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

Groups > linux.debian.user > #227755 > unrolled thread

one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager kaye n <guikaye@gmail.com> - 2020-10-13 04:00 +0200
    Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-13 04:20 +0200
      Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager kaye n <guikaye@gmail.com> - 2020-10-14 06:30 +0200
        Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-14 08:10 +0200
          Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-10-14 10:30 +0200
            Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager kaye n <guikaye@gmail.com> - 2020-10-14 13:20 +0200
            Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2020-10-14 18:30 +0200
          Please be respectful (was: one thing i don't like about Thunar file  manager) "Christoph K." <christoph@kobenetz.de> - 2020-10-14 10:40 +0200
            Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-14 11:20 +0200
              Re: Please be respectful Thomas Pircher <thp+debian@p5r.uk> - 2020-10-14 12:30 +0200
              Re: Please be respectful "Christoph K." <christoph@kobenetz.de> - 2020-10-14 17:40 +0200
              Re: Please be respectful Jonathan Dowland <jon+debian-user@dow.land> - 2020-10-15 15:50 +0200
                Re: Please be respectful grumpy@mailfence.com - 2020-10-15 16:10 +0200
                  Re: Please be respectful Felmon Davis <moelmoel2714@gmail.com> - 2020-10-15 16:30 +0200
                    Re: Please be respectful <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-10-24 10:20 +0200
                      Re: Please be respectful Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-10-24 18:50 +0200
                      Re: Please be respectful Doug McGarrett <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2020-10-24 19:30 +0200
                  Re: Please be respectful Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-10-15 17:40 +0200
              Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-16 00:20 +0200
                Re: Please be respectful Leslie Rhorer <lesrhorer@att.net> - 2020-10-16 02:20 +0200
                  Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-16 12:00 +0200
                    Re: Please be respectful Leslie Rhorer <lesrhorer@att.net> - 2020-10-16 23:50 +0200
                      Re: Please be respectful Michael uplawski <linux-gate@don.blech.e4ward.com> - 2020-10-17 07:30 +0200
                        Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-17 07:40 +0200
                          Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-17 23:10 +0200
                            Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-18 03:50 +0200
                              Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-18 04:10 +0200
                                Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-18 14:30 +0200
                                Re: Please be respectful Jan Foniok <jan.foniok@pikomat.mff.cuni.cz> - 2020-10-25 10:50 +0100
                                  Re: Please be respectful Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-10-25 21:10 +0100
                              Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-18 04:10 +0200
                                Re: Please be respectful Michael uplawski <linux-gate@don.blech.e4ward.com> - 2020-10-18 12:50 +0200
                                Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-18 14:40 +0200
                                  Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-24 18:50 +0200
                                    Re: Please be respectful Pierre-Elliott Bécue <peb@debian.org> - 2020-10-24 19:40 +0200
                                      Re: Please be respectful john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2020-10-24 19:50 +0200
                                      Re: Please be respectful "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2020-10-24 22:20 +0200
                      Re: Please be respectful Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-10-17 09:00 +0200
                        Re: Please be respectful Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2020-10-17 10:40 +0200
                        Re: Please be respectful Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-10-26 14:00 +0100
                          Re: Please be respectful Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2020-10-26 15:00 +0100
                            Re: Please be respectful ellanios82 <ellanios82@gmail.com> - 2020-10-26 15:50 +0100
                      Re: Please be respectful <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-10-17 10:20 +0200
                      Re: Please be respectful "Christoph K." <christoph@kobenetz.de> - 2020-10-18 13:50 +0200
                        Re: Please be respectful Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-10-18 14:00 +0200
                          Re: Please be respectful <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-10-18 14:20 +0200
                            Re: Please be respectful Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-10-18 16:50 +0200
                            Re: Please be respectful Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-10-19 14:00 +0200
                              Re: Please be respectful <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-10-19 14:20 +0200
                            Re: Please be respectful <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-10-24 16:10 +0200
        Re: one thing i don't like about Thunar file manager riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2020-10-14 08:40 +0200

