By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
446,234 Members | 1,896 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 446,234 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Why there aren't any female regulars in c.l.c?

P: n/a
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?

Feb 20 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
18 Replies


P: n/a
In article <11**********************@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups .com>,
<st***********@gmail.comwrote:
>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
It isn't just c.l.c -- there are few [known] female regulars in any
of the technical newsgroups I frequent (on a variety of topics.)
--
"law -- it's a commodity"
-- Andrew Ryan (The Globe and Mail, 2005/11/26)
Feb 20 '07 #2

P: n/a
st***********@gmail.com said:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.
Several people post here under pseudonyms, and in any case there is no
obligation on Usenet users to use their real names, so it's entirely
possible that some regular contributors are female without us
necessarily being aware of it. I only recall one regular contributor to
comp.lang.c who was "widely" known to be female - naisbodo - and she
hasn't posted here in quite a while.

In some IRC channels about C, the picture is a little different.

But in any case, on the Internet, you should always assume that men are
men, women are men, and children are policemen.
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Feb 20 '07 #3

P: n/a
st***********@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
How would we know?
Feb 20 '07 #4

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield wrote:
st***********@gmail.com said:
>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.

Several people post here under pseudonyms, and in any case there is no
obligation on Usenet users to use their real names, so it's entirely
possible that some regular contributors are female without us
necessarily being aware of it. I only recall one regular contributor to
comp.lang.c who was "widely" known to be female - naisbodo - and she
hasn't posted here in quite a while.

In some IRC channels about C, the picture is a little different.

But in any case, on the Internet, you should always assume that men are
men, women are men, and children are policemen.
>Is it something thats got to do with their genes?

Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.
Well, my SO has to remember to stay out of pointless flame-wars on
Metafilter, which is sort of like a USENET.
Feb 20 '07 #5

P: n/a
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:45 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>Is it something thats got to do with their genes?

Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.
Which is probably true of many men as well. More to the point, women
can be just as stupid as men. When they are stupid though they tend to be
stupid in their own ways.
Feb 20 '07 #6

P: n/a
st***********@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.

Why do you care?

Brian
Feb 20 '07 #7

P: n/a
Default User said:
st***********@gmail.com wrote:
>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.


Why do you care?
Why do you care why he (or she) cares?

(Okay, your turn)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
Feb 20 '07 #8

P: n/a
In article <Pv*********************@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:
>Default User said:
>st***********@gmail.com wrote:
>>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.


Why do you care?

Why do you care why he (or she) cares?
Ok, I'll play.

Why do you care why Default Loser cares why the OP cares?

Actually, I was thinking about posting something to the effect that it
would be helpful to know not why DL cares, but rather, what the tone of
his question was. I.e., if he actually did want to know why the OP
cares, there are some sensible answers that might be given.

But, of course, we know he was just being sarcastic and rhetorical.
Don't we?

Feb 20 '07 #9

P: n/a
On Feb 20, 11:23 am, Ivar Rosquist <IRosqu...@irq.orgwrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:45 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.

Which is probably true of many men as well. More to the point, women
can be just as stupid as men. When they are stupid though they tend to be
stupid in their own ways.
Nope. Women can't be just as stupid as men (at least in the extreme
cases, which is what we really need to worry about). ACL something of
a net-pest when she first arrived at comp.lang.c but she learned over
time. Now, Nudds (c.l.c) Harris (sci.math) and a few other net-pests
that I know of {presumably males according to their admission} took
her very best attempt at stupid, squared it, took that result to the
nth power, took the factorial of that result, and added one to the
sum. Then, they were proud of it. Eventually, ACL realized that void
main(void) *wasn't* such a grand idea but such advanced concepts never
seem to inkle into the brains of some supposedly advanced primate
males that I have known.

Now, I will admit that I am running on empirical evidence and
inductive logic. Probably, a woman would not make the same mistake.

Feb 20 '07 #10

P: n/a
user923005 wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:23 am, Ivar Rosquist <IRosqu...@irq.orgwrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:45 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.
Which is probably true of many men as well. More to the point, women
can be just as stupid as men. When they are stupid though they tend to be
stupid in their own ways.

Nope. Women can't be just as stupid as men (at least in the extreme
cases, which is what we really need to worry about). ACL something of
a net-pest when she first arrived at comp.lang.c but she learned over
time.
<snip>

Who's ACL? Must've stopped posting before mid-2005.

