write to
make things easier but its a hill you wouldn't be climbing it you didn't
wing it. With some structure, your bot could've 'lived on' indefinitely....
instead, it now rests for eternity in its AppleScript casket ;)
> > I was referring to methods that can be associated with objects and
> > how they can be used to create custom outputs that might fill a
> > variations slot or be used in some other way.
>
> This is going over my head.. but sounds like the replacement solution
> you have, doing it after creating the text instead of as I create it (I
> actually do some after as well).
I wouldn't worry about this aspect.
> >> OK, got that to work. :)
> >
> > And what happened? Describe what you see.
>
> ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"]
And that comes up because, unlike the earlier example, 'keyword' is now
set by userInput. This is key to organizing things.
> > It depends on how many variation sets you need, if hundreds, you
> > have a mess you can't untangle.
>
> I would say dozens if not hundreds. Each function would have fewer of
> course.
And you may not actually need as many as you're using.
> > IMO there'd be no need for more
> > than a few.
>
> To have lots of variations I used a lot.
You can have as many as you want but it's probably a good idea to
limit how many are in a given object, but the number could probably
be quite high. The problem is it's cumbersome to deal with them the
more you add. You could even write test functions to help you gen
up sentences and associated word variations to create equally (or
more) effective responses with less variations.
> Sincerely appreciate the help.
You're welcome... and I know you probably won't convert it but it'd be
interesting to see rise from the 'dead' ;)
> > <https://streamable.com/70szt>
>
> Good example of the value of the "some item in" feature I have. Look at
> your neutralText, you have;
>
> My favorite position is shortstop
>
> With swapping you could change positions easily without having it
> repeatedly talking about the favorite position.
Here are the data sets in the baseball object:
keywords: ["shortstop", "doubleheader", "dugout", "knuckleball"],
good: ["I love a %yourword% but a %variation2% is better.", "Nothing is better than a %myword%","Baseball is the best sport by far Period!","I like how a %variation1% revs the crowd up."],
neutral: ["I don't care for baseball all the much... but I do like watching a %variation1%", "Baseball is alright when there is a %yourword%", "My favorite position is %variation2%."],
bad: ["BASEBALL SUCKS!", "Baseball is boring as hell.", "I'd rather watch paint dry then watch a baseball game."],
variation1: ["double play", "triple play", "home run", "grand slam"],
variation2: ["the catcher", "2nd base", "in the outfield", "the relief pitcher","shortstop"]
Instead of using the term 'variations', you could have them be named
after parts of speech... have some for nouns of different 'flavors', verbs,
adjectives, etc. You can go nuts but you probably don't need to if the
stuff was matched well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 39 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 39 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web