If I have:
struct one_{
unsigned int one_1;
unsigned short one_2;
unsigned short one_3;
};
struct two_{
unsigned int two_1;
unsigned short two_2;
unsigned char two_3;
};
struct mystruct{
struct one_ one;
struct two_ two;
}mystruct1;
Then could I by any change ask on the value of the whole struct mystruct1,
that is all the elements in the struct in one call? I want to do something
like (in pseudo like language):
if(mystruct1 == 0) { print("All elements of mystruct1 is zero");}
Best Regards
Terry
Nov 13 '05
258  8335 
"Roose" <no****@nospam.nospam> writes: I agree with your points, and that is why I never complain about
bottom-posting. There are valid reasons for bottom posting, which is why I
do it sometimes, as I already said. But there are valid reasons for
top-posting as well, which I already listed. And that is why I get pissed
when people complain about ME top-posting.
But regardless of your preferences, you are expected to abide by
the rules of etiquette and social courtesy set forth by the NG to
which you post. This newsgroup has a very clear preference for
bottom-posting, and an active hatred toward top-posting.
In USENET, you are expected to read a group for a couple weeks
before posting to it.
The bottom line is that it is personal preference, and UseNet is public, so
I have the right to follow my preference.
In which case, we also have the right to killfile you. And you
should expect such when you treat others with such spite.
Just like everyone has the right
to post their f*cking stupid sigs after every goddamn message.
But this is different: this is *long*-standing
USENET-acceptable. Top-posting is not, though some of the younger
groups are apathetic about it. In such groups, I don't correct
people's top-posting, and my response will be in kind, except
when I just can't do that (e.g., when I'm responding
item-by-item, such as in this post).
However, I am less pissed now than amused by the fact that I've caused a
collective apoplexy in comp.lang.c, over something as stupid as top-posting.
The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
--
Micah J. Cowan mi***@cowan.name
"Roose" <no****@nospam.nospam> writes: Do you have the slightest clue how much diskspace even the text-only
newsgroups take up per day? Not to mention the binaries. I'm not
wasting my diskspace storing that.
Well, I looked in my outlook folder, and it's 26 megs, for about 40
newsgroups from two news servers, including a several binary groups. That's
because it only downloads the headers at first.
No -- he's talking about actually *running* a news server. People
who do that are committing themselves to willingly giving up
*huge* disk for the sake of others.
--
Micah J. Cowan mi***@cowan.name
> In USENET, you are expected to read a group for a couple weeks before posting to it.
Says who? There is no President of UseNet.
In which case, we also have the right to killfile you. And you
should expect such when you treat others with such spite.
And I have encouraged people who get riled up about something as stupid as
top-posting to killfile me. In fact, I have repeatedly asked them to, and
they still haven't.
But this is different: this is *long*-standing
USENET-acceptable. Top-posting is not, though some of the younger
That is not a good enough reason for me. The English language is a standard
as well, but it changes with time and de facto rules evolve. Old rules get
broken. Same thing with UseNet. It has changed over time to include
top-posting as acceptable.
The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
I am no more a guest than you are. I probably posted here in 1995, well
before most people here. Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own
the group.
> The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
And about the rudeness, it seems to be one of the accepted norms in this
group. Every other post is "blah blah you idiot, there is no such thing in
standard C" or "No, you can't do that, stupid". I started with a simple
question, it was someone else who answered with the "Don't top-post" BS.
The rudeness also serves the purpose of showing everyone what hypocrites
they are. If they consider me a troll, then they should follow netiquette
and killfile _without comment_.
Roose wrote: In USENET, you are expected to read a group for a couple weeks
before posting to it.
Says who? There is no President of UseNet.
"Read both mailing lists and newsgroups for one to two months before you
post anything. This helps you to get an understanding of the culture of
the group." - RFC 1855.
I see you're finally quoting context. Well done.
In which case, we also have the right to killfile you. And you
should expect such when you treat others with such spite.
And I have encouraged people who get riled up about something as stupid as
top-posting to killfile me. In fact, I have repeatedly asked them to, and
they still haven't.
It's not for you, or anyone else except me, to decide who goes into my
killfile.
But this is different: this is *long*-standing
USENET-acceptable. Top-posting is not, though some of the younger
That is not a good enough reason for me. The English language is
a standard as well, but it changes with time and de facto rules
evolve.
Indeed. And they have done so in comp.lang.c, too.
Old rules get broken. Same thing with UseNet.
Only if the old rules cease to make sense in new circumstances. That isn't
the case here.
It has changed over time to include
top-posting as acceptable.
Not in comp.lang.c. Newsgroups have their own cultures, which you would do
well to respect.
The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
I am no more a guest than you are. I probably posted here in 1995, well
before most people here.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the comp.lang.c
newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own the group.
No, but neither does /not/ posting here a lot.
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
> "Read both mailing lists and newsgroups for one to two months before you post anything. This helps you to get an understanding of the culture of
the group." - RFC 1855.
Thanks, check out this one too:
"Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond to incendiary
material."
You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly. And this is not
recognition of those rules as authority.
I see you're finally quoting context. Well done.
I already said that I am perfectly capable of quoting, when I think it's
more clear. I top-post when that's more clear.
Old rules get broken. Same thing with UseNet.
Only if the old rules cease to make sense in new circumstances. That isn't
the case here.
The new circumstances are that most people use different newsreaders than
they did 10 years ago. Back in the day, the ergonomics of newsreaders
demanded that you quote. Now they don't, as there are zillions of free
newsreaders that let you track threads quite easily.
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail clients
support it. Oh times they change.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works. Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own the group.
