Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #266673 > unrolled thread
| Started by | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-11-09 11:31 -0500 |
| Last post | 2014-11-09 20:54 -0800 |
| Articles | 15 on this page of 55 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-09 11:31 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 09:56 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? charlescroyden3@gmail.com - 2014-11-09 09:13 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 10:18 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 09:25 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-11-09 12:39 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 10:50 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? charlescroyden3@gmail.com - 2014-11-09 09:52 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 10:58 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Jorge Dimaggio <jorgedimaggio@spammenot.org> - 2014-11-09 13:34 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2014-11-09 15:32 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 13:37 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2014-11-10 08:09 -0600
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-11-10 09:15 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-11 09:24 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-11-11 10:21 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-11 16:45 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Nobody <nobody@invalid.com> - 2014-11-09 11:55 -0600
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 10:58 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-10 10:35 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2014-11-09 11:08 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 12:22 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2014-11-09 14:42 -0600
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-11-09 19:22 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2014-11-10 06:33 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-11-10 10:47 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2014-11-10 11:07 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-10 19:40 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-10 19:33 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Silver Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2014-11-10 20:09 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2014-11-11 08:55 -0500
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 09:15 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-09 18:09 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 11:40 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 11:57 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 10:54 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-10 01:50 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 19:45 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-10 04:35 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 21:02 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-10 05:28 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 22:37 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 22:25 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 21:39 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 22:19 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 21:25 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 21:28 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-10 04:43 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 21:09 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2014-11-10 05:34 +0000
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-10 07:37 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-10 08:26 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2014-11-09 22:18 -0700
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 21:23 -0800
Re: Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform? Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2014-11-09 20:54 -0800
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-10 05:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hgue00a3.fape@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #266754 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:35:58 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: >> >> > LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter how high you are, liar. >> >> LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. > An uneducated, idiotic liar is calling me names... whatever will I do? LOL! I'm educated enough to be able to follow context and discern between typos and errors in reasoning. You, on the other hand, despite your superior alien intellect, continue your idiotic foam-out that Snit was somehow wrong to disagree with the absurd idea that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 22:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D0859D2C.410B4%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #266760 |
On 11/9/14, 10:28 PM, in article hgue00a3.fape@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:35:58 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: >>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: >>> >>>> LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter >>>> how high you are, liar. >>> >>> LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. > >> An uneducated, idiotic liar is calling me names... whatever will I do? LOL! > > I'm educated enough to be able to follow context and discern between > typos and errors in reasoning. You, on the other hand, despite your > superior alien intellect, continue your idiotic foam-out that Snit was > somehow wrong to disagree with the absurd idea that a set must contain > all the features of any of its subsets. > Hmmmm, I wonder if Carroll is willing to stand up and say Tim Adams' claims about the same topic were wrong... and not just wrong from poor wording (which I granted at first) but wrong in a repulsive and even criminal way. No... I do not wonder. I know Carroll never will. He is simply trolling. