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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #266673 > unrolled thread

Why do the "Humble Bundle" people use the mean purchase per platform?

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

Contents

  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 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#266717

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> >> "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > https://www.humblebundle.com
> >> > 
> >> > 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.
> 
> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.
> 
> He doesn't seem to realize that this sample population is of users (Mac,
> Win, Lin) who don't want to pay $30+ for a *game*.  Those other people will
> not even be visiting "Humble Bundle".
> 
> What a k00k!

Unfortunately Chris, without the raw data, both your's and his claims are unsupported.

DFS's hypothesis included (since deleted by prior quotes) that a few high rollers 
in Linux had skewed the results.  Lacking the raw data, at least if the Medians of 
each had been reported, this assertion could have been tested.   With the "Top 10"
list that was provided it certainly looks like a good hypothesis, but lacking the 
appropriate data or analysis, it can neither be confirmed - - or (in your case) denied.


-hh

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

#266718

On 11/9/14, 12:08 PM, in article
36df6101-9829-44b2-96e9-f68b0adff793@googlegroups.com, "-hh"
<recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 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.
>>>>> 
>> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.
>> 
>> He doesn't seem to realize that this sample population is of users (Mac, Win,
>> Lin) who don't want to pay $30+ for a *game*.  Those other people will not
>> even be visiting "Humble Bundle".
>> 
>> What a k00k!
>> 
> Unfortunately Chris, without the raw data, both your's and his claims are
> unsupported.
> 
> DFS's hypothesis included (since deleted by prior quotes) that a few high
> rollers in Linux had skewed the results.

Which seems likely but is not proved.

> Lacking the raw data, at least if
> the Medians of each had been reported, this assertion could have been tested.
> With the "Top 10" list that was provided it certainly looks like a good
> hypothesis, but lacking the appropriate data or analysis, it can neither be
> confirmed - - or (in your case) denied.

Exactly. 


-- 
* 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]

#266730

On 2014-11-09, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> charlescroyden3@gmail.com wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, Snit wrote:
>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS"
>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> > https://www.humblebundle.com
>>> > 
>>> > 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.
>
> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.
>
> He doesn't seem to realize that this sample population is of users (Mac,
> Win, Lin) who don't want to pay $30+ for a *game*.  Those other people will
> not even be visiting "Humble Bundle".

    This thing also has a charity tie in. So this is also about how much
each of these variations are willing to give to CHARITY when there is a
minor sweetener added.

    Some of that high average for Linux is distorted by people that pay MUCH
more than the asking price with the idea that they are giving that extra money
to a CHARITY.

    ...and there are $30 and $60 games being sold for Linux again.

>
> What a k00k!
>
>>> <snip>
>>
>> The only ignorance was displayed by you snit and no matter how many times
>> you bring this topic up it will never change that fact.
>


-- 

   Apple: Power users are not welcome here.                             |||
                                                                       / | \

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

#266738

On 09/11/2014 3:42 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2014-11-09, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>> charlescroyden3@gmail.com wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS"
>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>
>> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.
>>
>> He doesn't seem to realize that this sample population is of users (Mac,
>> Win, Lin) who don't want to pay $30+ for a *game*.  Those other people will
>> not even be visiting "Humble Bundle".
>
>      This thing also has a charity tie in. So this is also about how much
> each of these variations are willing to give to CHARITY when there is a
> minor sweetener added.
>
>      Some of that high average for Linux is distorted by people that pay MUCH
> more than the asking price with the idea that they are giving that extra money
> to a CHARITY.
>
>      ...and there are $30 and $60 games being sold for Linux again.

A handful of games which don't appeal to everyone. Not everyone will be 
overjoyed at the prospect of paying 60$ for Football Manager 2015 or for 
games which look like they were made 30 years ago. For sixty bucks, 
GNUslims expect to get a dozen or more shitty games at the very least 
and that's exactly what they get.

GNUslims _exclusively_ buy shitty games as a result of having adapted to 
a shitty operating system. They RUN from quality.