Feb 21 '07 #11

P: n/a
Richard Heathfield wrote:
Default User said:
st***********@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.

Why do you care?

Why do you care why he (or she) cares?
Because he/she's starting off-topic threads with it. Of course, I'm
perpetuating one. Basically I want to know where she/he is going with
this, and whether I need to plonk.


Brian
Feb 21 '07 #12

P: n/a
On Feb 20, 3:52 pm, "santosh" <santosh....@gmail.comwrote:
user923005 wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:23 am, Ivar Rosquist <IRosqu...@irq.orgwrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:45 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.
Which is probably true of many men as well. More to the point, women
can be just as stupid as men. When they are stupid though they tend to be
stupid in their own ways.
Nope. Women can't be just as stupid as men (at least in the extreme
cases, which is what we really need to worry about). ACL something of
a net-pest when she first arrived at comp.lang.c but she learned over
time.

<snip>

Who's ACL? Must've stopped posting before mid-2005.
Best read in chronological order, starting with the oldest, if you
want to get the real flavor of it:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=al...2007&safe=off&

Feb 21 '07 #13

P: n/a
On 20 Feb 2007 15:52:08 -0800, "santosh" <sa*********@gmail.comwrote
in comp.lang.c:
user923005 wrote:
On Feb 20, 11:23 am, Ivar Rosquist <IRosqu...@irq.orgwrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:22:45 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
>
Yes. Many women lack the stupidity gene, and therefore they stay well
away from Usenet.
>
Which is probably true of many men as well. More to the point, women
can be just as stupid as men. When they are stupid though they tend to be
stupid in their own ways.
Nope. Women can't be just as stupid as men (at least in the extreme
cases, which is what we really need to worry about). ACL something of
a net-pest when she first arrived at comp.lang.c but she learned over
time.
<snip>

Who's ACL? Must've stopped posting before mid-2005.
Yes, long, long before mid 2005. Haven't heard a peep from her since
at least six years before that, perhaps longer.

--
Jack Klein
Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
FAQs for
comp.lang.c http://c-faq.com/
comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~a...FAQ-acllc.html
Feb 21 '07 #14

P: n/a
At about the time of 2/20/2007 3:21 PM, Richard Heathfield stated the
following:
Default User said:
>st***********@gmail.com wrote:
>>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.

Why do you care?
Probably out cruising for a piece of....female posterior. :)
Why do you care why he (or she) cares?

(Okay, your turn)
Sorry, couldn't resist.

--
Daniel Rudy

Email address has been base64 encoded to reduce spam
Decode email address using b64decode or uudecode -m

Why geeks like computers: look chat date touch grep make unzip
strip view finger mount fcsk more fcsk yes spray umount sleep
Feb 21 '07 #15

P: n/a
In article <rk********************************@4ax.com>,
Jack Klein <ja*******@spamcop.netwrote:
>On 20 Feb 2007 15:52:08 -0800, "santosh" <sa*********@gmail.comwrote
in comp.lang.c:
><snip>

Who's ACL? Must've stopped posting before mid-2005.

Yes, long, long before mid 2005. Haven't heard a peep from her since
at least six years before that, perhaps longer.
I can pin down the lower bound a bit more precisely by saying that she
was no longer posting when I arrived at university and discovered usenet
in 1999.
dave

--
Dave Vandervies dj******@csclub.uwaterloo.ca

Should I let the cat walk over the keyboard to select the compiler?
--CBFalconer in comp.lang.c
Feb 21 '07 #16

P: n/a
On Feb 21, 5:39 am, strangerdr...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here
in c.l.c. Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
They read the instructions before beginning, so have not as
yet needed to ask for help.

Feb 22 '07 #17

P: n/a
In article <11**********************@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups .com>,
<st***********@gmail.comwrote:
>I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in c.l.c.
Is it something thats got to do with their genes?
One wrote me in email that she dislikes posting here because of the
brusque responses.

-Beej

Feb 22 '07 #18

P: n/a
st***********@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a lurker here, and I do not find any female regulars here in
c.l.c.
I suspect it has something to do with the well-known fact that the
relevant standards permit them to exhibit undefined behavior in an
alarmingly large number of circumstances. (Of course, the behavior
specified for men is not always convenient.)

--
C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
Feb 22 '07 #19

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.