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

#227848 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le jeudi 15 octobre 2020 à 19:10:00-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> On 10/15/2020 5:05 PM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > Le mercredi 14 octobre 2020 � 02:12:45-0700, Weaver a �crit�:
> > > On 14-10-2020 18:30, Christoph K. wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:06:55 -0700
> > > > Weaver wrote <weaver@riseup.net>:
> > > > 
> > > > > > "as I learnt to read years ago,"
> > > > > It's appropriate sarcasm.
> > > > 
> > > > Disagreed.
> > > > It's simply disrespectful.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > For those who require spoon feeding:
> > > > 
> > > > As is this comment, too.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Sarcasm can be fun sometimes, but I believe it's no appropriate way to
> > > > communicate on debian mailing lists. It can lead to misunderstandings and
> > > > people being hurt, apart from making a bad impressions on others reading
> > > > this list.
> > > > 
> > > > Please re-read the Debian Code of Conduct and consider being more polite:
> > > > https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct
> > > 
> > > Being polite is a standard that has to apply to all.
> > > I consider the original post not to be.
> > > To me I see an outstanding example of laziness from somebody who
> > > obviously needs no consideration in the accessibility department.
> > > Scrolling an alphabetically arranged file system doesn't even qualify as
> > > trivial.
> > 
> > When the displayed file list contains hundreds or thousands of
> > files/directories, and you don't know the first letters of their name,
> > looking for a substring or a fuzzy pattern by hand with your eyes and
> > via scrolling qualifies as not-at-all trivial.
> 
> 	True enough, but then the same is true of a list of badly associated names,
> if not moreso.
> 
> > > It can be accomplished as quickly as you can move your hand.
> > > The use of find and/or locate will dig up anything, no matter how deeply
> > > hidden in a plethora of directories.
> > 
> > The question is about a GUI file manager with a specific feature, not
> > about a command line way of doing it.
> 
> 	The point - or my point anyway - is rather than seeking to tack on a whole
> bunch of poorly considered features to a poorly considered fundamental
> utility, well considered, powerful, highly configurable solutions such as
> "find" should be encouraged.

And no one said that one couldn't recommend using a command line tool.
But the fact there is a command line tool doesn't make the need of the
same feature in a GUI file manager absurd or irrelevant. And your
opinion on that matter is irrelevant as you are not the one asking for
help.

> > The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
> > of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
> > knowledge about the project and its features.
> 
> 	Why talk about Debian, irrespective of what list this is, when a more
> powerful, simpler, more fundamental utility is available on *ALL* distros?

Being "irrespective" of the list is completely irrelevant to the matter,
as this very list is a Debian one for people needing help about Debian.
Not just the ones you think have a right to ask for help but all of
them.

This fact litteraly makes the whole remains of your mail moot, and I'll
henceforth refrain from answering to it.

Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
irrespectful to them.

You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

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

#227891 — Re: Please be respectful

On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
>> 	The point - or my point anyway - is rather than seeking to tack on a whole
>> bunch of poorly considered features to a poorly considered fundamental
>> utility, well considered, powerful, highly configurable solutions such as
>> "find" should be encouraged.
> 
> And no one said that one couldn't recommend using a command line tool.
> But the fact there is a command line tool doesn't make the need of the
> same feature in a GUI file manager absurd or irrelevant. And your
> opinion on that matter is irrelevant as you are not the one asking for
> help.

	This is nonsense.  Whenever I  forced to do something, or worse yet, 
prevented from doing something by a consensus of incompetent 
individuals, I have every right to complain.

>>> The debian-user list is a communication medium where each and any user
>>> of Debian, from "newbie" to "expert" to ask questions and share their
>>> knowledge about the project and its features.
>>
>> 	Why talk about Debian, irrespective of what list this is, when a more
>> powerful, simpler, more fundamental utility is available on *ALL* distros?
> 
> Being "irrespective" of the list is completely irrelevant to the matter,
> as this very list is a Debian one for people needing help about Debian.
> Not just the ones you think have a right to ask for help but all of
> them.

	Your saying so does not make it so.  The simple fact is a solution 
which works for 100,000 people is superior to that which only serves 500 
people, *PROVIDED* the 500 are included in the 100,000.  Very, very few 
distros fail to provide the find utility.  It just does not get any more 
universal.

