A plan for Jacob

[Everyman]

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Just imagine the view a new poster gets of the group: he asks a
question, receives several answers of varying degrees of helpfulness,
and then somewhere along the line Jacob interjects an asinine comment
and the thread degenerates into a sprawling and acrimonious war of
words: people pointing out (for the nth time) why Jacob is wrong, while
he steadfastly refuses to admit any error in anything he says and at the
same time turns up the emotional heat with acerbic personal attacks on
the regulars here.

Look down a list of recent topics: thread after thread has been hijacked
by Jacob to promote one of his eccentric pet ideas about how C should be
"improved" by removing the essential traits that make it C; or
propaganda for his compiler; or a refusal to distinguish between C and
extensions in lcc-win32; or just plain unprovoked verbal aggression
against one of his bugbears (chief amongst them Richard Heathfield, even
though he hasn't posted a response to Jacob for months now).

The only roughly comparable situation in my experience was at sci.math a
few years ago, when a delusional crank called James Harris took over
lots of threads with claims to have an elementary proof of Fermat's Last
Theorem. That was resolved amicably: all parties (including Harris)
agreed that posts by and about Harris and his strange ideas would be
tagged JSH in the subject line, so that they could easily be filtered
out.

Unfortunately, while it would be obvious to anyone with a brain the size
of a cherry tomato that Harris's ramblings were nonsensical, in this
group there's a real danger that if no one corrects Navia then
non-experts might absorb even his more egregious errors. The more one
reads Jacob's posts, the more one realizes how little he knows,
understands or cares about the C language, but at first glance he does
manage to project the image of someone speaking with authority,
especially because of his wretched compiler project.

The best solution I can currently think of is this: someone could create
a webpage describing (completely rationally, with no emotive language)
why Jacob's unique view of C is not to be trusted, and explaining how
new readers can killfile him in popular newsreaders. Then an automated
bot could post a followup to each of Jacob's posts with a link to this
URL. This would allow regular posters to safely killfile Jacob: and if
no one is reading his insults then no one will feel compelled to respond
to them: and all in all the signal-noise ratio of the group will jump.

Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?

[Ian Collins]

Everyman wrote:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Humbug.

>
Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?

Use your killfile.

--
Ian Collins.

[Doug]

Everyman wrote:

<snip>

It's very unfortunate what's happened to clc over the last few months,
going back a couple of years now.

I'm afraid I don't see it as the 'Jacob situation', though. It takes
two to tango, and from where I'm standing the insults heading toward
Jacob are far worse than those heading away.

I agree that Jacob makes mistakes, and I agree that he gets
defensive. But I've seen very little that would justify the behaviour
toward him I see in this group. Although his defensiveness is
something *he* should work on, I think the way criticisms are
delivered here leaves a lot to be desired - and seem at times
deliberately designed to provoke him.

So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Doug

[borophyll]

On Sep 23, 9:20 pm, Everyman <[e-mail]:

>
Do other people think this might be a workable solution?

No, it is unnecessary at best. I believe in forming an opinion on a
person, like in real life, based on my experiences with that person,
and not through second-hand gossip and opinions from people who may
have an agenda. You need to trust that most people are capable of
forming their own opinions of others. And if they don't like them,
the intelligent person will ignore them. If you really want to make
the world a better place, give money to a charity.

Regards,
B.

[Richard]

Doug <Do*********@googlemail.comwrites:

Everyman wrote:

<snip>

It's very unfortunate what's happened to clc over the last few months,
going back a couple of years now.

I'm afraid I don't see it as the 'Jacob situation', though. It takes
two to tango, and from where I'm standing the insults heading toward
Jacob are far worse than those heading away.

I agree that Jacob makes mistakes, and I agree that he gets
defensive. But I've seen very little that would justify the behaviour
toward him I see in this group. Although his defensiveness is
something *he* should work on, I think the way criticisms are
delivered here leaves a lot to be desired - and seem at times
deliberately designed to provoke him.