No, but neither does /not/ posting here a lot.
No shit. I never said that I owned the group. You're the ones telling ME
what to do. I'm not telling you to do anything. I simply suggest that if
you're so keen on following netiquette, then killfile me already.
No, I don't think he is. In any case, it's not relevant if he's talking
about running a news server. I said that it is easy to track a thread even
without quoting, if you have a proper newsreader which sorts by thread. He
said that that isn't possible because you would have to store too many
messages on your machine. I say, not really, they're on the server.
There is no disk space issue with tracking messages backward by thread, in
order to follow a conversation without quoting. No -- he's talking about actually *running* a news server. People
who do that are committing themselves to willingly giving up
*huge* disk for the sake of others.
--
Micah J. Cowan
mi***@cowan.name
On 2003-10-30, Roose <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly. And this
is not recognition of those rules as authority.
Of course, it is obvious the only rules you recognize as having any
authority are your own.
I already said that I am perfectly capable of quoting, when I think
it's more clear. I top-post when that's more clear.
Obviously, it is a convention of this newsgroup to not top-post. Just
like it is convention to not bring crying babies into the movie theater.
It doesn't mean it doesn't ever happen, but when it does, the convention
breaker will get complaints. If you don't want to put up with the
complaining, why not killfile the complainers?
The new circumstances are that most people use different newsreaders
than they did 10 years ago. Back in the day, the ergonomics of
newsreaders demanded that you quote. Now they don't, as there are
zillions of free newsreaders that let you track threads quite easily.
This is a rather idyllic view. In reality, the supported features of
a news reader is dependent upon multiple factors, including, but not
limited to:
* whether the feature is implemented in the news reader
* whether the user is reading the news from a local spool or
a remote server
* whether or not the the user is reading the news offline
* whether the remote server supports all the features supported
by the client
As to which client any particular user may be using, that is a personal
choice, and the conventions of this newsgroup are such that the least
capable news reader can participate just as efficiently as the most
capable news reader.
To consider your example of threading, some commercial NNTP services
do not support the retrieval of an entire thread because it involves
a very expensive search of their, often proprietary, news database.
Others may read their news in an offline mode, to save on dial up
expenses, or reduce the amount of time the phone line is tied up by the
internet connection. In such cases, they may not have the complete
thread cached when they read a particular article.
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming
into acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more
e-mail clients support it. Oh times they change.
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
HTML e-mail is even more annoying these days, because spammers that
generate random e-mail targets now get a web server ping from your
e-mail reader, thus validating your e-mail address.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the
archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
You are so keen on getting people to killfile you, but you now openly
admit that you freely change your Usenet identity.
> Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own the group.
No, but neither does /not/ posting here a lot.
No shit.
Why, you're a potty-mouthed wart-hog-faced buffoon!
I never said that I owned the group. You're the ones
telling ME what to do.
I can't speak for everyone, but I was complaining about how you rudely
responded to a request to follow this groups netiquette, and then you
continued to rudely assert that you will do as you please. Which, to
me, implies you don't respect the members of this newsgroup that wish
you to follow netiquette.
Of course, what you do always remains your choice. Just like what
we do (which may include loud complainig) remains ours.
I'm not telling you to do anything. I simply
suggest that if you're so keen on following netiquette, then killfile
me already.
I repeat: If you don't want to put up with the complaining, why not
killfile the complainers?
....
ObC: So, what is the right way to print the value of a variable of type
int32_t? The best I can think of is:
int32_t i = 42;
printf("%jd\n", (intmax_t)i);
Is there a better way?
-- James
"Roose" <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
<snip> I started with a simple
question, it was someone else who answered with the "Don't top-post" BS.
Nope, 't was: "Please don't top-post."
^^^^^^
--
Irrwahn
(ir*******@freenet.de)
Irrwahn Grausewitz wrote: "Roose" <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
<snip>
I started with a simple
question, it was someone else who answered with the "Don't top-post" BS.
Nope, 't was: "Please don't top-post."
^^^^^^
Not only that but they answered his question very nicely while very
politely asking him not to top post. His thank you was a big fuck you.
--
Noah Roberts
- "If you are not outraged, you are not paying attention."
Roose wrote: "Read both mailing lists and newsgroups for one to two months before you
post anything. This helps you to get an understanding of the culture of
the group." - RFC 1855.
Thanks,
That's quite all right.
check out this one too:
"Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond to incendiary
material."
I have not posted any incendiary material in this thread. If you think I
have breached this guideline, it can only be because you think that /your/
material is incendiary. If so, then you have breached the guideline
yourself. I, however, have not.
You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly.
I have *asked* you not to top-post. There is a difference between asking and
telling.
And this is
not recognition of those rules as authority.
It appears from what you say that the only authority you recognise (and
expect us to recognise) is you.
I see you're finally quoting context. Well done.
I already said that I am perfectly capable of quoting, when I think it's
more clear. I top-post when that's more clear.
I disagree that putting the response before the stimulus is ever "more
clear".
<newsreader "ergonomics" point dealt with elsethread, so I've snipped it
here>
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail
clients
support it. Oh times they change.
HTML e-mail remains an ungodly annoyance. Oh times they stay the same.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Well, you certainly don't, if you think you can make unsupported and indeed
patently false claims in this newsgroup without being challenged.
> Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own the group.
No, but neither does /not/ posting here a lot.
No shit. I never said that I owned the group. You're the ones telling ME
what to do.
I have /asked/ you to stop top-posting. If you wish to be taken seriously in
this newsgroup (and it appears that you don't), it would be wise to follow
the accepted conventions of the group.