	I *NEVER* suggested anyone should not have the right to ask a question. 
  Indeed, everyone should be encouraged to ask questions.  Everyone is 
also entitled to an opinion and to express it.


> This fact litteraly makes the whole remains of your mail moot, and I'll
> henceforth refrain from answering to it.

	Your "fact" is in error.


> Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
> irrespectful to them.
> 
> You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.

	There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.  The point you 
were apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, 
and anyone else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I 
choose.  Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a 
privilege.  Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone 
should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone 
deserves respect.  If it is afforded to everyone, then it becomes 
totally worthless.

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

#227896 — Re: Please be respectful

Leslie Rhorer:
> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone 
> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone 
> deserves respect. 

This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.

Cheerio

(I like your topic here).

-- 
GnuPG rsa4096 2020-09-08 [SC] [expire : 2022-09-08]
      B31591374C4824DE872841D27D857E5045D038F8
sub   rsa4096 2020-09-08 [E] [expire : 2022-09-08]

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

#227897 — Re: Please be respectful

On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
> 
> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.

Rubbish!
There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are worthy
of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
engendered by social position.
Wrong!
Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
`excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of puerile
ignorance!

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

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

#227923 — Re: Please be respectful

On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> > Leslie Rhorer:
>> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> >> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> >> deserves respect.
>> >
>> > This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. Face
>> > it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
>>
>> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.

Rubbish is rubbish
Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
I don't.

 
>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are worthy
>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>> engendered by social position.
> 
> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.

Retarded is retarded.
You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
clearly applied to a viewpoint.

 
>> Wrong!
>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of puerile
>> ignorance!
>>
> 
> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the Internet.
> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>  to tell who's who"

Puerile is puerile.
`Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
The terminology applies: employ it.
`Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
effectively.
`which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
waffle! 
You know another method?
Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.

 
> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
> their intellect, you  might come across better.


A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
list.

<snip>

> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 2

We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
before our very eyes.

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

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

#227932 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a écrit :
>On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>>> > Leslie Rhorer:
>>> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>>> >> should afford it them.  It is utterly ridiculous to think
>everyone
>>> >> deserves respect.
>>> >
>>> > This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>Face
>>> > it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
>>>
>>> Rubbish!
>> 
>> Tone not helpful here on either side.
>
>Rubbish is rubbish
>Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
>I don't.
>
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>> 
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
>
>Retarded is retarded.
>You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
>clearly applied to a viewpoint.
>
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>>
>> 
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>>  to tell who's who"
>
>Puerile is puerile.
>`Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
>The terminology applies: employ it.
>`Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
>effectively.
>`which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
>waffle! 
>You know another method?
>Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
>Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
>
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you  might come across better.
>
>
>A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
>have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
>list.
>
><snip>
>
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>chapter 2
>
>We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
>before our very eyes.
>
>-- 
>`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
>by the wise as false,
>and by the rulers as useful'.
>
>— Lucius Annæus Seneca.
>
>Terrorism, the new religion.
>
>Registered Linux User: 554515

You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and ridiculous. I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you, instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 

I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here. 

Regards. 
--
Pierre-Elliott Bécue

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

#227933 — Re: Please be respectful

On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a
> écrit :

And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.
Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
time.?
I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

 
>> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
>>
>> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>> Face
>> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> 
> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.
> 
> Rubbish is rubbish
> Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> I don't.
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>>> worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
>>> can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>>
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> 
> Retarded is retarded.
> You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>>> puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
>> Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>> to tell who's who"
> 
> Puerile is puerile.
> `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> The terminology applies: employ it.
> `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> effectively.
> `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> waffle! 
> You know another method?
> Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you might come across better.
> 
> A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> list.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>> chapter 2
> 
> We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> before our very eyes.
> 
> You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> ridiculous. I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> 
> I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here. 
> 
> Regards. 
> --
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

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

#227945 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le samedi 17 octobre 2020 à 19:06:35-0700, Weaver a écrit :
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a
> > écrit :
> 
> And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.

That occurs when one do sent a mail to somebody and also to a list he's
subscribed to. As I learnt to delete duplicates, I'm pretty sure you'll
manage.

> Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
> time.?
> I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

I'm quite sure many people are sick of people behaving like bullies,
pretending to decide who gets or not to post and ask questions on a user
list and on what terms. If you don't want people to waste your time,
feel free not to reply and not to try imposing your opinion on a list
already regulated by guidelines you're actually trying to spit on.

There are plenty places on the internet where your behaviour would be
seen as excellence and "the way to do it". This corner is not one of
these. Feel free to either accept it or go ranting elsewhere.

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

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

#228188 — Re: Please be respectful

> On 18 Oct 2020, at 04:06, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> wrote:
> 
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a
>> écrit :
> 
> And now we go another step further: with double postings into my inbox.
> Why don't you massage your petit ego requirements on somebody else's
> time.?
> I'm quite sure everybody here is as sick of it as I am.

Just for the record, I'm actually sick of you and Leslie Rhorer.

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

#228214 — Re: Please be respectful

On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 09:59:05 +0100
Jan Foniok <jan.foniok@pikomat.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:

> > On 18 Oct 2020, at 04:06, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> wrote:

> Just for the record, I'm actually sick of you and Leslie Rhorer.

Hear, hear.


-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

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

#227934 — Re: Please be respectful

On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a
> écrit :
> 
>> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
>> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
>> Leslie Rhorer:
>> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
>> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
>> deserves respect.
>>
>> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
>> Face
>> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> 
> Rubbish!
> 
> Tone not helpful here on either side.
> 
> Rubbish is rubbish
> Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> I don't.
> 
>>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
>>> worthy
>>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
>>> can
>>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
>>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
>>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
>>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
>>> engendered by social position.
>>
>> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> 
> Retarded is retarded.
> You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> 
>>> Wrong!
>>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
>>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
>>> puerile
>>> ignorance!
>>
>> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
>> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
>> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
>> Internet.
>> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
>> to tell who's who"
> 
> Puerile is puerile.
> `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> The terminology applies: employ it.
> `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> effectively.
> `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> waffle! 
> You know another method?
> Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> 
>> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
>> their intellect, you might come across better.
> 
> A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> list.
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
>> chapter 2
> 
> We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> before our very eyes.
> 
> You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> ridiculous. 

In your perception.

I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> 
> I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here.

And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.
I see A plethora of others who grasp the opportunity to ascend their
lecterns and preach, you being one of them, and this I can ignore, but
if it continues, and then my inbox gets cluttered with direct
communications of an incident I have long left in the rear vision
mirror, you get what you earn. One poster delivered what _you_ earned,
but there has obviously been no effort to reflect and philosophies of
convenience hold sway.
Leave the subject alone.

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

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

#227941 — Re: Please be respectful

Weaver:

> And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.

All living thing, and maybe more merit respect as a matter of fact.

Afterwards, you develop.

But societies change each one at any point in time adapts its rules to
the current understanding of abstract, arbitrary and deliberately
defined “values”.

You are in or you are out. You choose to be out and I wished that people
found a way to honor that fact.

You want to be handled this way, we shall comply.

Ω


-- 
GnuPG rsa4096 2020-09-08 [SC] [expire : 2022-09-08]
      B31591374C4824DE872841D27D857E5045D038F8
sub   rsa4096 2020-09-08 [E] [expire : 2022-09-08]

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

#227946 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le samedi 17 octobre 2020 à 19:03:17-0700, Weaver a écrit :
> On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a
> > écrit :
> > 
> >> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote:
> >> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote:
> >> Leslie Rhorer:
> >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone
> >> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone
> >> deserves respect.
> >>
> >> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community.
> >> Face
> >> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway.
> > 
> > Rubbish!
> > 
> > Tone not helpful here on either side.
> > 
> > Rubbish is rubbish
> > Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise.
> > I don't.
> > 
> >>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are
> >>> worthy
> >>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you
> >>> can
> >>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others.
> >>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the
> >>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future.
> >>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something
> >>> engendered by social position.
> >>
> >> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere.
> > 
> > Retarded is retarded.
> > You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is
> > clearly applied to a viewpoint.
> > 
> >>> Wrong!
> >>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect.
> >>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of
> >>> puerile
> >>> ignorance!
> >>
> >> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language
> >> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable.
> >> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the
> >> Internet.
> >> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able
> >> to tell who's who"
> > 
> > Puerile is puerile.
> > `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'.
> > The terminology applies: employ it.
> > `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates
> > effectively.
> > `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual
> > waffle! 
> > You know another method?
> > Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint.
> > Beginning, end, and entire middle of story.
> > 
> >> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for
> >> their intellect, you might come across better.
> > 
> > A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would
> > have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on
> > list.
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> >> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
> >> chapter 2
> > 
> > We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out
> > before our very eyes.
> > 
> > You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and
> > ridiculous. 
> 
> In your perception.

