This newsgroup has become vicious

[anonymouse127]

This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.

Newbies are regularly attacked in a vicious way about top-posting -
which is a completely normal thing to do outside of this little
newsgroup micro-world. The equally severe beatings people are given
for not trimming quotes in the right way is also unfair. Shouting at
people to read the rules doesn't hold up as an argument. When you add
a newsserver and search for javascript and find this place, there's no
popup window with the rules in it. There's nothing that tells you the
name of the website where the rules are.

Even people that sign their posts with their real name, like that
Richard person that showed up a few days ago, are criticized for
having the same name as another poster. I think the quote was "we
already have a Richard". I assume that was meant to refer to Richard
Cornford, who in each post I've seen signs his name in full so what's
the problem. Before you suggest it, I'm not "the criticized Richard",
I kept well out of that thread.

The people who offer answers or solutions are also attacked by the
more experienced here. It's programming, there's rarely a perfect
answer. There's no concept of "ok, that'll work" here. You all have to
get into a "my solution is more standard than yours". You're all
applying such an unnecessary complexity to things. There's the overly
pedantic people who are claiming that eval is evil, that sniffing for
a browser and using that to branch your logic makes you a weak and
basically worthless programmer, and that if any of your code doesn't
pass an strict validation then you're a total idiot. Likewise there's
the lobby that are criticizing anybody who's code is using anything
deprecated, or even worse, something that will be deprecated in the
future.

You might want to step back and look at what you're doing. You're
basically just being asshole geeks. Does it make you feel good ?

[rf]

<an***********@ googlemail.comw rote in message
news:11******** **************@ m36g2000hse.goo glegroups.com.. .

This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.

<snip rant>

X-Trace: posting.google. com 1183631826 12225 127.0.0.1 (5 Jul 2007 10:37:06
GMT)

--
Richard.

[Tim Streater]

In article <Vb************ ****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

<an***********@ googlemail.comw rote in message
news:11******** **************@ m36g2000hse.goo glegroups.com.. .

This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.

<snip rant>

X-Trace: posting.google. com 1183631826 12225 127.0.0.1 (5 Jul 2007 10:37:06
GMT)

Can you post something sensible instead of line-noise?

Thanks.

[rf]

"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message
news:ti******** *************** *********@news. individual.net. ..

In article <Vb************ ****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

><an*********** @googlemail.com wrote in message
news:11******* *************** @m36g2000hse.go oglegroups.com. ..

This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.

<snip rant>

X-Trace: posting.google. com 1183631826 12225 127.0.0.1 (5 Jul 2007
10:37:06
GMT)

Can you post something sensible instead of line-noise?

OK.

The things the OP is complaining about in his/her rant are usually caused by
people who know exactly nothing about the etiquette of usenet drifting in
from web based "newsgroup portals" such as google groups and others.

They come in here (read: usenet in general, not just this group but all the
others as well), break all the rules totally, and get cranky when the people
who have been inhabiting usenet since before google was even thought of try
to correct their ways.

Most of them are fly-bys. They make one single post, usually incomplete and
ambiguous, often incomprehensibl e, and are never heard from again, even when
more information is requested from them. This is annoying and in itself
engenders a very low tolerance to anybody posting from such things as google
groups.

When they do stick around they are so hampered by the stupidity of the
google groups interface that it just don't get it, to the annoyance of those
trying to help. This lowers the tolerance further.

Often they become arrogant, their tone implying that they consider that they
are conversing with something that might be called a "google groups help
desk". They snipe when somebody drifts a little off topic. I've seen them
decry a poster for addressing the stupidity of the actual question, rather
than providing a solution to that stupid question. Search the archive for
right click scripts :-) This lowers the tolerance to almost zero.

What you missed in my one-liner was that the OP is posting from the very
place that is the main cause of the reactions he is complaining about.

Clear enough?

I repeat: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

--
Richard.

[anonymouse127]

On Jul 5, 1:41 pm, "rf" <r...@invalid.c omwrote:

The things the OP is complaining about in his/her rant are usually caused by
people who know exactly nothing about the etiquette of usenet drifting in
from web based "newsgroup portals" such as google groups and others.