I would agree. The nasty elitism that exists in this NG is second to
none. And there are 3 or 4 posters directly responsible for that. Keith
Thompson tends to remain level headed and true to the language whereas
there are a few others who constantly resort to petty sniping and
jibes. If all someone can reply is something "Read the f**king FAQ" then
they shouldn't be here in the first place.

>
So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Come now, that's not true.

>
Doug

[pete]

Everyman wrote:

>
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Just imagine the view a new poster gets of the group: he

.... sees that Jacob has an anonymous stalker.

--
pete

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <sl********************@nospam.invalid>,
Richard's H's sockpuppet <sp******@invalid.comwrote:

>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

blather deleted

[Keith Thompson]

Everyman <sp******@invalid.comwrites:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

[...]

Fight fire with gasoline, eh?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Richard Tobin]

In article <sl********************@nospam.invalid>,
Everyman <sp******@invalid.comwrote:

>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

I do.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

[Eric Sosman]

Everyman wrote:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid

[John Smith]

Everyman wrote:

<snip twaddle>

Do other people think this might be a workable solution? Or is there a
better idea?

LEAVE JACOB ALONE!!

BTW, James S. Harris is still around, still solving hard
problems, and just as entertaining as ever.

JS

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:

>Everyman wrote:

>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

[J. J. Farrell]

On Sep 23, 9:36 pm, [e-mail] (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:

In article <[e-mail]>,
Eric Sosman <[e-mail]:

Everyman wrote:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.

[Malcolm McLean]

"Kenny McCormack" <ga*****@xmission.xmission.comwrote in message

In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:

>>Everyman wrote:

>>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

I doubt it. Not Heathfield's style.

--
Free games and programming goodies.
http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm

[Martin Ambuhl]

Kenny McCormack wrote:

In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:

>Everyman wrote:

>>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]

Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that. Are you sure he's not Kenny McC.
trying once again to stir the pot with his anti-social trolling?

[Charles Richmond]

Martin Ambuhl wrote:

Kenny McCormack wrote:

>In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:

>>Everyman wrote:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that. Are you sure he's not Kenny McC.
trying once again to stir the pot with his anti-social trolling?

What is your C question ???

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond richmond at plano dot net |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <11**********************@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups .com>,
J. J. Farrell <jj*@bcs.org.ukwrote:
....

>No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.

That doesn't make any sense. I *like* Jacob's posts. I think they are
intelligent, thoughtful, and worthwhile. Why would I post otherwise?

And, on the other side, who else here besides RH has such a clear-cut
hard-on (in the stalker sense) for Jacob?

[Doug]

On 23 Sep, 13:05, Richard <[e-mail]:

Doug <[e-mail]:

<snip>

So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Come now, that's not true.

Yeah, fair enough. The board seems to be ok at the moment, and i
remember some good recent discussions about type punning and em...

I'd just like clc to lay off the j-baiting. It causes more noise than
it's worth, it doesn't achieve anything. I really think that some
people do it just for a rise. Let's face it, some of us come back
here to see what'll happen next.

Anyways, the regulars here have been through a rough period in the
past and want to keep things strictly on-topic. New posters, and some
other regulars and non-regulars don't know this rule or don't follow
it strictly.

I think some slack should be cut in light of recent events. In the
words of Jack Nicholson, just before he was melted by a Martian, "why
can't we all just get along?"

I do come here primarily for the technical info (although above I
claim there's little here these days) and every now and then there is
something worth reading.

And I should point out that I rarely post technical answers because I
know there are others here who can answer better than I, and they will
get to you. Although I'll take a shot of there's nothing from the
floor after a while. (A secondary consideration is that I don't want
to get involved in an all-too-common flame war.)

Bed,
Doug

[Keith Thompson]

"J. J. Farrell" <jj*@bcs.org.ukwrites:

On Sep 23, 9:36 pm, [e-mail] (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:

[SNIP]

No; it's obvious that he's a troll trying to stir up more off-topic
nonsense and trouble here. My immediate assumption was that he is you,
Kenny.