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 22:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c0785050-2ecb-42a3-8bbc-b6f1afcbe1e2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266762 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 10:37:38 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 11/9/14, 10:28 PM, in article hgue00a3.fape@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:35:58 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >>> > >>>> LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter > >>>> how high you are, liar. > >>> > >>> LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. > > > >> An uneducated, idiotic liar is calling me names... whatever will I do? LOL! > > > > I'm educated enough to be able to follow context and discern between > > typos and errors in reasoning. You, on the other hand, despite your > > superior alien intellect, continue your idiotic foam-out that Snit was > > somehow wrong to disagree with the absurd idea that a set must contain > > all the features of any of its subsets. > > > Hmmmm, I wonder if Carroll is willing to stand up and say Tim Adams' claims > about the same topic were wrong... (said Snit as he attempts to shine the light on to something that isn't relevant to his erroneous position) Tell me, given the following definition, that you provided for me when I asked: -- sex n 1. either of the two reproductive categories, male or female, of animals and plants 2. sexual intercourse 3. sexual activity or behavior leading to it 4. the genitals (literary) 5. the set of characteristics that determine whether the reproductive role of an animal or plant is male or female -- Is the following statement true or false? "Sex is a subset of sexual activities" You know who wrote it. Is it just a case of "poor wording" again, Snit? > and not just wrong from poor wording > (which I granted at first) Your defender, owl, says it's a "typo". Care to comment on this one? I didn't think so, because you know full well I can show examples of you making it clear what you recognize to be a "typo", ( even when you make them ;) > but wrong in a repulsive and even criminal way. > > No... I do not wonder. I know Carroll never will. He is simply trolling. Get your money back on your "psych degree", Snit, you really suck at it... and get a new owl, this one isn't very wise.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 21:39 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b10c3e50-3384-431f-a804-bb694e664c9e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266760 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 10:28:31 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:35:58 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >> > >> > LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter how high you are, liar. > >> > >> LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. > > > An uneducated, idiotic liar is calling me names... whatever will I do? LOL! > > I'm educated enough to be able to follow context and discern between > typos and errors in reasoning. You say this, yet, you didn't show it. What you did show is that you'll make up a bunch of BS. Snit's a lying idiot... and you're not far behind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 22:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D085990B.410AD%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #266751 |
On 11/9/14, 9:35 PM, in article ghue93.a3f@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >> LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter how >> high you are, liar. > > LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. What kind of faggot goes > on and on about a typo as if it means something. The entirety of the > post that you linked clearly shows it to be a typo. Why don't you > unleash an army of socks now. That would be about par for you, wouldn't > it, Obsesso. Jesus, I thought Snit was a rainman, but you take the > whole retard cake. > The sad thing is the debate was *years* ago, is not in any way relevant to anything being discussed now, was in a different forum, and I was clearly and unambiguously correct. Why is this even an issue now? -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 21:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a228c3df-d02f-4caf-a2b4-2127a96f3d20@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266757 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 10:20:04 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 11/9/14, 9:35 PM, in article ghue93.a3f@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > > > >> LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter how > >> high you are, liar. > > > > LOL! Of course it's a typo you dumb bitch. What kind of faggot goes > > on and on about a typo as if it means something. The entirety of the > > post that you linked clearly shows it to be a typo. Why don't you > > unleash an army of socks now. That would be about par for you, wouldn't > > it, Obsesso. Jesus, I thought Snit was a rainman, but you take the > > whole retard cake. > > > The sad thing is the debate was *years* ago, is not in any way relevant to > anything being discussed now It's relevant to you doing what your lover here just accused me of and it started with your hypocritical idiocy: "It was amazing how many in COLA could not understand the basic math" (snips more lies)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 21:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D0858D0C.410A2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #266743 |
On 11/9/14, 6:50 PM, in article bghv9.afeap3@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:09:04 AM UTC-7, owl wrote: >>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> When the median would be much more useful and revealing? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm 100% sure they do it to make Linux and its proponents look better. >>>>>> But it hides the effects of the large donations made by a few Linux >>>>>> people. