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

Groups > sci.physics > #532129 > unrolled thread

Floating Point Test Suite

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 18:01 +0000
    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 18:09 +0000
    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 19:58 +0000
      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-11 15:19 -0500
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 20:28 +0000
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 20:37 +0000
          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-11 16:33 -0500
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 21:13 +0000
          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 15:16 -0600
            Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 21:42 +0000
            Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 21:54 +0000
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 16:43 -0600
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 23:15 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 17:34 -0600
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 17:37 -0600
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 23:47 +0000
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-12 07:56 -0500
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 19:07 +0000
                          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 19:57 -0600
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 00:45 +0000
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 04:55 +0000
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 09:26 -0600
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 20:56 +0000
                          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 20:00 -0600
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 16:48 -0600
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-11 23:08 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 17:12 -0600
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 17:06 -0600
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite dvus <dven1@adelphia.net> - 2015-11-12 07:35 -0500
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 19:29 +0000
      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-11 21:33 -0600
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 04:47 +0000
          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 20:19 -0600
            Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 03:28 +0000
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-12 22:40 -0500
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 03:59 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 00:16 -0500
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-13 15:00 -0700
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 01:40 -0600
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 08:22 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 12:41 -0500
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 19:16 +0000
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Apollyon <adravirgo@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 13:04 -0800
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 22:58 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-14 18:08 -0500
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 23:39 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-14 18:26 -0800
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-15 07:07 +0000
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-14 23:42 -0800
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 09:49 +0100
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-15 21:01 +0000
                          Re: Floating Point Test Suite jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-15 21:33 +0000
                          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-15 14:24 -0800
                            Re: Floating Point Test Suite jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-15 22:55 +0000
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-15 22:25 +0000
                          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-15 14:59 -0800
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 09:41 +0100
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 06:24 +0000
          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 20:29 -0600
            Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 03:49 +0000
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-12 22:49 -0600
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 04:59 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 01:56 -0600
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 08:28 +0000
                      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Monkey Man <manm0nk3y@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 22:24 -0600
                        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 04:45 +0000
            Re: June 1986 ? ! Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 06:19 +0000
              Re: June 1986 ? ! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-13 15:03 -0700
        Re: MonkeyMan is FabianRussell. Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-12 19:44 +0000
      Re: Floating Point Test Suite Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2015-11-13 01:59 -0500
        Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-13 07:43 +0000
          Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-13 15:11 -0800
            Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 00:00 +0000
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-13 16:31 -0800
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 02:26 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-14 03:52 +0000
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-11-14 02:46 +0000
                  Re: Floating Point Test Suite Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-11-13 19:26 -0800
                    Re: Floating Point Test Suite benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 02:11 -0500
                Re: Floating Point Test Suite noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 15:20 -0800
              Re: Floating Point Test Suite jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-11-14 00:47 +0000
    Re: Floating Point Test Suite Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-11 15:28 -0500

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

#532129 — Floating Point Test Suite

Greetings physics enthusiasts:

C'mon, you lazy laggards.  Let's get some discussion going.  Get off
your moribund asses and put forth some comments.

Modern science depends heavily, if not entirely, on the computer, and
the most important element of scientific computation is undeniably
the FLOATING POINT NUMBER.

The floating point standard for all computing machines, from supercomputers
to desktop workstations, is codified in the standards IEEE754/854.

How well does your machine perform in executing floating point calculations?

To help you answer this question I have uploaded a tarball of the
rigorous FP test suite known as UCBTEST, which was first developed
at the University of California at Berkeley.

Original source: http://www.netlib.org/fp/

The original source code is quite ancient, ca. 1995, and may not function
on modern machines.  Consequently I have provided a patched version to
bring the code up to date.  The patched source should run on any x64 Linux
machine (it certainly runs on mine).

Patched source: 
http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=05747896726892930617

Note that the original source is somewhat disorganized and not structured
according to the GNU/Linux style to which you may be accustomed.  But
the fault is not mine.  I did not write the code; I only patched it.