Please don't feed the trolls. Responding to Kenny only encourages
him.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Jack Klein]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:20:52 +0200 (CEST), Everyman
<sp******@invalid.comwrote in comp.lang.c:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

I take it you weren't around a decade or so ago in the Scott Nudds
days. You have no idea what a crisis in clc is.

--
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.club.cc.cmu.edu/~ajo/docs/FAQ-acllc.html

[Karl Heinze]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:20:52 +0200 (CEST), Everyman
<sp******@invalid.comwrote:

>
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

How about the "Eveyman" situation? Go away and ...

--

E-mail: info<at>simple-line<Punkt>de

[Richard Heathfield]

Martin Ambuhl said:

Kenny McCormack wrote:

>In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:

>>Everyman wrote:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that.

For the record, Everyman is nothing to do with me. My track record in
Usenet demonstrates that I have no qualms about using my own name no
matter who I'm arguing with. Since "Kenny McCormack" is itself a
pseudonym, his opinion on sock puppets is very suspect.

McCormack appears to be of the opinion that a sock puppet belongs to a
person whose opinions the puppet agrees with. If that is so, then it would
seem that McCormack is a sock puppet of Riley, Navia, maybe Reid, and -
nobody else. I am not making that claim, however. I am merely pointing out
how it seems. And in fact I don't think that Everyman's "plan for Jacob"
is a particularly good idea.

Are you sure he's not Kenny McC. trying once again to stir the pot with
his anti-social trolling?

It is clear to me that an attempt has been made to imitate my writing
style. Nevertheless, such attempts are inevitably flawed. If necessary,
I'll go looking for some flaws. But I don't think it's necessary. Whoever
*is* behind Everyman, it is clear that clc as a group accepts that it
isn't me, despite the muckraking attempts of the trolls - for which I
thank the group.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

[Mark McIntyre]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 04:43:16 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Doug
<Do*********@googlemail.comwrote:

>I'm afraid I don't see it as the 'Jacob situation', though.

You've not been watching long enough...
JN has been a consistent and flagrant ignorer of the topic of this
group for a long time. His standard response to being told he's off
topic is to complain that he's being victimised and blame the other
person.

>It takes
two to tango, and from where I'm standing the insults heading toward
Jacob are far worse than those heading away.

Probably because jacob whines and whines and like with an irritating
child who never shuts up, eventually everyone loses their patience.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

[Chris Hills]

In article <sl********************@nospam.invalid>, Everyman
<sp******@invalid.comwrites

>The best solution I can currently think of is this: someone could create
a webpage describing (completely rationally, with no emotive language)
why Jacob's unique view of C is not to be trusted,

That is not to be trusted in your opinion....

>and explaining how
new readers can killfile him in popular newsreaders. Then an automated
bot could post a followup to each of Jacob's posts with a link to this
URL.

This would amount to abuse. (Not to mention censorship)

>Do other people think this might be a workable solution?

Absolutely not

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ ch***@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

[Richard]

Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:

Martin Ambuhl said:

>Kenny McCormack wrote:

>>In article <dL******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
Everyman wrote:
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.
[...]
Agreed. When cowardly twits feel free to launch anonymous
attacks, we have a crisis. And you, you pusillanimous piece of
pseudonymous pigeon poop, are it.

While I certainly don't disagree with your sentiments, isn't it obvious
to one and all that "Everyman" is a Richard H. sockpuppet?

No. There is little to suggest that.

For the record, Everyman is nothing to do with me. My track record in
Usenet demonstrates that I have no qualms about using my own name no
matter who I'm arguing with. Since "Kenny McCormack" is itself a
pseudonym, his opinion on sock puppets is very suspect.

McCormack appears to be of the opinion that a sock puppet belongs to a
person whose opinions the puppet agrees with. If that is so, then it would
seem that McCormack is a sock puppet of Riley, Navia, maybe Reid, and -
nobody else. I am not making that claim, however. I am merely pointing out
how it seems. And in fact I don't think that Everyman's "plan for Jacob"
is a particularly good idea.

