Re: Rich Grise
- From: keith <krw@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:37:45 -0400
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 07:50:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:36:55 -0400, Keith Williams <krw@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <83ild1pu73afasil1oqjhs0v4i6p43ssrv@xxxxxxx>,
>>jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>>> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 13:59:32 -0700, Jim Thompson
>>> <thegreatone@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 13:53:23 -0700, John Larkin
>>> ><jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 19:25:50 +0000, Guy Macon
>>> >><_see.web.page_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Frank Raffaeli wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>So I'm not much of a usenet expert, posting from google and all ...
>>> >>>>just learned what "plonk" means. Wonder why it's important.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>It's important because it tells you that, when you read posts that
>>> >>>are full of personal attacks, the target of those attacks has
>>> >>>chosen to use special software so that he doesn't see any posts
>>> >>>by the attackers - they are shouting into an empty hall. It also
>>> >>>tells you that the person being attacked has decided to rise above
>>> >>>the pettyness and to refuse to dignify any further personal attacks
>>> >>>with a response.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> "Usenet being what it is, if you participate in newsgroups
>>> >>> at all over a period if time you have the possibility of
>>> >>> attracting your own personal lunatic, who considers any
>>> >>> disagreement a personal affront, and considers it their
>>> >>> duty and obligation to "expose" the person they fixate on.
>>> >>> It's kind of pathetic, but they can't quite seem to figure
>>> >>> out why no one else sees their actions as heroic."
>>> >>> -Richard Ward
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Here is the official definition:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Plonk
>>> >>>
>>> >>>[Usenet: possibly influenced by British slang `plonk' for cheap booze,
>>> >>>or `plonker' for someone behaving stupidly (latter is lit. equivalent
>>> >>>to Yiddish `schmuck')] The sound a newbie makes as he falls to the
>>> >>>bottom of a kill file. While it originated in the newsgroup talk.bizarre,
>>> >>>this term (usually written "*plonk*") is now (1994) widespread on Usenet.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>See also kill file.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Killfile
>>> >>>
>>> >>>[Usenet; very common] (alt. `KILL file') Per-user file(s) used by some
>>> >>>Usenet reading programs (originally Larry Wall's rn(1)) to discard
>>> >>>summarily (without presenting for reading) articles matching some
>>> >>>particularly uninteresting (or unwanted) patterns of subject, author,
>>> >>>or other header lines. Thus to add a person (or subject) to one's kill
>>> >>>file is to arrange for that person to be ignored by one's newsreader in
>>> >>>future. By extension, it may be used for a decision to ignore the
>>> >>>person or subject in other media.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>See also plonk.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Troll
>>> >>>
>>> >>>1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting
>>> >>>on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the
>>> >>>post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in
>>> >>>turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one
>>> >>>trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite.
>>> >>>The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and
>>> >>>flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do,
>>> >>>while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in
>>> >>>fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be
>>> >>>in on it. See also YHBT.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts
>>> >>>specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup,
>>> >>>discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone
>>> >>>or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they
>>> >>>have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply
>>> >>>want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after,
>>> >>>they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are
>>> >>>recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him,
>>> >>>he's just a troll."
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower
>>> >>>category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing
>>> >>>some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily
>>> >>>produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not
>>> >>>infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of
>>> >>>a followup to troll postings.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>See also Kook.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>Get a life, Guy.
>>> >>
>>> >>John
>>> >
>>> >Guy who? John, WHY do you reply to such a cretin?
>>> >
>>> > ...Jim Thompson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, since I'm plonked, he can't see me. So, just because it pleases
>>> me.
>>>
>>> And because I'm bored. I'm writing a manual for a product we're just
>>> now designing. I always write the manual before we design the product,
>>> so we know what we're trying to do, and so that we can float it past a
>>> few potential customers for comment/admiration/purchase orders. But I
>>> hate to write manuals, so it's just as well I do it before, otherwise
>>> it might never get done. The PowersThatBe want me to use Word, even
>>> worse.
>>
>>PowersThatBe? Word? Good thing that we're still allowed (required?)
>>to use Frame.
>
>
> Yeah. Since I'm the Chief Engineer and the President and the Chairman
> of The Board, you'd think that I would get to make the rules. Wrong.
Why does your wife care what word processor you use?
--
Keith
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Rich Grise
- References:
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: John Fields
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: YD
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Frank Raffaeli
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Guy Macon
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Jim Thompson
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: Keith Williams
- Re: Rich Grise
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Rich Grise
- Prev by Date: RFDesign Magazine article--Tayloe
- Next by Date: Re: Fun with Lead-Free soldering
- Previous by thread: Re: Rich Grise
- Next by thread: Re: Rich Grise
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|