My complaint wasn't about the people who don't understand the
netiquette, it was about the reaction they receive when they don't
follow rules that they haven't seen and haven't been given the address
to go and read them.

What's worse is the <self-imposed snip here, it's in my original post,
I don't need to repeat it>. This is my last post on this topic and
this group, squabble amongst yourselves children.

[rf]

<an***********@ googlemail.comw rote in message
news:11******** *************@q 69g2000hsb.goog legroups.com...

On Jul 5, 1:41 pm, "rf" <r...@invalid.c omwrote:

>The things the OP is complaining about in his/her rant are usually caused
by
people who know exactly nothing about the etiquette of usenet drifting in
from web based "newsgroup portals" such as google groups and others.

My complaint wasn't about the people who don't understand the
netiquette,

That is exactly the point. The etiquette is that *you* find out the rules.
*You* find the FAQ. *You* lurk for a week or so to find out the rules. This
is the etiquette the bloody google groupers simply do not understand.

it was about the reaction they receive when they don't
follow rules that they haven't seen and haven't been given the address
to go and read them.

And my diatribe was not about that either. It was about the bloody idiots
from google groups disrupting the local scenery and then bitching about the
reaction the get, and you are one of them. You want to be spoon fed like the
bloody idiots you are.

Walk into a bar and piss on the floor. Oh, I didn't see a sign saying no
pissing on the floor.

What's worse is the <self-imposed snip here, it's in my original post,
I don't need to repeat it>. This is my last post on this topic and
this group, squabble amongst yourselves children.

Don't let the door hit your arse on your way out.

--
Richard.

[Tim Streater]

In article <3O************ *****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message
news:ti******** *************** *********@news. individual.net. ..

In article <Vb************ ****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

<an***********@ googlemail.comw rote in message
news:11******** **************@ m36g2000hse.goo glegroups.com.. .
This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.

<snip rant>

X-Trace: posting.google. com 1183631826 12225 127.0.0.1 (5 Jul 2007
10:37:06
GMT)

Can you post something sensible instead of line-noise?

OK.

Thanks, that's clear now.

The things the OP is complaining about in his/her rant are usually caused by
people who know exactly nothing about the etiquette of usenet drifting in
from web based "newsgroup portals" such as google groups and others.

They come in here (read: usenet in general, not just this group but all the
others as well), break all the rules totally, and get cranky when the people
who have been inhabiting usenet since before google was even thought of try
to correct their ways.

These aren't rules, they are mere suggestions. It's exactly when people
try to characterise them as "rules", and say that since they have been
on usenet since the year dot they get to tell people off, that I am
minded to top-post or commit some other "crime".

Most of them are fly-bys. They make one single post, usually incomplete and
ambiguous, often incomprehensibl e, and are never heard from again, even when
more information is requested from them. This is annoying and in itself
engenders a very low tolerance to anybody posting from such things as google
groups.

Such people are an irritation in any context.

When they do stick around they are so hampered by the stupidity of the
google groups interface that it just don't get it, to the annoyance of those
trying to help. This lowers the tolerance further.

Never used it but I can imagine.

Often they become arrogant, their tone implying that they consider that they
are conversing with something that might be called a "google groups help
desk". They snipe when somebody drifts a little off topic. I've seen them
decry a poster for addressing the stupidity of the actual question, rather
than providing a solution to that stupid question. Search the archive for
right click scripts :-) This lowers the tolerance to almost zero.

Well ,there are nincompoops in any group, live or not. Threads involving
them can be quite funny, and sometimes quite instructive as you often
get detailed useful information from people trying to educate the klod
in question.

What you missed in my one-liner was that the OP is posting from the very
place that is the main cause of the reactions he is complaining about.

Clear enough?

I repeat: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Yes. I haven't seen his previous posts or the thread(s?) that were
referred to, so can't judge as to whether the particular rant was
justified. But I have experienced something similar when I dropped into
the perl ng looking for an answer to a specific question about parameter
passing. They were very inwardly focussed and I got told off, so I left.
Quietly.

[-Lost]

Tim Streater wrote:

In article <3O************ *****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

>"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message
news:ti******* *************** **********@news .individual.net ...