The fact that I think you are rude, arrogant and abrasive does not mean
I am anyones sock puppet or vice versa.

Frankly I find your little war against Jacob unsavoury and it is clear
that although you revel in your killfiling of him you never miss an
opportunity to express your poisonous views about him in a followup to a
followup.

I also don't think for one minute that the OP was you.

>

>Are you sure he's not Kenny McC. trying once again to stir the pot with
his anti-social trolling?

[Richard]

Doug <Do*********@googlemail.comwrites:

On 23 Sep, 13:05, Richard <[e-mail]:

>Doug <[e-mail]:

<snip>

So I would say 'no' - writing such a page would say more about you
than Jacob. If you did write such a page, I'd probably read it during
a compile, but only for amusement value - which is the same reason I'm
here, there's little real technical discussion in this group these
days.

Come now, that's not true.

Yeah, fair enough. The board seems to be ok at the moment, and i
remember some good recent discussions about type punning and em...

I'd just like clc to lay off the j-baiting. It causes more noise than
it's worth, it doesn't achieve anything. I really think that some

This has been my point for ages now. But Heathfield in particular thinks
he has a god given right to hound and abuse other posters for reasons
known only to him. There is far more noise from him and similar than any
"troll posts". But of course in Heathfield's mind anyone who disagrees
with his "directives" with regard to content and topicality is
immediately a "troll".

[Al Balmer]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 09:21:05 -0400, pete <pf*****@mindspring.com>
wrote:

>Everyman wrote:

>>
I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

Just imagine the view a new poster gets of the group: he

... sees that Jacob has an anonymous stalker.

Anonymous, but perhaps not unknown, given one of the followups. I
presume he thought it was a clever plot.

--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ

[user923005]

On Sep 23, 7:44 pm, Jack Klein <[e-mail]:

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:20:52 +0200 (CEST), Everyman
<[e-mail] in comp.lang.c:

I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the Jacob
situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

I take it you weren't around a decade or so ago in the Scott Nudds
days. You have no idea what a crisis in clc is.