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com >>>>>> >>>>>> The Numbers (around 10:40am today) >>>>>> >>>>>> Total payments: $1,110,293.65 >>>>>> Number of purchases: 149,494 >>>>>> Average purchase: $7.43 >>>>>> Average Windows: $7.08 >>>>>> Average Mac: $8.55 >>>>>> Average Linux: $10.06 >>>>>> >>>>>> The avg Linux purchase is 42% higher than the avg Windows purchase. The >>>>>> reason is because Windows gamers buy good games at $30 to $60 a pop, and >>>>>> don't have as much to spend on these crapola games - which are top >>>>>> flight games for deprived Linux victims. >>>>> >>>>> This was discussed in some detail a while back with a previous bundle. It >>>>> was amazing how many in COLA could not understand the basic math / stats. >>>>> cc >>>>> was absolutely hilarious in his ignorance about it. >>> >>>> As hilarious as this? >>> >>>> "...by definition a set MUST contain all of the features of a subset, >>>> otherwise it (the subset) wouldn't be a subset." >>> >>>> Your reply: >>> >>>> "Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within >>>> that set." >>> >>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/sN1HvpwXrK >>>> w/7nrGK5fKuwIJ >>> >>>> I don't think so ;) >>> >>> The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset >>> "red balls." > >> Which has nothing to do with what you responded to. > > I responded at the end, but my response was more directed to your > "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link, which has something to > do with incest as a subset of sex. The claim, which Snit disagreed with, > implied that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets. > That claim is false, so Snit was correct to object. Although he did > incorrectly use the term "items" instead of "features" in his objection, > that likely *typo* does not make the original claim true any more true. > That it was a typo is obvious from his entire statement, where he > goes on to reference "features," not "items": > > <quote> > Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within > that set. Even though incest is sex, not all "sex MUST include all of the > features of incest." > </quote> > Exactly right. I used an incorrect word in one of the stupid endless debates that happen in COLA and CSMA. Instead of focusing on the facts, Carroll nit-picks and plays stupid games. I openly admit the *one* sentence Carroll quoted was worded incorrectly... but by the context any reasonable person can see my point was correct. Carroll, on the other hand, defends Tim Adam's incorrect (and repulsive) claim that all sex must include all the features of incest... and did the same when Tim Adams insisted that sex and incest are, in his view, "identical" and "synonymous". Unlike Carroll, I assumed Tim Adams just misspoke and granted him that... refusing to sink to the games they used to play (and Carroll *still* is, years later!) In brief: Carroll claims I refuse to let go of things, assume the worst in people, twist words, etc. His example here, though, is a great example where I actively did not do that and granted that people make mistakes in their typing and Carroll and his co-trolls did as he accuses and he continues to for years. Carroll is a completely hypocritical, obsessive jerk who will play these games as long as he can. He is not capable of having a reasonable discussion when he has a chance to mindlessly and dishonestly attack me. -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-10 04:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <h99kgue.ty33@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #266749 |
Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 11/9/14, 6:50 PM, in article bghv9.afeap3@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:09:04 AM UTC-7, owl wrote: >>>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" >>>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> When the median would be much more useful and revealing? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm 100% sure they do it to make Linux and its proponents look better. >>>>>>> But it hides the effects of the large donations made by a few Linux >>>>>>> people. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The Numbers (around 10:40am today) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Total payments: $1,110,293.65 >>>>>>> Number of purchases: 149,494 >>>>>>> Average purchase: $7.43 >>>>>>> Average Windows: $7.08 >>>>>>> Average Mac: $8.55 >>>>>>> Average Linux: $10.06 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The avg Linux purchase is 42% higher than the avg Windows purchase. The >>>>>>> reason is because Windows gamers buy good games at $30 to $60 a pop, and >>>>>>> don't have as much to spend on these crapola games - which are top >>>>>>> flight games for deprived Linux victims. >>>>>> >>>>>> This was discussed in some detail a while back with a previous bundle. It >>>>>> was amazing how many in COLA could not understand the basic math / stats. >>>>>> cc >>>>>> was absolutely hilarious in his ignorance about it. >>>> >>>>> As hilarious as this? >>>> >>>>> "...by definition a set MUST contain all of the features of a subset, >>>>> otherwise it (the subset) wouldn't be a subset." >>>> >>>>> Your reply: >>>> >>>>> "Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within >>>>> that set." >>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/sN1HvpwXrK >>>>> w/7nrGK5fKuwIJ >>>> >>>>> I don't think so ;) >>>> >>>> The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset >>>> "red balls." >> >>> Which has nothing to do with what you responded to. >> >> I responded at the end, but my response was more directed to your >> "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link, which has something to >> do with incest as a subset of sex. The claim, which Snit disagreed with, >> implied that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets. >> That claim is false, so Snit was correct to object. Although he did >> incorrectly use the term "items" instead of "features" in his objection, >> that likely *typo* does not make the original claim true any more true. >> That it was a typo is obvious from his entire statement, where he >> goes on to reference "features," not "items": >> >> <quote> >> Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within >> that set. Even though incest is sex, not all "sex MUST include all of the >> features of incest." >> </quote> >> > Exactly right. I used an incorrect word in one of the stupid endless debates > that happen in COLA and CSMA. Instead of focusing on the facts, Carroll > nit-picks and plays stupid games. I openly admit the *one* sentence Carroll > quoted was worded incorrectly... but by the context any reasonable person > can see my point was correct. > Carroll, on the other hand, defends Tim Adam's incorrect (and repulsive) > claim that all sex must include all the features of incest... and did the > same when Tim Adams insisted that sex and incest are, in his view, > "identical" and "synonymous". Unlike Carroll, I assumed Tim Adams just > misspoke and granted him that... refusing to sink to the games they used to > play (and Carroll *still* is, years later!) > In brief: Carroll claims I refuse to let go of things, assume the worst in > people, twist words, etc. His example here, though, is a great example where > I actively did not do that and granted that people make mistakes in their > typing and Carroll and his co-trolls did as he accuses and he continues to > for years. > Carroll is a completely hypocritical, obsessive jerk who will play these > games as long as he can. He is not capable of having a reasonable discussion > when he has a chance to mindlessly and dishonestly attack me. He's a madman.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 21:09 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <07951e80-447e-40dc-b4ac-0cb0e4fe5214@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266752 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:43:32 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > He's a madman. Given Snit's posting history, that everyone is aware of, anyone who defends Snit on *any* topic is likely to be made a fool of like you were here. As I said, and just proved, this wasn't an isolated incident. My suggestion: Buy a dictionary... but don't have Snit give you reading lessons ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-10 05:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bghe90.fae@rooftop.invalid> |