But execution should be foolproof if you follow these instructions.

1) Unpack the tarball anywhere.

2) You will see a directory called "ucbtest-src"

3) Change into that directory and execute the script:

	ucbREADME/linux.shlinux.sh > linux.log 2>&1 

4) The program requires several minutes to complete.  Results are
contained in the "ucbtest-results" directory as several *output
files as well as in the file "linux.log."

Documentation for the UCBTEST is included in the "ucbREADME" directory.

The tests require the Linux "time" utility which I have included
in the "ucbREADME" dir.  If this version of "time" fails for some
reason you will have to supply your own.  It is a common utility.

If you experience problems, check the compiler opt flags and the
other variables that are defined in ucbREADME/linux.sh.  Exactly
what to look for is explained in the README file.

Also feel free to post any questions, issues, results, or failures
to the list.

My machine performs excellently.  How does yours?

MS Windows users are out of luck, but MS Windows is junk anyway,
and the average MS Windows user could not distinguish a floating
point number from a hole in the ground.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#532135

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:01:38 +0000, Fabian Russell wrote:

> 
> 3) Change into that directory and execute the script:
> 
> 	ucbREADME/linux.shlinux.sh > linux.log 2>&1 
> 

Cut and paste slip.

Change this to:

ucbREADME/linux.sh > linux.log 2>&1

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

#532168

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:01:38 +0000, Fabian Russell wrote:

> Greetings physics enthusiasts:
> 

What?  No takers?

What's the matter?  Floating point numbers are not impressive enough to
your digital savoir-faire?

Floating point numbers make the computing world go around.  Nothing could
be done without them, from calculating a flight to Mars to balancing
grandma's check book.

What's the matter?  Y'all a bunch of Object Oriented a$$wipes that have
never experienced the real machine?  Y'all a bunch of hardware virgins?

Does the expression "Branch On Carry Clear" have any significance to y'all?

Ha, ha!  Y'all couldn't construct a 2's complement to save grandma from
being sold to the Arabs!

Catastrophic cancellation would bite your lame asses and no dick head
in the OO department would ever suspect the least.

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

#532173

Fabian Russell wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:01:38 +0000, Fabian Russell wrote:
>
>> Greetings physics enthusiasts:
>> 
>
> What?  No takers?
>
> What's the matter?  Floating point numbers are not impressive enough to
> your digital savoir-faire?
>
> Floating point numbers make the computing world go around.  Nothing could
> be done without them, from calculating a flight to Mars to balancing
> grandma's check book.

Fool.  Nobody uses floating points for money, except fools like you, fool.

<chuckle>

You do realize you're talking to people who probably think Excel is
suitable for big-time calculations?

   http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/13/microsofts-excel-might-be-the-most-dangerous-software-on-the-planet/

   No, really, it’s possible that Microsoft‘s Excel is the most dangerous
   software on the planet. Yes, more dangerous than rogue code running a
   nuclear power plant, than the Stuxnet that was deliberately sent off to
   sabotage Iran‘s nuclear program, worse, even, than whatever rent in the
   fabric of space time led to the invention of Lolcats. Really, that
   serious.

   . . .

   To translate that into the vernacular, the bank, JP Morgan, was running
   huge bets (tens of billions of dollars, what we might think of a golly
   gee gosh that’s a lot of money) in London. The way they were
   checking what they were doing was playing around in Excel. And not even
   in the Masters of the Universe style that we might hope, all integrated,
   automated and self-checking, but by cutting and pasting from one
   spreadsheet to another. And yes, they got one of the equations wrong as a
   result of which the bank lost several billion dollars (perhaps we might
   drop the gee here but it’s still golly gosh that’s a lot of money).

-- 
You single-handedly fought your way into this hopeless mess.

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

#532178

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:19:53 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> 
> Nobody uses floating points for money, 
> 

You need to specify *binary* floating point.