/* For old time's sake: */
#define PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT 14
#define GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT 35
#define DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT 8
#define DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT 6
#define DODGE_COUNT 26
#define TRIPE_COUNT 10
static const char*PersonalInsults[PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT+1]={"%s derides
\
the term 'software engineering'\n","%s does not think. He simply jabb
\
ers.\n","%s is a clueless juvi, and ignorant if recent history.\n","%s
\
is a liar. I have never said anything of the kind.\n","%s is clearly a
\
hack and should not be put in a position of trust\n","%s is the new ch
\
ampion of false codeing speed claims.\n","%s loves to assume that error
\
s never happen.\n","I expect to see an apology %s.\n","Is %s a hack? O
\
r is he a software engineer?\n","It is obvious that %s's comments are i
\
ncorrect.\n","Logic is not one of %s's strong points.\n","More irreleva
\
nce from %s. It doesn't matter in the slightest\n","This is nothing bu
\
t wishful thinking on %s's part.\n","What %s thinks is true is often ir
\
rational.\n",0};static const char*GenericInsults[GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT
+1]
={"Conclusion? You are a fool. This is a statement of fact.\n","Death
\
is too good for them.\n","He is demented.\n","He remains clueless.
\n",
"More proof that you are an idiot.\n","No rational mind could conclude
\
otherwise.\n","No such assumption can be made. You are demented.\n","Q
\
uite stupid.\n","There is no insult here. You are demented. It is a f
\
act.\n","They will say anything to defend their pathetic religion.
\n","\
They will say anything to defend their slothful religion.\n","They will
\
say anything.\n","Think, before you jabber further.\n","Unfortunately
\
his repsonse was incorrect, and childishly naive.\n","What is your excu
\
se?\n","What planet are you from?\n","Where is the insult? You claim i
\
s a fabrication.\n","Who am I to argue with language bigots?\n","Who ca
\
res.\n","Why do you continue to fail to provide an example?\n","Why don
\
't you?\n","Why isn't this clear to you? It's perfectly obvious to me?
\
\n","With the above nonsense, this is impossible.\n","You are demented.
\
\n","You fail to see because you wish to keep your eyes closed.\n","You
\
have contradicted yourself.\n","You most certianly are demented if thi
\
s is what you believe.\n","You need to break your habit of introducing
\
irrelevance into threads.\n","You see only what your sad religion allow
\
s you to see.\n","You see only what your sick religion allows you to se
\
e.\n","You should invest in a dictionary.\n","Your are demented.\n","Yo
\
ur position is demented.\n","Your religion prevents you from expressing
\
many blind facts.\n","Yours is a straw man, not worthy of consideratio
\
n.\n",0};static const char*DerideLanguage[DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT+1]={"C
\
is a myth and a scam.\n","C is an abomination.\n","C pushers will deny
\
any truth in the defense of their sad religion.\n","C pushers will say
\
anything.\n","Clearly the C pusher claim that C is portable is a myth a
\
nd a scam.\n","Despite himself, and his pathetic C religion, he is lear
\
ning.\n","The C pushers that remain, are mindless Juvi's.\n","The C rel
\
igion apparently demands it.\n",0};static const char*DerideUnix[
DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT+1]={"Unix continues to shrink into irrelevance.\n","U
\
nix is history.\n","Unix pushers was incorrect, yet you claim that I am
\
wrong.\n","Unix pushers will say anything to defend their pathetic rel
\
igion.\n","Why would they waste their time learning Unix?\n","Yes, Unix
\
is dying. The statistics show it.\n",0};static const char*Dodge[
DODGE_COUNT+1]={"Completely Irrelevant.\n","Examples noted.. and delete
\
d for brevity.\n","Human language is filled with imprecision.\n","I am
\
afraid to say that you fall into this classification.\n","I can only as
\
sume he agrees with the statement.\n","I can only laugh and shake my he
\
ad...\n","I don't know any recent CPU's for which this is true.\n","I h
\
ave. You have not. As your following questions show.\n","I laugh.
\n",
"In the future no OS will be without a integrated GUI. The trend is obv
\
ious.\n","Irrelevant.\n","It follows logically that Java assembler is a
\
portable assembler.\n","It is an undeniable truth that Java is portabl
\
e.\n","It will take years. We have time.\n","It's all so obvious..
\n",
"Of course not. I restate it....\n","The environment may, at its optio
\
n implement these checks.\n","There is no break in portability, you are
\
simply confused.\n","They will laugh, as I am laughing now.\n","This i
\
s absolutely true. And it is absolutely irrelevant.\n","Watch and lear
\
n...\n","What compiler? I have proposed or supported no compiler.
\n","\
Why not? Its perfectly acceptable in many situations.\n","Without the
\
ability to measure, there can be no discussion of how much.\n","Yes, we
\
ll my list wasn't extensive. Here is a more complete one.\n","You are
\
confused. I still have the statistics here beside me.\n",0};static
const char*MeaninglessTripe[TRIPE_COUNT+1]={"Java assembler is a porta
\
ble assembler.\n","Juvenile is a state of mine.\n","Natural languages a
\
re most certainly not case sensitive.\n","Only command line driven tras
\
h can be portably written in C.\n","PC's will never have gigabytes of R
\
AM.\n","Secure computing environments demand these things.\n","Semantic
\
s is an illusion. There is only rule based symbol manipulation.\n","The
\
code you present is command line driven trash.\n","Traditional assembl
\
ers are inadequate for modern programming tasks.\n","Typically, code th
\
at will shut down the application.\n",0};
#include<limits.h>
#include<stdio.h>
#include<math.h>
#include<time.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
int rand_range(int n){return(int)((double)rand()/((double)RAND_MAX
+1)*n)
;}void usage(void);int main(int argc,char**argv){int i;if(argc!
=3)usage(
);srand((unsigned)fmod(fabs((double)time(NULL)),(d ouble)UINT_MAX));
printf("%s claims that %s.\n",argv[2],argv[1]);for(i=0;i<rand()%4+1;i+
+)
{printf(PersonalInsults[rand_range(PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT)],argv[2]);
printf(Dodge[rand_range(DODGE_COUNT)]);printf(GenericInsults[rand_range(
GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT)]);printf(MeaninglessTripe[rand_range(TRIPE_COUNT)]
);printf(DerideLanguage[rand_range(DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT)]);printf(
DerideUnix[rand_range(DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT)]);}return EXIT_SUCCESS;}void
usage(void){puts("Usage:\n\tNUDDSPAM <subject<name>");exit(
EXIT_FAILURE);}