Looking at the number of people who replied to tell you your attitude is
not welcome, I think it is a bit more than just my perception.

> > I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you,
> > instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. 
> > 
> > I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point
> > : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here.
> 
> And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned.

Not here. Not in the biggest part of the society. Respect is presumed,
and then is either confirmed or lost. Feel free to abide by the rules
you like at your home, but here the rules are not yours. If you're not
fine with these rules, it's the same as any private space: either remain
silent or leave.

> I see A plethora of others who grasp the opportunity to ascend their
> lecterns and preach, you being one of them, and this I can ignore, but
> if it continues, and then my inbox gets cluttered with direct
> communications of an incident I have long left in the rear vision
> mirror, you get what you earn. One poster delivered what _you_ earned,
> but there has obviously been no effort to reflect and philosophies of
> convenience hold sway.

Many times people let rude and aggressive tones and behaviours go,
because these very long threads where people remind to one that there
are rules to interact on these lists and that one tries to show that
he's smarter and rules don't apply to him are just boring for everyone.
But from time to time, it's required to remind to everyone that just
because we don't react all the time doesn't mean we think less.

But to be honest, I have no problem with not letting it go when people
react. Because there is a Code of Conduct in Debian and guidelines when
you post on a list, and since you're trying to waive both, I think it's
worth the trouble.

> [snip]

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

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

#228160 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> [snip]

Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.

Regards,

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

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

#228163 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> 
> 
> On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:
> > > [snip]
> > 
> > Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
> 
> 	So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
> Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
> to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.

I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.

> 	Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.

You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
rules already exist.

> > the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.
> 
> 	Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
> man, I follow nothing and no one.

Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.

Regards,

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

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

#228164 — Re: Please be respectful

On 10/24/2020 7:31 PM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
>>
>>
>> On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
>>> Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:
>>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
>>
>> 	So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
>> Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
>> to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.
>
> I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.
>
>> 	Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.
>
> You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
> rules already exist.
>
>>> the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.
>>
>> 	Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
>> man, I follow nothing and no one.
>
> Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.
>
> Regards,
>

Please, take this elsewhere.

--
John Doe

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

#228170 — Re: Please be respectful

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 07:31:11PM +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 à 12:07:09-0500, Leslie Rhorer a écrit :
> > 
> > 
> > On 10/24/2020 11:46 AM, Pierre-Elliott B�cue wrote:
> > > Le samedi 24 octobre 2020 � 10:39:56-0500, Leslie Rhorer a �crit�:
> > > > [snip]
> > > 
> > > Honestly, I don't care about your opinion. If you don't want to follow
> > 
> > 	So let me get this straight.  I want very much to hear your opinion.
> > Indeed, I would be willing to fight and if need be die to protect your right
> > to express your opinion.  You, however, cannot be bothered to hear mine.
> 
> I read it thrice, a fourth time is not going to have any better outcome.
> 
> > 	Yet I am disrespectful?  Right.
> 
> You are when you try to impose your values on a place where a set of
> rules already exist.
> 
> > > the local rules, go waste people's time elsewhere.
> > 
> > 	Only a fool or one devoid of morals and ethics follows rules.  As a free
> > man, I follow nothing and no one.
> 
> Then please go following nothing and no one elsewhere.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Pierre-Elliott Bécue
> GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
> It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

Leslie,

You clearly have a great deal to say about your personal morals and ethics and you do not regard yourself as anybody's fool. 
"Never argue with a fool on the Internet - after a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able to tell who's who"

Your responses in this and other threads are neither necessarily constructive nor helping other people to appreciate you more widely. 
I would respectfully suggest that you could profitably go back and read the list archives to find examples of good and useful 
communication styles that will allow you to bring your expertise to bear more usefully to every reader's benefit.