I'm not telling you to do anything. I simply suggest that if
you're so keen on following netiquette, then killfile me already.
But what if you were to start dispensing language advice? If you were in
every regular contributor's killfile, who would correct your errors?
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Roose <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
Since you do not wish to killfile various people in the group, I would
recommend just ignoring them and ending this thread.
Their only desire at this point is to continue baiting you. They are not
interested in any genuine or logical discussion. They are only posting
because they believe it makes you say funny things.
--
James Hu wrote: Obviously, it is a convention of this newsgroup to not top-post. Just
like it is convention to not bring crying babies into the movie theater.
It doesn't mean it doesn't ever happen, but when it does, the convention
breaker will get complaints.
Because you can't killfile a baby or its parent that won't step out
without going to prison for a very long time. Therefor all that can be
done is complain and hope the theater personell do something.
We have it so easy here.
NR te*********@BUSThotmailE.Rcom wrote: Their only desire at this point is to continue baiting you. They are not
interested in any genuine or logical discussion. They are only posting
because they believe it makes you say funny things.
Ah, another troll. Like your buddy Roose, you go:
*plonk*
Brian Rodenborn
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 04:08:25 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: do it sometimes, as I already said. But there are valid reasons for
top-posting as well, which I already listed.
Unfortunately the reasons were IMO invalid.
And that is why I get pissed
when people complain about ME top-posting.
people complain because your posts are usually unreadable gibberish
without resorting to scrollinh up and down to read what you failed to
snip, or diving off to google to read the fscking archives. When you
stop posting so antisocially, people will stop complaining.
The bottom line is that it is personal preference, and UseNet is public, so
I have the right to follow my preference.
Public doesn't mean "I can do what I like and the h*ll with everyone
else". It means "I have to behave according to the accepted practices
of the society I'm in". In the Real World (tm) you do'nt p*ss in
public, or attack children with mallets and your private parts. In CLC
you don't top post.
Just like everyone has the right
to post their f*cking stupid sigs after every goddamn message.
Astonishing as it may seem, sigs are accepted by RFC.
However, I am less pissed now than amused by the fact that I've caused a
collective apoplexy in comp.lang.c, over something as stupid as top-posting.
Well stop doing it.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 04:12:46 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: Do you have the slightest clue how much diskspace even the text-only
newsgroups take up per day? Not to mention the binaries. I'm not
wasting my diskspace storing that.
Well, I looked in my outlook folder, and it's 26 megs, for about 40
newsgroups from two news servers, including a several binary groups.
*shrug* PER DAY, headers alone take up about 70MB for me, ie a weeks
worth is half a gig. You can imagine how much space headers+bodies
would take up, not to mention the retention needed to keep up with
some threads.
That's because it only downloads the headers at first.
which are useless if you want to retain the threading, no? don't /have/ to read old messages. Either get with the plot, or get
plonked.
THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU TO DO, IDIOT, SO FUCKING DO IT ALREADY.
You misunderstand. Other people will plonk you, not me.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:18:50 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: No, I don't think he is.
You don't think I am *what*? If you would post properly, we'd know
what you were talking about?
In any case, it's not relevant if he's talking about running a news server.
Agreed.
I said that it is easy to track a thread even
without quoting, if you have a proper newsreader which sorts by thread. He
said that that isn't possible because you would have to store too many
messages on your machine. I say, not really, they're on the server.
FWIW few servers these days retain even plain text for more than a few
days. And even if they did, so what? I need to track down what roose
said last week, so I have to go off to some server to get it, when if
he'd retained context in the first place, he'd have saved everyone
lots of strife.
There is no disk space issue with tracking messages backward by thread, in
order to follow a conversation without quoting.
Yes there is.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:44:14 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: In USENET, you are expected to read a group for a couple weeks
before posting to it.
Says who? There is no President of UseNet.
Says the usnet guidelines at usenet.org, plus the readme. first for
this and many other groups, plus common sense. Are you clinically
thick?
But this is different: this is *long*-standing
USENET-acceptable. Top-posting is not, though some of the younger
That is not a good enough reason for me.
Then you're behaving like an antisocial cretin who deserves to be
ostracised by your fellows.
The English language is a standard
as well, but it changes with time and de facto rules evolve. Old rules get
broken. Same thing with UseNet. It has changed over time to include
top-posting as acceptable.
So you've tried here, and failed, much like Noah Webster failed to get
some English words respelled to suit his idiosyncracies. Learn a
lesson from this.
The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
I am no more a guest than you are. I probably posted here in 1995,
Frankly, I don't believe you. A google reference please, with proof
that its you..
well before most people here.
Thats very unlikely, if you restrict yourself to regulars.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:00:50 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: > Old rules get broken. Same thing with UseNet.
Only if the old rules cease to make sense in new circumstances. That isn't
the case here.
The new circumstances are that most people use different newsreaders than
they did 10 years ago. Back in the day, the ergonomics of newsreaders
demanded that you quote. Now they don't, as there are zillions of free
newsreaders that let you track threads quite easily.
Fortunately nobody gives a sh*t what you think about the ergonomics of
newsreaders changing everything. You're talking bullshit, evidently
based on exceptionally limited experience of possibly the world's
most poorly designed newsreader. Threading newsreaders have been
around for decades, but are irrelevant to the actual point.
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail clients
support it.
And the opportunity to spread viruses, trojans and generally irritate
the crap out of people. Again you're wrong. That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Apparently you're unable to back up your wild claim.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:v6********************************@4ax.com... On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 02:07:15 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
You said you killfiled me already,
He has not, but I am now:
*PLONK!*
No, I killfile you when you start telling people wrong C answers.