>>In article <Vb************ ****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

<an********* **@googlemail.c omwrote in message
news:11***** *************** **@m36g2000hse. googlegroups.co m...
This is now such a nasty place to visit so I'm quitting coming here.
<snip rant>

X-Trace: posting.google. com 1183631826 12225 127.0.0.1 (5 Jul 2007
10:37:06
GMT)
Can you post something sensible instead of line-noise?

OK.

Thanks, that's clear now.

>The things the OP is complaining about in his/her rant are usually caused by
people who know exactly nothing about the etiquette of usenet drifting in
from web based "newsgroup portals" such as google groups and others.

They come in here (read: usenet in general, not just this group but all the
others as well), break all the rules totally, and get cranky when the people
who have been inhabiting usenet since before google was even thought of try
to correct their ways.

These aren't rules, they are mere suggestions. It's exactly when people
try to characterise them as "rules", and say that since they have been
on usenet since the year dot they get to tell people off, that I am
minded to top-post or commit some other "crime".

>Most of them are fly-bys. They make one single post, usually incomplete and
ambiguous, often incomprehensibl e, and are never heard from again, even when
more information is requested from them. This is annoying and in itself
engenders a very low tolerance to anybody posting from such things as google
groups.

Such people are an irritation in any context.

>When they do stick around they are so hampered by the stupidity of the
google groups interface that it just don't get it, to the annoyance of those
trying to help. This lowers the tolerance further.

Never used it but I can imagine.

>Often they become arrogant, their tone implying that they consider that they
are conversing with something that might be called a "google groups help
desk". They snipe when somebody drifts a little off topic. I've seen them
decry a poster for addressing the stupidity of the actual question, rather
than providing a solution to that stupid question. Search the archive for
right click scripts :-) This lowers the tolerance to almost zero.

Well ,there are nincompoops in any group, live or not. Threads involving
them can be quite funny, and sometimes quite instructive as you often
get detailed useful information from people trying to educate the klod
in question.

>What you missed in my one-liner was that the OP is posting from the very
place that is the main cause of the reactions he is complaining about.

Clear enough?

I repeat: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Yes. I haven't seen his previous posts or the thread(s?) that were
referred to, so can't judge as to whether the particular rant was
justified. But I have experienced something similar when I dropped into
the perl ng looking for an answer to a specific question about parameter
passing. They were very inwardly focussed and I got told off, so I left.
Quietly.

See "Example produces infinite loop - my solution fails" by "Richard".

And note that despite the genius of few, they are not superior to
anyone. And anyone who flexes their intellectual might on another
simply to get a point across is as worthless as the "idiots" they
attempt to belittle.

--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not.

[rf]

"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message
news:ti******** *************** *********@news. individual.net. ..

In article <3O************ *****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

>"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message

But I have experienced something similar when I dropped into
the perl ng looking for an answer to a specific question about parameter
passing. They were very inwardly focussed and I got told off, so I left.
Quietly.

I used one of those odd email groups once. You post an email to your
favourite chip suppliers group address and it is forwarded to everybody.

"You *MUST* put your reply at the very top of the email chain so nobody has
to scroll down" they said to me.

I did. Seemed to satisfy them. Play by their rules and they don't get upset.
Well, not a lot, anyway :-)

--
Richard.

[-Lost]

rf wrote:

"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message
news:ti******** *************** *********@news. individual.net. ..

>In article <3O************ *****@news-server.bigpond. net.au>,
"rf" <[e-mail] wrote:

>>"Tim Streater" <ti**********@d ante.org.ukwrot e in message

>But I have experienced something similar when I dropped into
the perl ng looking for an answer to a specific question about parameter
passing. They were very inwardly focussed and I got told off, so I left.
Quietly.

I used one of those odd email groups once. You post an email to your
favourite chip suppliers group address and it is forwarded to everybody.

"You *MUST* put your reply at the very top of the email chain so nobody has
to scroll down" they said to me.

I did. Seemed to satisfy them. Play by their rules and they don't get upset.
Well, not a lot, anyway :-)

Are we talking about comp.lang.perl? I'd rather read hordes of man
pages than visit that damn group.

--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not.