[CBFalconer]

user923005 wrote:

Jack Klein <[e-mail]:

>Everyman

>>I don't think it's too much of an exaggeration to say that the
Jacob situation is reaching crisis proportions for clc.

I take it you weren't around a decade or so ago in the Scott
Nudds days. You have no idea what a crisis in clc is.

.... snip original code ...

I took it on myself to convert it into understandable (but
identical) code. Enjoy. :-)

/* For old time's sake: */
#define PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT 14
#define GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT 35
#define DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT 8
#define DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT 6
#define DODGE_COUNT 26
#define TRIPE_COUNT 10

static const char *PersonalInsults[PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT+1] = {
"%s derides the term 'software engineering'\n",
"%s does not think. He simply jabbers.\n",
"%s is a clueless juvi, and ignorant if recent history.\n",
"%s is a liar. I have never said anything of the kind.\n",
"%s is clearly a hack and should not be put in a position"
" of trust\n",
"%s is the new champion of false codeing speed claims.\n",
"%s loves to assume that errors never happen.\n",
"I expect to see an apology %s.\n",
"Is %s a hack? Or is he a software engineer?\n",
"It is obvious that %s's comments are incorrect.\n",
"Logic is not one of %s's strong points.\n",
"More irrelevance from %s."
" It doesn't matter in the slightest\n",
"This is nothing but wishful thinking on %s's part.\n",
"What %s thinks is true is often irrational.\n",0};

static const char*GenericInsults[GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT+1] = {
"Conclusion? You are a fool. This is a statement of fact.\n",
"Death is too good for them.\n",
"He is demented.\n",
"He remains clueless.\n",
"More proof that you are an idiot.\n",
"No rational mind could concludeotherwise.\n",
"No such assumption can be made. You are demented.\n",
"Quite stupid.\n",
"There is no insult here. You are demented."
" It is a fact.\n",
"They will say anything to defend their pathetic religion.\n",
"They will say anything to defend their slothful religion.\n",
"They will say anything.\n",
"Think, before you jabber further.\n",
"Unfortunately his repsonse was incorrect,"
" and childishly naive.\n",
"What is your excuse?\n",
"What planet are you from?\n",
"Where is the insult? You claim is a fabrication.\n",
"Who am I to argue with language bigots?\n",
"Who cares.\n",
"Why do you continue to fail to provide an example?\n",
"Why don't you?\n",
"Why isn't this clear to you? It's perfectly obvious to me?\n",
"With the above nonsense, this is impossible.\n",
"You are demented.\n",
"You fail to see because you wish to keep your eyes closed.\n",
"You have contradicted yourself.\n",
"You most certianly are demented"
" if this is what you believe.\n",
"You need to break your habit of introducing"
" irrelevance into threads.\n",
"You see only what your sad religion allows you to see.\n",
"You see only what your sick religion allows you to see.\n",
"You should invest in a dictionary.\n",
"Your are demented.\n",
"Your position is demented.\n",
"Your religion prevents you from expressing"
" many blind facts.\n",
"Yours is a straw man, not worthy of consideration.\n",0};