That would be a bad idea, wrong answers need to be corrected.
Ignorant idiots, OTOH, may be happily plonked :-)
Right now you're just an annoying idiot.
I think everybody agrees on that.
"James Hu" <jx*@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:ya********************@comcast.com... ObC: So, what is the right way to print the value of a variable of type
int32_t? The best I can think of is:
int32_t i = 42;
printf("%jd\n", (intmax_t)i);
Is there a better way?
Isn't long guaranteed to be at least 32 bits wide? You can use
printf("%ld\n", (long)i);
Mark McIntyre wrote: There is no disk space issue with tracking messages backward by thread, in
order to follow a conversation without quoting.
Yes there is.
You know, I think Roose, and maybe others, misses the point entirely.
The point isn't disk space usage, or being able to backtrack a message
because most of the time it is possible. The point is the irritation
caused by reading something like this:
"I don't see that as a benefit."
And then going "WTF is he talking about?" You begin looking for clues,
because for some reason you give a fuck. You read the post to which he
is replying, either by reading below the top-post or backtracking the
thread, and see several things to which he could be refering.
Even if I can decern exactly what he is refering to after minor research
I am already pissed off because I had to do that research. Why should I
have to go hunting for context?! In my opinion it is very pretentious
to think that you have the right to waste my time like that. What arogance!
Also highly irritating is something like this:
<hypoquote>
Maybe someday he will get it...
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 02:19:58 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
<hypoquote cut short>
And at first you go "Why the hell did he reply, quote the entire text,
and say nothing?"
I hate top posting, I am glad I killfiled this jerk. Not only did he
say "I don't want you to listen to a damn thing I say" when he top
posted, not only did you say "Fuck you" to a very well layed out answer
and polite request to be polite, but finally he had the gaul to dare me
to killfile him...bye! The rest of you still listening to his clap trap
would do good to follow those of us that saw him for the turd he is
right off and flush.
--
Noah Roberts
- "If you are not outraged, you are not paying attention."
Thanks, but at this point, it's just entertainment. No big deal. Pretty
much half the newsgroup has be vehemently replying to this thread, so I'll
take that as a license to continue. But you're right that I would have got
bored if they stopped replying.
<te*********@BUSThotmailE.Rcom> wrote in message
news:1g3nagc.sz8mhf13bva5rN%te*********@BUSThotmai lE.Rcom... Roose <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote:
Since you do not wish to killfile various people in the group, I would
recommend just ignoring them and ending this thread.
Their only desire at this point is to continue baiting you. They are not
interested in any genuine or logical discussion. They are only posting
because they believe it makes you say funny things.
--
> > "Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond to
incendiary material."
I have not posted any incendiary material in this thread.
That's debatable, but what's not debatable is that you consider my posts to
be incendiary, and you have replied to them. Therefore you have violated
your precious RFC.
You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly.
I have *asked* you not to top-post. There is a difference between asking
and telling.
Then you are in no position to ask me not to top-post, since you don't
follow netiquette yourself.
It appears from what you say that the only authority you recognise (and
expect us to recognise) is you.
That's true on Usenet, because by its design it admits no authority.
Whether this design is a mistake is a separate issue. If it were a private
group, I would abide by its rules or simply not participate. And in fact I
do participate in a few web forums and abide by their rules.
I disagree that putting the response before the stimulus is ever "more
clear".
I am well-aware of that, as are you that I disagree.
The issue is that you should either respect my preference for top-posting,
or killfile me because you consider me a troll. Or at least remain agnostic
and stop contributing to a thread that is off-topic (which is also proper
netiquette). You have failed to do any of these things.
Note that if you continue to show inability to follow the logic of a basic
argument, then I might get so bored that I would stop. That would
accomplish the same goal as well, so you can give that a try.
So far though you've distinguished yourself from James Hu and Mark McIntyre,
who aren't really worth responding to. Mr. Hu is just a fucking dolt who
sounds like a 12-year-old with a thesaurus. And Mr. McIntyre has bored me
with his inability to grasp basic ideas and the sheer volume of posts.
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail
clients
support it. Oh times they change.
HTML e-mail remains an ungodly annoyance. Oh times they stay the same.
The point is not personal preference. I can think of many reasons as well
why it's annoying. However I'm saying that it is coming into common usage
(or has already). Therefore the ever-changing Internet community has given
de facto approval to its use. There is no central authority to decide
whether its valid or not. So you can either live with it like I do and
appreciate some benefits of it, or you can drive your blood pressure through
the roof being pissed about it.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Well, you certainly don't, if you think you can make unsupported and
indeed patently false claims in this newsgroup without being challenged.
Prove that I did not post here. If you understood how Usenet works, you
would not be able to say that my claim is false.
I used to post under my real name, and no I'm not going to post it for the
group or give you a google link. I can change my name any time by going
into a dialog box in my newsreader. But so far I haven't, because otherwise
you wouldn't be able to killfile me, which I invite you to do. I'm not telling you to do anything. I simply suggest that if
you're so keen on following netiquette, then killfile me already.
But what if you were to start dispensing language advice? If you were in
every regular contributor's killfile, who would correct your errors?
That's pretty lame. A transparent facade for your control problems.
Anyway, there are OBVIOUSLY plenty of people who haven't killfiled me, so
you can -- safe with the knowledge that no incorrect answers will go
unnoticed.
Roose
> >However, I am less pissed now than amused by the fact that I've caused a collective apoplexy in comp.lang.c, over something as stupid as
top-posting.