Decimal floating point (DFP) is preferable for financial calculations
and has been finalized in IEEE854, but hardware implementations
of it are completely lacking.

Hopefully, the processor manufacturers will get up to speed
and incorporate DFP into a future release and soon.

> 
> No, really, it’s possible that Microsoft‘s Excel is the most dangerous
> software on the planet.
>

That's why Gnumeric is always recommended:

http://www.gnumeric.org

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

#532182

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:19:53 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> 
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/13/microsofts-excel-might-be-the-most-dangerous-software-on-the-planet/
> 
> No, really, it’s possible that Microsoft‘s Excel is the most dangerous
> software on the planet. Yes ...
>

Do you mean that this tripe actually passes for serious journalistic style?

Whew!  The author appears to be a professional imitating a junior high
school sophomore imitating a professional.

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

#532196

Fabian Russell wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:19:53 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> 
>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/02/13/microsofts-excel-might-be-the-most-dangerous-software-on-the-planet/
>> 
>> No, really, it’s possible that Microsoft‘s Excel is the most dangerous
>> software on the planet. Yes ...
>
> Do you mean that this tripe actually passes for serious journalistic style?
>
> Whew!  The author appears to be a professional imitating a junior high
> school sophomore imitating a professional.

I couldn't resist a little trolling :-)

-- 
Try the Moo Shu Pork.  It is especially good today.

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

#532191

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:19:53 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> 
> You do realize you're talking to people who probably think Excel is
> suitable for big-time calculations?
> 

Well, judging by the response to a previous thread I thought that
this group was composed of lively and talented men of true intellectual
curiosity.

How wrong first impressions can be!

It seems those who frequent this NG are just more of the listless,
provincial, and mentally paralyzed type that one sees wandering
Skid Row.

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

#532193

On 11/11/2015 3:13 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>
>
> Well, judging by the response to a previous thread I thought that
> this group was composed of lively and talented men of true intellectual
> curiosity.
>
> How wrong first impressions can be!
>
> It seems those who frequent this NG are just more of the listless,
> provincial, and mentally paralyzed type that one sees wandering
> Skid Row.
>

Attention whores be whorin'.

"Talk to me! I dare you! PleeeeEEEEEASE....."

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#532197

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:16:41 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Attention whores be whorin'.
> 
> "Talk to me! I dare you! PleeeeEEEEEASE....."
>

Is that you, Oddball?  Or is that one of your wooden puppets
attempting to come to life?

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

#532200

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:16:41 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Attention whores be whorin'.
> 

Now, you listen and you listen good, you fscking little weasel.

This is a very important floating point test suite that could be
immensely valuable to physicists and scientists of all persuasions.
I am taking the responsibility to bring it to the attention of all
dedicated professionals.

Yet you are attempting to cheapen and degrade the discussion with
you inane outbursts.

Unless you have substantive and relevant ideas to contribute I will
advise you to keep your fscking mouth shut.

Is that clear?

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

#532206

On 11/11/2015 3:54 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:16:41 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Attention whores be whorin'.
>>
>
> Now, you listen and you listen good, you fscking little weasel.
>
> This is a very important floating point test suite that could be
> immensely valuable to physicists and scientists of all persuasions.

So would a fancy new calculator. So would a novel socket wrench. Neither 
of which is pertinent to a discussion group about physics.

> I am taking the responsibility to bring it to the attention of all
> dedicated professionals.
>
> Yet you are attempting to cheapen and degrade the discussion with
> you inane outbursts.

It is impossible to degrade one of the discussions you initiate.

>
> Unless you have substantive and relevant ideas to contribute I will
> advise you to keep your fscking mouth shut.

Advise away, you over-inflated blimp.

>
> Is that clear?
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#532215

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:43:41 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> So would a fancy new calculator. So would a novel socket wrench. Neither 
> of which is pertinent to a discussion group about physics.
> 

Ha, ha, ha, ha!  Oddball, fresh out of his water-logged ammunition, falls
back to an elaboration of the "rules."