| In reply to | #266755 |
Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:43:32 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: >> He's a madman. >... likely to be made a fool of like you were here. I guess in your world, just proclaiming something makes it true. Weird.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-10 07:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D0861B9F.410D7%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #266761 |
On 11/9/14, 10:34 PM, in article bghe90.fae@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:43:32 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >>> He's a madman. > >> ... likely to be made a fool of like you were here. > > I guess in your world, just proclaiming something makes it true. Weird. > It is all he ever has... well, that and taking things out of context, playing word games, fabricating quotes, using more socks than he can keep track of (literally... try some day to get him to list all the names he has used - he is completely incapable. He has said some of the ones I attributed to him are wrong but cannot even say which... just insane.) -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-10 08:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <88280fdb-d527-4fb7-a21d-e9a73b164912@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266796 |
On Monday, November 10, 2014 7:37:11 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 11/9/14, 10:34 PM, in article bghe90.fae@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:43:32 PM UTC-7, owl wrote: > > > >>> He's a madman. > > > >> ... likely to be made a fool of like you were here. > > > > I guess in your world, just proclaiming something makes it true. Weird. > > > It is all he ever has... LOL! I just showed two solid examples of your confusion with set theory. > well, that and taking things out of context, Any idiot can see there is no missing context in either of the examples I just showed. All you're doing, again, is proving that you don't understand what context is, either. (snip lies and more whining)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 22:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D08598B1.410AC%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #266752 |
On 11/9/14, 9:43 PM, in article h99kgue.ty33@rooftop.invalid, "owl" <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: >>> I responded at the end, but my response was more directed to your >>> "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link, which has something to >>> do with incest as a subset of sex. The claim, which Snit disagreed with, >>> implied that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets. >>> That claim is false, so Snit was correct to object. Although he did >>> incorrectly use the term "items" instead of "features" in his objection, >>> that likely *typo* does not make the original claim true any more true. >>> That it was a typo is obvious from his entire statement, where he >>> goes on to reference "features," not "items": >>> >>> <quote> >>> Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within >>> that set. Even though incest is sex, not all "sex MUST include all of the >>> features of incest." >>> </quote> >>> >> Exactly right. I used an incorrect word in one of the stupid endless debates >> that happen in COLA and CSMA. Instead of focusing on the facts, Carroll >> nit-picks and plays stupid games. I openly admit the *one* sentence Carroll >> quoted was worded incorrectly... but by the context any reasonable person >> can see my point was correct. > >> Carroll, on the other hand, defends Tim Adam's incorrect (and repulsive) >> claim that all sex must include all the features of incest... and did the >> same when Tim Adams insisted that sex and incest are, in his view, >> "identical" and "synonymous". Unlike Carroll, I assumed Tim Adams just >> misspoke and granted him that... refusing to sink to the games they used to >> play (and Carroll *still* is, years later!) > >> In brief: Carroll claims I refuse to let go of things, assume the worst in >> people, twist words, etc. His example here, though, is a great example where >> I actively did not do that and granted that people make mistakes in their >> typing and Carroll and his co-trolls did as he accuses and he continues to >> for years. > >> Carroll is a completely hypocritical, obsessive jerk who will play these >> games as long as he can. He is not capable of having a reasonable discussion >> when he has a chance to mindlessly and dishonestly attack me. > > He's a madman. A much more concise way of saying what I did. Thanks. :) -- * Mint MATE: Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 21:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f9c3d596-841a-4eb2-834e-96daa2fa44ef@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266756 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 10:18:34 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 11/9/14, 9:43 PM, in article h99kgue.ty33@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > >>> I responded at the end, but my response was more directed to your > >>> "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link, which has something to > >>> do with incest as a subset of sex. The claim, which Snit disagreed with, > >>> implied that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets. > >>> That claim is false, so Snit was correct to object. Although he did > >>> incorrectly use the term "items" instead of "features" in his objection, > >>> that likely *typo* does not make the original claim true any