Well stop doing it.
This seems unlikely, given the size this thread has grown to.
Roose wrote: > "Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond to incendiary > material."
I have not posted any incendiary material in this thread.
That's debatable,
Then debate it. Please cite some material that I have posted to this thread
which could reasonably be considered by an impartial observer to be
incendiary.
but what's not debatable is that you consider my posts
to be incendiary,
Do you have any evidence to back up your belief that you have irrefutable
knowledge of what I do and do not consider to be incendiary?
and you have replied to them. Therefore you have violated
your precious RFC.
Actually, I haven't.
> You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly.
I have *asked* you not to top-post. There is a difference between asking
and telling.
Then you are in no position to ask me not to top-post, since you don't
follow netiquette yourself.
If I have breached netiquette, I will apologise to you for that, but I don't
believe that I have. Your /belief/ in such a breach does not actually
/constitute/ a breach on my part.
It appears from what you say that the only authority you recognise (and
expect us to recognise) is you.
That's true on Usenet, because by its design it admits no authority.
If you do not recognise, for example, the authority of truth, of competence,
or of convention, then I see little chance of this discussion leading to
any positive outcome.
<snip>
The issue is that you should either respect my preference for top-posting,
or killfile me because you consider me a troll.
I disagree. The issue is whether you wish to be taken seriously on this
newsgroup, which values its conventions highly, and for good reason. I
don't think you're a troll, but I do think you have misunderstood this
newsgroup.
Or at least remain
agnostic
Lit "unknowing". You may consider that to be a desirable state. I do not.
<snip>
> Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming
> into acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more
> e-mail clients
> support it. Oh times they change.
HTML e-mail remains an ungodly annoyance. Oh times they stay the same.
The point is not personal preference. I can think of many reasons as well
why it's annoying. However I'm saying that it is coming into common usage
(or has already). Therefore the ever-changing Internet community has
given
de facto approval to its use. There is no central authority to decide
whether its valid or not. So you can either live with it like I do and
appreciate some benefits of it, or you can drive your blood pressure
through the roof being pissed about it.
Or you can make it clear to those who correspond with you that you prefer to
have text email. That is what I do.
>> That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
> comp.lang.c
>> newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
>
> Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Well, you certainly don't, if you think you can make unsupported and
indeed patently false claims in this newsgroup without being challenged.
Prove that I did not post here. If you understood how Usenet works, you
would not be able to say that my claim is false.
You, Roose, have posted to this newsgroup in exactly one thread - this one.
My supporting evidence is the Google archive.
Are you claiming that Google has lost your articles?
I used to post under my real name
I don't believe you.
<snip>
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Peter Pichler wrote: "Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:v6********************************@4ax.com... On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 02:07:15 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: >
>You said you killfiled me already,
He has not, but I am now:
*PLONK!*
No, I killfile you when you start telling people wrong C answers.
That would be a bad idea, wrong answers need to be corrected.
Ignorant idiots, OTOH, may be happily plonked :-)
Alas, Roose has started dispensing C "advice".
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
> > That's debatable,
Then debate it. Please cite some material that I have posted to this
thread which could reasonably be considered by an impartial observer to be
incendiary.
You posted repeated messages that told me not to top-post, when clearly you
had no expectation that I would. You were just bugging me for the sake of
replying, having the last word. Not that incendiary, and not unwelcome from
me, I admit, but to a strict netiquette nerd, they would definitely be
considered unnecessary.
but what's not debatable is that you consider my posts
to be incendiary,
Do you have any evidence to back up your belief that you have irrefutable
knowledge of what I do and do not consider to be incendiary?
Well, at least you *said* so if you don't believe so, or maybe that was one
of the others in the indistinguishable mass of anal-retentive geeks. Can't
really tell.
If you don't think any of my past message was incendiary, then that last
line certainly was. So if you reply to this, then you're replying to
incendiary material.
That's true on Usenet, because by its design it admits no authority.
If you do not recognise, for example, the authority of truth, of
competence, or of convention, then I see little chance of this discussion leading to
any positive outcome.
I think that is clear, regardless of whether I recognize those authorities.
: )
I disagree. The issue is whether you wish to be taken seriously on this
newsgroup, which values its conventions highly, and for good reason. I
don't think you're a troll, but I do think you have misunderstood this
newsgroup.
Who brought up that issue? I didn't. I am fine just having some fun.
Apparently people do take me seriously, since they've attempted (poorly) to
logically refute my arguments, and have not killfiled me, which you would do
with someone you don't take seriously.
Prove that I did not post here. If you understood how Usenet works, you
would not be able to say that my claim is false.
You, Roose, have posted to this newsgroup in exactly one thread - this
one. My supporting evidence is the Google archive.
Are you claiming that Google has lost your articles?
Jesus Christ. I think this is like the 3rd time I've explained this. Let's
go back to the basics.
There is the real world, and then there is the Internet. In the real world,
there is a person that exists. On the Internet, that person can have AS
MANY USENET IDENTITIES AS HE WISHES. It's fascinating, I know.
Therefore, the fact that "Roose" (NOT my real name, BTW) only appears in
certain threads, does not mean that I (a real person) have never posted in
other threads.
You're making this way too easy for me.
> Alas, Roose has started dispensing C "advice".
Honestly. In all seriousness.
Do you think the OP (in the interview question thread) wants to hear what I
told him, or what you guys told him? Really. Just a reality check here. I
want to know what kind of people I'm dealing with here.
On 2003-10-31, Roose <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: Alas, Roose has started dispensing C "advice".
Honestly. In all seriousness.