Since when does it say "sci.physics.theoretical?"  Huh?  Answer
me that one.

Discussion group?

Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
psychological neologisms. 

You are a wind-up doll with a few stripped sprockets, methinks.

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

#532222

On 11/11/2015 5:15 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:43:41 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> So would a fancy new calculator. So would a novel socket wrench. Neither
>> of which is pertinent to a discussion group about physics.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha!  Oddball, fresh out of his water-logged ammunition, falls
> back to an elaboration of the "rules."
>
> Since when does it say "sci.physics.theoretical?"  Huh?  Answer
> me that one.

Didn't say it did. Didn't use the word "theoretical" at all.
Try posting about a novel socket wrench. See how much interest you draw 
from a physics discussion group.

You see, it doesn't matter what YOU think is interesting.

>
> Discussion group?
>
> Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
> psychological neologisms.
>
> You are a wind-up doll with a few stripped sprockets, methinks.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#532223

On 11/11/2015 5:15 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
> psychological neologisms.

By the way, when you choose to use a word, check what it means first.

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#532226

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 17:37:00 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 11/11/2015 5:15 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
>> psychological neologisms.
> 
> By the way, when you choose to use a word, check what it means first.
>

November 22 is Veteran's Day, Oddball.

I hope that you will take the time to remember, in your heart, all
those brave men, both young and old, who gave their lives in defense
of freedom, and all so a disgusting piece of sub-human trash like
you can enjoy peace and prosperity.

They should demand a refund.

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

#532301

On 11/11/2015 6:47 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 17:37:00 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>> On 11/11/2015 5:15 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>> Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
>>> psychological neologisms.
>>
>> By the way, when you choose to use a word, check what it means first.
>>
>
> November 22 is Veteran's Day, Oddball.
>
> I hope that you will take the time to remember, in your heart, all
> those brave men, both young and old, who gave their lives in defense
> of freedom, and all so a disgusting piece of sub-human trash like
> you can enjoy peace and prosperity.

I don't understand why if those freedoms include your right to tell "Odd 
Bodkins" to keep his mouth shut they don't include his right to say "no".

> They should demand a refund.

Maybe, since you seem to be trying to rescind some people's rights to 
disagree with you.

-- 
dvus

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

#532401

On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:56:30 -0500, dvus wrote:

> 
> I don't understand why if those freedoms include your right to tell "Odd 
> Bodkins" to keep his mouth shut they don't include his right to say "no".
> 

Oddball attempts to silence and neutralize legitimate discussion
with characterizations based on his "pussy" psychologizing.

This is essentially criminal.  It would not survive any court
(except maybe the "kangaroo" court of his Usenet peers).

Oddball, and any associates, should be purged.








>> They should demand a refund.
> 
> Maybe, since you seem to be trying to rescind some people's rights to 
> disagree with you.

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

#532594

On 11/12/2015 1:07 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:56:30 -0500, dvus wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't understand why if those freedoms include your right to tell "Odd
>> Bodkins" to keep his mouth shut they don't include his right to say "no".
>>
>
> Oddball attempts to silence and neutralize legitimate discussion
> with characterizations based on his "pussy" psychologizing.
>
> This is essentially criminal.  It would not survive any court
> (except maybe the "kangaroo" court of his Usenet peers).

LOL. So someone who offends you is a criminal. Someone you offend is 
rightfully convicted.

>
> Oddball, and any associates, should be purged.

Purged from what?
This is an open newsgroup.
If you want to go to a group that is more moderated, there are plenty.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> They should demand a refund.
>>
>> Maybe, since you seem to be trying to rescind some people's rights to
>> disagree with you.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

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

#532241

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 17:37:00 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 11/11/2015 5:15 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> Anytime a discussion rears its head Oddball spews forth his
>> psychological neologisms.
> 
> By the way, when you choose to use a word, check what it means first.
>

I know fscking godamned well exactly what the fsck it means.

You are the one who cannot read, you fscking literalist.

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

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web