Re: The ultimate luxury ?

From: Bo Grimes (vcg3rd_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 08/04/04 

Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 14:21:42 GMT

On Wed, 04 Aug 04 10:15:44 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
> In article <sWNPc.7854$Jp6.2035@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Bo Grimes <vcg3rd@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 03 Aug 04 12:11:13 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com>
> wrote:
>>> In article <oPLPc.7757$Jp6.937@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
>>> Bo Grimes <vcg3rd@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> You keep removing sci.physics. In order to answer your question,
>>> I have to keep adding it back in case you post again. I'm
>>> not going to wipe your snot again. If you want me to answer
>>> a question, you have to include the newsgroup I'm reading.
>>
>>Nice move to avoid the fact that you used 'sort' to mean 'thread' exactly
>>as you said I shouldn't and that this whole thing has been a semantic play
>>to save face on your part.

[formatting fixed for readability]

>
> Your reading comprehension needs work.

So does you newsreaders ability to quote.

>>
>>I *did* include sci.physics,
>
> No, you didn't. The only newsgroup in the line for that post was
> the linux advocacy group.

Sorry, Charlie. The only thing that has been made clear by this discussion
is that you need a new newsreader and that you don't understand how usenet
works.

>
>> ...or can't you read headers? When did you begin
>>subscribing to cola? I just set a follow-up to where I'm posting from. No
>>one was forcing you to follow it;
>
> So you are trying to undo the software. I was beginning to suspect
> so.

Not at all. I merely set a follow-up header, which you obviously don't
understand.

>
>> ... in fact, you managed to somehow figure out
>>how to respond just fine and still manage to avoid the questions.
>
> I had to edit the newsgroups line to include s.p.

Of course you did. That's how follow-ups work, but that doesn't mean my
post didn't get posted to sci.physics. It did.
  
>>
>>Since you seem to be the only one in sci.physics
>
> You need to reexamine your assumptions.

Pot, meet kettle. You have assumed everyone else's software works as your
does, that Johan doesn't understand Cobol, that Jesse doesn't understand
what a sort is and that I need my nose wiped.

> Just because nobody is commenting does not mean that they're not
> interested. The fact that they're letting me be the only fighter in this
> biz is almost proof that they're enjoying it and not bored :-).

Yeaaaah, riiight. See above regarding assumptions. You have a really,
really wierd concept of 'proof' for someone posting in a physics group.

>
>> ..who is interested in this
>>discussion I thought we could have it here; or, and here's a novel idea:
> you could set a follow-up to sci.physics and read my reply there, reply to
>>me with my follow-up in cola and I read it here.

[formatting fixed]

>
> Why should I type all those extra keystrokes just because you're
> a snot-nosed kid?

Well, you wouldn't need any extra keystrokes if you didn't insist on reading
your own post as it appears on usenet rather than just reading it in your
sent files if you needed a reminder.

And so, let me ask you: Why should Relf change what he does just because
you're a tiresome, ignorant bore? There are reasons Relf shouldn't do what
he does, but I won't appeal to them because they come from the same RFCs
that say it's polite to set a follow-up when crossposting and you obviously
don't care. So why should Relf?

>
>>
>>Or do you have some need to actually see your own posts appear in the
> group you're reading?

[formatting fixed, again]
>
> yes. People of your attitude have a tendency to edit commentary out.
> Occasionally I reread my posts to see if it happened or to remind
> myself what I was talking about. I have about 100
> conversations going and am no longer able to keep track
> of them all in my head.

Your newsreader can't save your sent posts then? And, if what you say about
my attitude is true, then people of my attitude trim posts for relevancy,
and, that's a good thing. No reason to waste bandwidth keeping comments I
don't address, as long as the relevant context is intact.

But you wouldn't understand about stuff like that either. People of your
attitude tends to be intractable, hypocritical, insufferable blowhards who
think that because they have one foot in the grave that they're wise and
entitled to be assholes.

>
>> ..Afraid you'll forget what you wrote?
>
> Nope. I'm not afraid; it's a fact that I forget now.

That's what saved posts are for. What do you do when your posts drop off
the server?
>
>> .. Can't figure out how to save your sent messages?

[formatting fixed, again]

> That's takes a lot of disk space and a lot of extra keystrokes.

Again, this is problem with your newsreader. It takes *no* keystrokes for
me to save a post. In other words, you refuse to acknowledge the place for
the follow-up header, but insist that Relf should conform to standard of not
changing the subject line.

If it looks like a hypocrite, walks like a hypocrite, and quacks like a a
washed out has been...

 
>> ...There seem to be all "sorts" of things about
>>usenet that are beyond your ability. Senility perhaps?
>
> Nope. It's a disease that I have which affects neuron function.
> Apparently, this also includes the brain neurons.

Sorry to hear that, but that just sounds like all the more reason to get a
better newsreader and to stop wasting time protecting your ego and just
admit you don't know what you're talking about.

>>
>>As to my snot, you make a whole lot of arrogant and unwarranted
> assumptions. It seems to me that if I'm as young and inexperienced

[formatting fixed, again...talk about a lot of keystrokes...you're as bad a
Relf]

>
> I have worked with 40 and 50 years olds who needed their
> noses wiped, too.

Somehow I get the sense that you think everyone but you is a snotty nosed
brat. Go figure.

>
>> ..as you think I am and
>>if I am as unknowledgeable about coding as you assume everyone is and I
> can
>>do with no problem what gives you great difficulty...

[screw it, not fixing any more of your botched quoting]

>>
>>....well, just maybe you shouldn't be so quick to respond with a
> patronizing
>>tone.
>
> Snotty is as snotty does.

*** is as...
Hypocrite is as...
Blowhard is...

> Whenever management needed the snot removed, I got the job so that our
> bit gods didn't have to waste their time on puerile behaviour. Since I
> was real efficient, I would do a snotectomy rather than momentary Kleenix
> wipes.

Wow! Your parents must be sooo proud! So who's the lucky farmer who gets
all that bull*** for ferlitizer when you get your colonoscopies, which I
imagine happens monthly so you don't drown in your own foma.[1]

>
> There was only one person who needed to be de-snotted by the
> bit gods. It wasn't a pretty sight. Do not piss off bit gods
> if you ever want to login again in your life time :-).

Sorry, I don't worship the same god as you. Bit gods can byte me.

>
> /BAH
>
> Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

And can't you set-up a proper signiture delineator? 

-- 
Bo Grimes   vcg3rd@earthlink.net
Quantcast