Do you think the OP (in the interview question thread) wants to hear
what I told him, or what you guys told him? Really. Just a reality
check here. I want to know what kind of people I'm dealing with here.
If I asked a technical question looking for an answer, I would rather
be told the correct answer, instead of being told what I wanted to
hear.
And then, I apply the golden rule.
-- James
Roose wrote: I find it _extremely_ irritating when people complain about
top-posting, as if they were the President of UseNet.
Even after a decade or more reading it.
I never get any of those type of complaints.
Have you ever considered that there might be
an obvious, easy, and final, solution to your problem ?
--
pete
Roose <no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: Thanks, but at this point, it's just entertainment. No big deal. Pretty
much half the newsgroup has be vehemently replying to this thread, so I'll
take that as a license to continue. But you're right that I would have got
bored if they stopped replying.
Good point. At least while they continue spending time with you, they
are not bothering other people with their prattle.
--
Mark McIntyre wrote: Then you're behaving like an antisocial cretin who deserves to be
ostracised by your fellows.
ROFLMAO! What's so funny is the manifest inability of you folks
to do just that!
I just *love* these threads where the clcnicks get their knickers
all bunched up.
Oop, darn forgot to post this in HTML....
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch***@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|_____________________________________________|___ ____________________|
Roose wrote: The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
And about the rudeness, it seems to be one of the accepted norms
in this group.
Actually, in many comp.lang groups. (Heh, actually, in *many*
places in amUSENET.)
But they're quite a scrabbly lot here, aren't they. They remind
me of small town folk fighting to keep progress out of River City.
"HTML has a "T" and that stands for Trouble!..." ;-)
The rudeness also serves the purpose of showing everyone what
hypocrites they are.
I've always thought it had to do with insecure egos. A common
phenomenon: if you can trash something, you *must* be better than
it. There is also the common phenomenon of "keyboard disconnect".
It's easy to be a jerk when you're not face to face. I'd bet good
money most of these people wouldn't **dare** to talk like that to
anyone's face. (If they talked to me like that, they'd be picking
up teeth!)
If they consider me a troll, then they should follow netiquette
and killfile _without comment_.
Where's the fun in that? The public plonking serves to demonstrate
how superior they (think they) are to you.
All kidding aside, my sense is there is *vast* knowledge about the
C language to be had here. But you should largely ignore them in
any other subject.
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch***@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|_____________________________________________|___ ____________________|
In article <3F***************@Sonnack.com>,
Programmer Dude <Ch***@Sonnack.com> wrote: "HTML has a "T" and that stands for Trouble!..." ;-)
No, the T stands for Text, and we have no problem with that part.
It's the H and the M (especially the M) that we'd rather not have to
deal with.
There is also the common phenomenon of "keyboard disconnect".
It's easy to be a jerk when you're not face to face. I'd bet good
money most of these people wouldn't **dare** to talk like that to
anyone's face. (If they talked to me like that, they'd be picking
up teeth!)
If somebody were to tell me face to face that I was an idiot for
preferring that they follow established social norms when dealing with
me, the number of chances that they would get to change their position
before I stopped being polite about it would not be large.
If it were my teeth that were being picked up as a result of such an
exchange, the other party would have rather more than just teeth to be
worrying about.
(And yes, in the small subset of the real world that I prefer to inhabit,
telling people (usually without being all that diplomatic about it)
when they're wrong or when they should go away and bother somebody else
instead is expected according to the established social norms.)
All kidding aside, my sense is there is *vast* knowledge about the
C language to be had here. But you should largely ignore them in
any other subject.
Better would be to grow a thick skin and pay attention to people when
they're telling you something.
Even better would be to not be rude when people try to tell you things
in the first place. (I sometimes wonder whether I have some sort of
attitude problem, since I've never noticed any of the regulars (or pretty
much anybody else, for that matter) being rude to me.)
dave
--
Dave Vandervies dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Yes, I'm a middle-aged fogy. Forty years ago I was a young fogy.
In fifteen years or so, I'll be an old fogy.
--Mike Andrews in the scary devil monastery
Dave Vandervies wrote: "HTML has a "T" and that stands for Trouble!..." ;-)
No, the T stands for Text,...
Not a fan of old musicals? (-:
There is also the common phenomenon of "keyboard disconnect".
It's easy to be a jerk when you're not face to face. I'd bet good
money most of these people wouldn't **dare** to talk like that to
anyone's face. (If they talked to me like that, they'd be picking
up teeth!)
If somebody were to tell me face to face that I was an idiot for
preferring that they follow established social norms when dealing
with me,...
Something I would grant you the ability to do *only* within the
context of *your* home or *your* office. On public ground you
have *zero* right (repeat: Z*E*R*O) to expect or demand anything.
You can certainly *request*, and if you do so nicely, and if all
other things are equal, I may well grant your request. If your
ego is so overwhelming that you refuse to deal with me, except by
your guidelines, then you probably are someone I could get through
life without dealing with ever.
(And yes, in the small subset of the real world that I prefer to
inhabit, telling people (usually without being all that diplomatic
about it) when they're wrong or when they should go away and bother
somebody else instead is expected according to the established
social norms.)
I would consider your social norms defective or naive. (Not an
uncommon thing for hardcore computer workers and engineers.) I
forget who said it, but "Politeness is the grease on which society
runs" is, I think, a Truth.
(If those are indeed your social norms, I can see why you prefer
to inhabit a small subset of the real world.)
All kidding aside, my sense is there is *vast* knowledge about the
C language to be had here. But you should largely ignore them in
any other subject.