The Debian mailing list code of conduct (see below) is here to try and bring some of these things more clearly to people's attention
if they don't already know,

The Debian Code of Conduct (see below) is more wide ranging and applies to any and all Debian assets. In many ways, it's based on 
getting the best out of how we work: we're aware of the sorts of issues that can cause problems or attitudes that can alienate 
people and would not wish to perpetuate these.

With thanks for your reading time,

All the very best, as ever,

Andy Cater [amacater@debian.org]

https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/
https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct

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

#227900 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Vi, 16 oct 20, 16:46:42, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> 
> > Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
> > irrespectful to them.
> > 
> > You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.
> 
> 	There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.

Please excuse us non-native English speakers for such mistakes. As far 
as I can tell Pierre-Elliot meant "rude".

> The point you were
> apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, and anyone
> else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I choose.
> Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a privilege.  Until
> someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone should afford it them.
> It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone deserves respect.  If it is
> afforded to everyone, then it becomes totally worthless.

This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a 
person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.

Is this what you meant?

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

#227902 — Re: Please be respectful

On 17-10-2020 16:59, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 16 oct 20, 16:46:42, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
>>
>> On 10/16/2020 4:57 AM, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
>>
>> > Feel free to ignore """lazy""" people from now on, but don't be
>> > irrespectful to them.
>> >
>> > You have no right to, and they don't deserve it.
>>
>> 	There is no such word - or concept - as irrespectful.
> 
> Please excuse us non-native English speakers for such mistakes. As far 
> as I can tell Pierre-Elliot meant "rude".
> 
>> The point you were
>> apparently trying to make, however, is just completely wrong.  I, and anyone
>> else, have every right to reserve my respect from whomever I choose.
>> Respect is *EARNED*. It is not a right and it is not a privilege.  Until
>> someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone should afford it them.
>> It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone deserves respect.  If it is
>> afforded to everyone, then it becomes totally worthless.
> 
> This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a 
> person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.
> 
> Is this what you meant?

I think this might be classified as a `qualified' interpretation.
This was not the assertion put forward.
Nowhere is this stated.
The property put forward is `respect'.
Nowhere is it stated that it's O.K. to be rude to somebody because they
don't respect you.
What _I_ would put forward is it's O.K. to be rude to somebody who has
imposed rudeness upon you.
But I'm generally better at it.
Cheers!

Harry
> 
> Kind regards,
> Andrei

-- 
`Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as false,
and by the rulers as useful'.

— Lucius Annæus Seneca.

Terrorism, the new religion.

Registered Linux User: 554515

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

#228239 — Re: Please be respectful

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sb, 24 oct 20, 03:46:20, Leslie Rhorer wrote:
> 
> On 10/17/2020 1:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > 
> > This could be understood that in your opinion it is ok to be rude to a
> > person unless that person has somehow earned your respect.
> > 
> > Is this what you meant?
> 
> 	It is neither what I said, nor what should properly be inferred from it.
> As I already mentioned, there is a difference between rudeness and
> disrespect.  There is also a big difference between not respecting someone
> and being either rude or disrespectful to them.  I am not quite sure it is
> really ever OK to be rude.  I know it is never acceptable to engage in
> puerile behavior such as name-calling or ad hominem attacks.
> 
> 	It is also a very different thing to reserve one's respect and one's
> opinions until someone has proven themselves than from engaging in a
> gratuitous, unprovoked verbal attack.  Please do not attempt to extrapolate
> from my statements beyond reasonable logical boundaries. For one thing, it
> is rude to do so.  (But not necessarily disrespectful.)
 
I'm quite certain at least part of this huge discussion is caused by 
misunderstandings.

This is my attempt to clarify at least some of it.

Apparently I failed.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

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

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

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web