-- 
Silver Slimer
OpenMedia Supporter
www.silverlips.ca

Archivist of GNU/Linux's many positive reviews:
"Running Linux is like taking a fat girl to the prom..and she won't even 
do your homework right." - Steve
"The biggest killer of putting penguin software on the desktop is the 
Linux community. If you think the Apple fanboys are completely barking, 
they are role models of sanity to the loudmouthed Open Sauce religious 
loonies who are out there. Like many fundamentalists they are totally 
inflexible, waving a GNU as if it were handed down by God to Richard 
Stallman." - Nick Farrell

Recipient of overwhelmingly positive reviews among the GNU/Linux advocates:
- "Low life at its best. But thats what you are. Worth a lot less than
stinking contaminated dirt" - Peter Köhlmann
- "He's a rotten POS." - Chris Ahlstrom AKA The Pee-Pee Wiper 
(http://bit.ly/1wg0lkd)
- "He's a troll, that's his stock and trade." - RonB
- "Slimer is a filthy hater, liar and fraud IMHO." - Marti Van Lin
- "We know that it was the "Slimer", the shameless liar who takes pride,
apparently, in being a worthless trolling asshole." - chrisv

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

#266795

On 11/09/2014 09:39 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> charlescroyden3@gmail.com wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, Snit wrote:
>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS"
>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com
>>>>
>>>> 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.
> 
> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.

They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
like complete idiots.

> 
> He doesn't seem to realize that this sample population is of users (Mac,
> Win, Lin) who don't want to pay $30+ for a *game*.  Those other people will
> not even be visiting "Humble Bundle".
> 
> What a k00k!

Someone should still look in his freezer.

-- 
-v

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

#266807

On 10/11/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:

> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
> like complete idiots.

You mean like mentioning the same retarded 1980s game every week for 
months and months in the hope that its overall shittiness will somehow 
convince the population that GNU/Linux is suitable for a gaming machine? 
Who did that again? Oh wait, it was _you_.

-- 
Silver Slimer
OpenMedia Supporter
www.silverlips.ca

Archivist of GNU/Linux's many positive reviews:
"Running Linux is like taking a fat girl to the prom..and she won't even 
do your homework right." - Steve
"The biggest killer of putting penguin software on the desktop is the 
Linux community. If you think the Apple fanboys are completely barking, 
they are role models of sanity to the loudmouthed Open Sauce religious 
loonies who are out there. Like many fundamentalists they are totally 
inflexible, waving a GNU as if it were handed down by God to Richard 
Stallman." - Nick Farrell

Recipient of overwhelmingly positive reviews among the GNU/Linux advocates:
- "Low life at its best. But thats what you are. Worth a lot less than
stinking contaminated dirt" - Peter Köhlmann
- "He's a rotten POS." - Chris Ahlstrom AKA The Pee-Pee Wiper 
(http://bit.ly/1wg0lkd)
- "He's a troll, that's his stock and trade." - RonB
- "Slimer is a filthy hater, liar and fraud IMHO." - Marti Van Lin
- "We know that it was the "Slimer", the shameless liar who takes pride,
apparently, in being a worthless trolling asshole." - chrisv

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

#266812

"Silver Slimer" <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote in message 
news:m3qmmo$t3m$1@dont-email.me...
> On 10/11/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:
>
>> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
>> like complete idiots.

You (vallor) must have been looking in the mirror when you wrote that. One 
of the biggest idiots here is *you*

First a poser like "vallor" tries to lecture someone on HTML tags - only to 
be completely wrong.

Then he creates a new thread whining that old versions of IE didn't support 
the XML request object correctly. The idiot is too stupid to realize that 
the versions of the browser he whined about were released YEARS before this 
was even proposed as a standard by the W3C

Calling vallor stupid at this point would be a generous compliment.


> You mean like mentioning the same retarded 1980s game every week for 
> months and months in the hope that its overall shittiness will somehow 
> convince the population that GNU/Linux is suitable for a gaming machine? 
> Who did that again? Oh wait, it was _you_.