Better would be to grow a thick skin and pay attention to people
when they're telling you something.
Only if that something is (a) something I care to know and (b) is
something the other party can speak authoritatively and correctly
about. Unasked for *opinions* about how I should behave are not
particularly welcome.
Even better would be to not be rude when people try to tell you
things in the first place.
Considering that unasked for advice is a rudeness in itself, I'd
suggest it was the offerer of said advice who "started it".
It's about control. The more I think about life and people, the
more I realize there is a single, almost defining, characteristic
about humans: we try to control as much of our environment as we
can. Some people more so than others. Some *way* more so than
others. Most of Maslow boils down to this single issue, IMO.
I've discovered that engineers and computer programmers are,
perhaps understandably, *extremely* controlling people. This is
good in their work, but can be a problem in social interaction.
They are also often prone to truly believe a problem has only
ONE completely valid solution (another aspect of control).
The extreme focus on text of a certain width, no HTML, specific
rules about quoting and replying.... all control mechanisms.
SOME of us prefer a wilder, less controlled, version of reality.
Some of us also don't much care to *be* controlled.
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch***@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|_____________________________________________|___ ____________________|
Dave Vandervies <dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote: If somebody were to tell me face to face that I was an idiot for
preferring that they follow established social norms when dealing with
me,
There is only a single social norm that I care about or believe to be
important.
Is what the person doing causing direct harm to my property (a person
fundamentally owns themselves), without my consent?
If the answer is no, they, quite simply, can do whatever they feel like
doing.
Of course, since everyone has these same property rights, actions people
can take are not unlimited.
No rational person can argue that a post to USENET is causing direct
harm to anyone's property, without their consent. This is a public place
and no one is forced to be here.
--
Roose wrote: Alas, Roose has started dispensing C "advice".
Honestly. In all seriousness.
Do you think the OP (in the interview question thread) wants to hear what
I
told him, or what you guys told him?
I presume he wants to hear the right answer, which Jack Klein gave him. I
don't suppose he wanted to hear incorrect answers.
Really. Just a reality check here.
I want to know what kind of people I'm dealing with here.
Most people who stick this newsgroup for any length of time tend to be the
kind of people who value accurate answers.
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Roose wrote:
<snip> > Prove that I did not post here. If you understood how Usenet works,
> you would not be able to say that my claim is false.
You, Roose, have posted to this newsgroup in exactly one thread - this
one. My supporting evidence is the Google archive.
Are you claiming that Google has lost your articles?
Jesus Christ. I think this is like the 3rd time I've explained this.
Let's go back to the basics.
By all means.
There is the real world, and then there is the Internet. In the real
world,
there is a person that exists. On the Internet, that person can have AS
MANY USENET IDENTITIES AS HE WISHES. It's fascinating, I know.
In Usenet, it is effectively the case that you are what you post. As far as
the world can tell, your identity is "Roose" and the only articles you have
posted in this newsgroup have all been made within the last few days.
Therefore, the fact that "Roose" (NOT my real name, BTW) only appears in
certain threads, does not mean that I (a real person) have never posted in
other threads.
Nor does it mean the opposite. In the absence of evidence to the contrary
after a search of the archives for the existence of such evidence, I draw
the obvious conclusion that you, Roose, have never posted here before.
You're making this way too easy for me.
Well, I'm certainly trying to make it as easy for you as I can. You have
made a claim (i.e. that you have posted in this newsgroup as long ago as
1995) which you have failed to substantiate. I don't believe your claim. If
you care about your reputation, either substantiate your claim (for
example, giving a message ID from a 1995 article you posted to comp.lang.c,
together with some kind of evidence that the article in question was indeed
posted by you), or withdraw the claim.
It's that easy.
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Programmer Dude <Ch***@Sonnack.com> writes:
[...] The extreme focus on text of a certain width, no HTML, specific
rules about quoting and replying.... all control mechanisms.
These are all serious attempts to keep this newsgroup useful. We have
found, from years of experience, that folowing certain simple
conventions makes this whole thing possible. Excessively long lines,
HTML, and putting quoted material after the response all get in the
way of communication. Most of us realize that, even if following the
conventions might take a little more time, it's well worth it to make
things a little easier for the people reading what we write.
I seldom say anything so important that it's going to be worth my
readers' time to wade through clever formatting or insufficient
context to figure out what I'm talking about. Even if I did have
something monumental to say, I'd still want to make it as easy as
possible for it to be read.
Too many newsgroups have descended into useless chaos. We don't want
to let that happen to comp.lang.c.
We're here to talk about C. Anyone who's more interested in showing
off how unconventional they are, or how creatively they can format
their text, should probably consider finding someplace else to do it.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks*@cts.com <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
In article <1g********************************@BUSThotmailE.R com>,
<te*********@BUSThotmailE.Rcom> wrote: Dave Vandervies <dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
If somebody were to tell me face to face that I was an idiot for
preferring that they follow established social norms when dealing with
me,
There is only a single social norm that I care about or believe to be
important.
Is what the person doing causing direct harm to my property (a person
fundamentally owns themselves), without my consent?
If the answer is no, they, quite simply, can do whatever they feel like
doing.
Then why don't you tell us where you live, and a few CLC regulars who are
following this thread and live in the area can go follow you around for
a day telling you that if you don't like the fact that they're bothering
you you can just ignore them.
I suspect that pondering the above may change your opinion about what
social norms are important.
dave
--
Dave Vandervies dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
I think he should instead be tortured by being forced to sit in a comfortable
armchair whilst someone brings him fiendishly tasty coffee and biscuits. THAT
will teach him to mess with comp.lang.c! HA! --Richard Heathfield in CLC
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 01:10:34 -0000, in comp.lang.c , "Peter Pichler"
<pi*****@pobox.sk> wrote: "Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:v6********************************@4ax.com.. .