more true. > >>> That it was a typo is obvious from his entire statement, where he > >>> goes on to reference "features," not "items": > >>> > >>> <quote> > >>> Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within > >>> that set. Even though incest is sex, not all "sex MUST include all of the > >>> features of incest." > >>> </quote> > >>> > >> Exactly right. I used an incorrect word in one of the stupid endless debates > >> that happen in COLA and CSMA. Instead of focusing on the facts, Carroll > >> nit-picks and plays stupid games. I openly admit the *one* sentence Carroll > >> quoted was worded incorrectly... but by the context any reasonable person > >> can see my point was correct. > > > >> Carroll, on the other hand, defends Tim Adam's incorrect (and repulsive) > >> claim that all sex must include all the features of incest... and did the > >> same when Tim Adams insisted that sex and incest are, in his view, > >> "identical" and "synonymous". Unlike Carroll, I assumed Tim Adams just > >> misspoke and granted him that... refusing to sink to the games they used to > >> play (and Carroll *still* is, years later!) > > > >> In brief: Carroll claims I refuse to let go of things, assume the worst in > >> people, twist words, etc. His example here, though, is a great example where > >> I actively did not do that and granted that people make mistakes in their > >> typing and Carroll and his co-trolls did as he accuses and he continues to > >> for years. > > > >> Carroll is a completely hypocritical, obsessive jerk who will play these > >> games as long as he can. He is not capable of having a reasonable discussion > >> when he has a chance to mindlessly and dishonestly attack me. > > > > He's a madman. > > A much more concise way of saying what I did. Thanks. :) Two liars (who can't read) are using their "math" skills and, between them, they come up with '69'. Not in public boys. LOL!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-11-09 20:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1780f1cd-4e7f-47d9-b2dc-715fbffbdbee@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #266749 |
On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:28:54 PM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > On 11/9/14, 6:50 PM, in article bghv9.afeap3@rooftop.invalid, "owl" > <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote: > > > Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:09:04 AM UTC-7, owl wrote: > >>> Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote: > >>>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS" > >>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> When the median would be much more useful and revealing? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm 100% sure they do it to make Linux and its proponents look better. > >>>>>> But it hides the effects of the large donations made by a few Linux > >>>>>> people. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The Numbers (around 10:40am today) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Total payments: $1,110,293.65 > >>>>>> Number of purchases: 149,494 > >>>>>> Average purchase: $7.43 > >>>>>> Average Windows: $7.08 > >>>>>> Average Mac: $8.55 > >>>>>> Average Linux: $10.06 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The avg Linux purchase is 42% higher than the avg Windows purchase. The > >>>>>> reason is because Windows gamers buy good games at $30 to $60 a pop, and > >>>>>> don't have as much to spend on these crapola games - which are top > >>>>>> flight games for deprived Linux victims. > >>>>> > >>>>> This was discussed in some detail a while back with a previous bundle. It > >>>>> was amazing how many in COLA could not understand the basic math / stats. > >>>>> cc > >>>>> was absolutely hilarious in his ignorance about it. > >>> > >>>> As hilarious as this? > >>> > >>>> "...by definition a set MUST contain all of the features of a subset, > >>>> otherwise it (the subset) wouldn't be a subset." > >>> > >>>> Your reply: > >>> > >>>> "Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within > >>>> that set." > >>> > >>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/sN1HvpwXrK > >>>> w/7nrGK5fKuwIJ > >>> > >>>> I don't think so ;) > >>> > >>> The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset > >>> "red balls." > > > >> Which has nothing to do with what you responded to. > > > > I responded at the end, but my response was more directed to your > > "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link, which has something to > > do with incest as a subset of sex. The claim, which Snit disagreed with, > > implied that a set must contain all the features of any of its subsets. > > That claim is false, so Snit was correct to object. Although he did > > incorrectly use the term "items" instead of "features" in his objection, > > that likely *typo* does not make the original claim true any more true. > > That it was a typo is obvious from his entire statement, where he > > goes on to reference "features," not "items": > > > > <quote> > > Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within > > that set. Even though incest is sex, not all "sex MUST include all of the > > features of incest." > > </quote> > > > Exactly right. Exactly "wrong". > I used an incorrect word That wasn't an isolated incident and you know it. During this argument you had with Ebot, Tim and Wally about incest, I asked you for the definition of the word "sex" and you gave me the following: sex n 1. either of the two reproductive categories, male or female, of animals and plants 2. sexual intercourse 3. sexual activity or behavior leading to it 4. the genitals (literary) 5. the set of characteristics that determine whether the reproductive role of an animal or plant is male or female Yet, you also stated: "Sex is a subset of sexual activities" Are you going to yell "wrong word" or "typo" here, too? LOL! > in one of the stupid endless debates > that happen in COLA and CSMA. Instead of focusing on the facts, Carroll > nit-picks and plays stupid games. You're clearly confused, sometimes you get it right, sometimes, wrong. Who in COLA *hasn't* seen you even purposefully argue both sides of an argument at times? > I openly admit the *one* sentence Carroll > quoted was worded incorrectly... but by the context any reasonable person > can see my point was correct. Horsesh*t and the definition (that you gave to me) and statement I just quoted of you prove your confusion wasn't an isolated incident.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web