It must be one of the games that works on Linux so it's like a breath of 
fresh air to these zealots.

-- 

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

#266843

On 11/10/2014 11:07 AM, Ezekiel wrote:
> "Silver Slimer" <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote in message
> news:m3qmmo$t3m$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 10/11/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:
>>
>>> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
>>> like complete idiots.
>
> You (vallor) must have been looking in the mirror when you wrote that. One
> of the biggest idiots here is *you*
>
> First a poser like "vallor" tries to lecture someone on HTML tags - only to
> be completely wrong.
>
> Then he creates a new thread whining that old versions of IE didn't support
> the XML request object correctly. The idiot is too stupid to realize that
> the versions of the browser he whined about were released YEARS before this
> was even proposed as a standard by the W3C


Notice vallet wasn't man enough to admit his idiocy, either.

This is a trait common to most or all cola "advocates".

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

#266842

On 11/10/2014 10:47 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:
> On 10/11/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:
>
>> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
>> like complete idiots.
>
> You mean like mentioning the same retarded 1980s game every week for
> months and months in the hope that its overall shittiness will somehow
> convince the population that GNU/Linux is suitable for a gaming machine?
> Who did that again? Oh wait, it was _you_.


Doesn't he cum all over "Kerbal Space Program" or some such piece of 
crap game?

It's to laugh.

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

#266848

On 10/11/2014 7:33 PM, DFS wrote:
> On 11/10/2014 10:47 AM, Silver Slimer wrote:
>> On 10/11/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:
>>
>>> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
>>> like complete idiots.
>>
>> You mean like mentioning the same retarded 1980s game every week for
>> months and months in the hope that its overall shittiness will somehow
>> convince the population that GNU/Linux is suitable for a gaming machine?
>> Who did that again? Oh wait, it was _you_.
>
>
> Doesn't he cum all over "Kerbal Space Program" or some such piece of
> crap game?
>
> It's to laugh.

He does. Why buy a powerful video game and play a sophisticated game 
when you can be stuck in the 1980s with pathetic games and on-board video?

-- 
Silver Slimer
OpenMedia Supporter
www.silverlips.ca

Archivist of GNU/Linux's many positive reviews:
"Running Linux is like taking a fat girl to the prom..and she won't even 
do your homework right." - Steve
"The biggest killer of putting penguin software on the desktop is the 
Linux community. If you think the Apple fanboys are completely barking, 
they are role models of sanity to the loudmouthed Open Sauce religious 
loonies who are out there. Like many fundamentalists they are totally 
inflexible, waving a GNU as if it were handed down by God to Richard 
Stallman." - Nick Farrell

Recipient of overwhelmingly positive reviews among the GNU/Linux advocates:
- "Low life at its best. But thats what you are. Worth a lot less than
stinking contaminated dirt" - Peter Köhlmann
- "He's a rotten POS." - Chris Ahlstrom AKA The Pee-Pee Wiper 
(http://bit.ly/1wg0lkd)
- "He's a troll, that's his stock and trade." - RonB
- "Slimer is a filthy hater, liar and fraud IMHO." - Marti Van Lin
- "We know that it was the "Slimer", the shameless liar who takes pride,
apparently, in being a worthless trolling asshole." - chrisv

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

#266879

On 11/10/2014 9:33 AM, vallor wrote:
> On 11/09/2014 09:39 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> charlescroyden3@gmail.com wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>
>>> On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:57:01 AM UTC-5, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 11/9/14, 9:31 AM, in article m3o4sd$hrh$1@dont-email.me, "DFS"
>>>> <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://www.humblebundle.com
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>
>> Good old DFS... always finding ways to spin Linux positives into negatives.
>
> They wouldn't be wintrolls if they didn't come up with new ways to look
> like complete idiots.


Aren't you the moron who bragged and bragged about tweaking a game on 
Linux/Wine and ending up with audio out-of-sync with the video?

Talk about looking like a complete idiot.