No, I killfile you when you start telling people wrong C answers.
That would be a bad idea, wrong answers need to be corrected.
Quite, but there's wrong, and there's garbage. ERT is killfiled as
he's just a troll.
Ignorant idiots, OTOH, may be happily plonked :-)
Absolutely. ERT being a case in point.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 04:39:45 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam.nospam> wrote: > "Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond toincendiary > material."
I have not posted any incendiary material in this thread.
That's debatable, but what's not debatable is that you consider my posts to
be incendiary, and you have replied to them. Therefore you have violated
your precious RFC.
Don't try to argue with RJH, you'll lose. I've watched it many times.
Then you are in no position to ask me not to top-post, since you don't
follow netiquette yourself.
Non sequitur.
The issue is that you should either respect my preference for top-posting,
or killfile me because you consider me a troll.
We all *respect* it, we have no problem with your preference, just as
I'd not care if your preference was for camels instead of humans, or
smoking instead of whiskey.
But the point is, you show no respect for the CLC rules. When you show
respect for them, you can expect it in turn. You're the newby here, so
you start.
So far though you've distinguished yourself from James Hu and Mark McIntyre,
who aren't really worth responding to.
then why do you?
Mr. Hu is just a fucking dolt who
sounds like a 12-year-old with a thesaurus. And Mr. McIntyre has bored me
with his inability to grasp basic ideas and the sheer volume of posts.
pot, thy name is kettle. But then we did that already...
Prove that I did not post here.
Easy. The only name you're known by is roose. Before the last couple
of weeks, there's never been a post by anyone called roose. Therefore
roose has never posted here before. QED.
Now you prove that you /have/ posted here.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
ME TOOO !!!!
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:06:34 -0600, in comp.lang.c , Programmer Dude
<Ch***@Sonnack.com> wrote: Mark McIntyre wrote:
Then you're behaving like an antisocial cretin who deserves to be
ostracised by your fellows.
ROFLMAO! What's so funny is the manifest inability of you folks
to do just that!
I just *love* these threads where the clcnicks get their knickers
all bunched up.
Oop, darn forgot to post this in HTML....
(if I could have worked out how to post in HTML from a real
newsreader, I'd have done it, with a vcard attached, and all, no
honest I would have).
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
"Keith Thompson" <ks*@cts.com> wrote in message
news:lz************@cts.com... Too many newsgroups have descended into useless chaos. We don't want
to let that happen to comp.lang.c.
An observation: most (all?) technical and/or scientific groups that I am
following tend to self-regulate, in the clc manner. I guess it's mostly
because time wasters usually don't understand the topic of such newsgroup
and quickly give up.
--
.... Schroedinger does Shakespeare: "To be *and* not to be"
Only until the curtain goes up :-)
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:06:34 -0600, in comp.lang.c , Programmer Dude
<Ch***@Sonnack.com> wrote: Oop, darn forgot to post this in HTML....
<pedantry>
you misspelled oops
</pedantry>
:-)
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Mark McIntyre wrote: (if I could have worked out how to post in HTML from a real
newsreader, I'd have done it, with a vcard attached, and all, no
honest I would have).
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
It isn't difficult to write&nb sp;
valid HTML in news articles.<b r>
It's just a very silly id ea.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
"Richard Heathfield" <do******@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:bn**********@sparta.btinternet.com... <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
It isn't difficult to write&nb sp;
valid HTML in news articles.<b r>
It's just a very silly id ea.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
<p>A very silly idea indeed! </p>
It displayed as gibberish even in OE. Without headers, you are nothing! :-)
Now, what was your C question?
"Richard Heathfield" <do******@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:bn**********@sparta.btinternet.com... Roose wrote:
In Usenet, it is effectively the case that you are what you post. As far
as the world can tell, your identity is "Roose" and the only articles you
have posted in this newsgroup have all been made within the last few days.
"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:an********************************@4ax.com... Easy. The only name you're known by is roose. Before the last couple
of weeks, there's never been a post by anyone called roose. Therefore
roose has never posted here before. QED.
From these two posts, I'm going to add to my stereotypical CLC profile:
- inability to distinguish between the real world and the insular little
world of Usenet
Let's repeat. "Roose" is not a real person. I, Andy, am a real person.
Roose has not posted here before, but I have.
It is not possible to prove that I posted here. Just as it's not possible
to prove that I didn't. Therefore, you can't know, but I claim I did. I
know that upsets you greatly, with all your control problems. For something
to be undecidable boggles the small mind.
I don't know if this is funny or sad any more.
> Then why don't you tell us where you live, and a few CLC regulars who are following this thread and live in the area can go follow you around for
a day telling you that if you don't like the fact that they're bothering
you you can just ignore them.
The difference being that in the real world, there is no mechanism for
ignoring someone if they follow you around in your face. On Usenet, it is
trivial to killfile someone. Granted, that's broken if people quote the
killfiled person, but you "regular" CLCers are in such strict agreement
about things like top-posting, so I'm sure you can agree as well not to
respond to me.
I suspect that pondering the above may change your opinion about what
social norms are important.
dave
--
Dave Vandervies
dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca I think he should instead be tortured by being forced to sit in a
comfortable armchair whilst someone brings him fiendishly tasty coffee and biscuits.
THAT will teach him to mess with comp.lang.c! HA! --Richard Heathfield in
CLC This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. |