static const char*DerideLanguage[DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT+1] = {
"C is a myth and a scam.\n",
"C is an abomination.\n",
"C pushers will deny any truth"
" in the defense of their sad religion.\n",
"C pushers will sayanything.\n",
"Clearly the C pusher claim that C"
" is portable is a myth and a scam.\n",
"Despite himself, and his pathetic C religion,"
" he is learning.\n",
"The C pushers that remain, are mindless Juvi's.\n",
"The C religion apparently demands it.\n",0};

static const char*DerideUnix[DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT + 1] = {
"Unix continues to shrink into irrelevance.\n",
"Unix is history.\n",
"Unix pushers was incorrect, yet you claim that I am wrong.\n",
"Unix pushers will say anything to defend their"
" pathetic religion.\n",
"Why would they waste their time learning Unix?\n",
"Yes, Unix is dying. The statistics show it.\n",0};

static const char*Dodge[DODGE_COUNT+1] = {
"Completely Irrelevant.\n",
"Examples noted.. and deleted for brevity.\n",
"Human language is filled with imprecision.\n",
"I am afraid to say that you fall into this classification.\n",
"I can only assume he agrees with the statement.\n",
"I can only laugh and shake my head...\n",
"I don't know any recent CPU's for which this is true.\n",
"I have. You have not. As your following questions show.\n",
"I laugh.\n",
"In the future no OS will be without a integrated GUI."
" The trend is obvious.\n",
"Irrelevant.\n",
"It follows logically that Java assembler is a"
" portable assembler.\n",
"It is an undeniable truth that Java is portable.\n",
"It will take years. We have time.\n",
"It's all so obvious..\n",
"Of course not. I restate it....\n",
"The environment may, at its option implement these checks.\n",
"There is no break in portability, you are simply confused.\n",
"They will laugh, as I am laughing now.\n",
"This is absolutely true. And it is absolutely irrelevant.\n",
"Watch and learn...\n",
"What compiler? I have proposed or supported no compiler.\n",
"Why not? Its perfectly acceptable in many situations.\n",
"Without the ability to measure,"
" there can be no discussion of how much.\n",
"Yes, well my list wasn't extensive."
" Here is a more complete one.\n",
"You are confused."
" I still have the statistics here beside me.\n",0};

static const char*MeaninglessTripe[TRIPE_COUNT+1] = {
"Java assembler is a portable assembler.\n",
"Juvenile is a state of mine.\n",
"Natural languages are most certainly not case sensitive.\n",
"Only command line driven trash"
" can be portably written in C.\n",
"PC's will never have gigabytes of RAM.\n",
"Secure computing environments demand these things.\n",
"Semantics is an illusion."
" There is only rule based symbol manipulation.\n",
"The code you present is command line driven trash.\n",
"Traditional assemblers are inadequate"
" for modern programming tasks.\n",
"Typically, code that will shut down the application.\n",0};

#include<limits.h>
#include<stdio.h>
#include<math.h>
#include<time.h>
#include<stdlib.h>

int rand_range(int n) {
return(int)((double)rand() / ((double)RAND_MAX + 1) * n);
}

void usage(void);

int main(int argc, char **argv) {
int i;

if (argc != 3)usage();
srand((unsigned)fmod(fabs((double)time(NULL)),
(double)UINT_MAX));
printf("%s claims that %s.\n", argv[2], argv[1]);
for(i = 0; i < rand() % 4 + 1; i++) {
printf(PersonalInsults[rand_range(PERSONAL_INSULT_COUNT)],
argv[2]);
printf(Dodge[rand_range(DODGE_COUNT)]);
printf(GenericInsults[rand_range(GENERIC_INSULT_COUNT)]);
printf(MeaninglessTripe[rand_range(TRIPE_COUNT)]);
printf(DerideLanguage[rand_range(DERIDE_LANGUAGE_COUNT)]);
printf(DerideUnix[rand_range(DERIDE_UNIX_COUNT)]);
}
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

void usage(void) {
puts("Usage:\n\tNUDDSPAM <subject<name>");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com