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

#266688

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/sN1HvpwXrKw/7nrGK5fKuwIJ 

I don't think so ;)

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

#266708

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/sN1HvpwXrKw/7nrGK5fKuwIJ 

> I don't think so ;)

The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset
"red balls."

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

#266711

On 11/9/14, 11:09 AM, in article hg9e.fjeop@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
<owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:

>>> 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/sN1HvpwXrKw/
>> 7nrGK5fKuwIJ 
> 
>> I don't think so ;)
> 
> The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset
> "red balls."

Good grief... this has been beaten to death. Typical Carroll... in these
stupid online debates that go on forever there are going to be poorly worded
comments. The concept is clear:

To use your example: you can have balls which are not red but are still in
the group balls. They will not be in the sub-group "red balls". Items in the
set "balls" need not contain all of the features or aspects of the items in
"red balls" (they need not be red).

But things like that go far, far over Carroll's head: or he pretends they do
to push his idiotic, years-long arguments. He loses repeatedly and just gets
pissed and cannot let go. This started in 2004 and has not ended yet... even
with my not responding directly to him or even reading most of his posts.


-- 
* 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]

#266719

On Sunday, November 9, 2014 11:40:33 AM UTC-7, Snit wrote:
> On 11/9/14, 11:09 AM, in article hg9e.fjeop@rooftop.invalid, "owl"
> <owl@rooftop.invalid> wrote:
> 
> >>> 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/sN1HvpwXrKw/
> >> 7nrGK5fKuwIJ 
> > 
> >> I don't think so ;)
> > 
> > The set "balls" does not contain all of the features of its subset
> > "red balls."
> 
> Good grief... this has been beaten to death. Typical Carroll... in these
> stupid online debates that go on forever there are going to be poorly worded
> comments.

LOL! Your failed face saving attempt here aside, there is nothing "poorly worded" about your erroneous statement, what you wrote is crystal clear, it's just "wrong". Strangely (for a normal person, not for you), in the same thread, you also wrote:

"A set must contain its subsets..." - Snit
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/sN1HvpwXrKw/yBrPCRVlsL4J


> The concept is clear:

It is, and you're obviously "very, very" confused.

"Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within that set" - Snit

Obvious question: How can something *not* "contain" something that is "within" it? 

Do you need a lot of heavy medication for that to happen or do you have some really good stuff where only a tiny bit is needed? ;)

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

#266715

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/sN1HvpwXrKw/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.

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

#266743

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/sN1HvpwXrKw/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>

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

#266747

On Sunday, November 9, 2014 6:50:46 PM UTC-7, owl 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/sN1HvpwXrKw/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, 

I saw... you responded with a lie about "features". Why do I jump straight to a "lie" and not give you the benefit of the doubt? Keep reading...

> but my response was more directed to your
> "quoted" paraphrase of the statement at the link,

You're lying here, too. I didn't 'paraphrase' Snit, I quoted him... as anyone can clearly see. I doubt two blatant inaccuracies in a row is a coincidence, liar.

> which has something to
> do with incest as a subset of sex. 

Fact: Snit's quoted statement is about set theory.

Fact: Snit's quoted statement doesn't require any additional context to show that his statement is erroneous on the topic of set theory.

> 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.  

Irrelevant. Snit's erroneous, self contained statement is about set theory and it's a statement that has *all* the context needed to see how confused he is on that topic.

> 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":

LOL! The word "item" is not a "typo" for a "feature of an item, no matter how high you are, liar.  I don't get it, why are you repeatedly lying and doing it in ways that are ridiculous?  No matter... that's the 3rd lie in a row so you're out. 

> <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>

LOL! Snit referenced all kind of things in numerous ways in his *many* arguments on incest, there are TONS of them...  he often argued BS (and this isn't the first time Snit had confusion over set theory). 

Even if this was just a simple, isolated error (and it isn't), no one would deserve having it pointed out more than Snit, who has actually done such things for over a decade (and much worse). BTW, you lie no better than he does, you should work on that if you care about not being detected.

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

#266751

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.

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

#266754

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!

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web