Are all C++'ers like this?

[Paul]

They lose an argument because I provide supporting links from Stroustrup and
intellegnet arguments, while they provide no more than, they know it all
therefor they are right, as an argument.

They show nothing more than fear , they are cowards and lack intelligence
and wit.
This forum has turned into the most homosexual group of losers I ever seen
in my life.


Plonk.

 

[Matteo Settenvini]

Il giorno mer, 02/02/2011 alle 10.52 +0000, Paul ha scritto:

They lose an argument because I provide supporting links from Stroustrup and
intellegnet arguments, while they provide no more than, they know it all
therefor they are right, as an argument.

They show nothing more than fear , they are cowards and lack intelligence
and wit.
This forum has turned into the most homosexual group of losers I ever seen
in my life.


Plonk.

Even if you are angry, raising the tones won't help you making friends
(two wrongs don't make one right). Moreover, posting links to other
people websites is:
a) arrogant, because it gives for granted any other interested reader
can not use Google if (s)he wants, and
b) crossing the line that keeps *your* privacy safe, by a common social
contract. How would you feel if some of us were to post a link to, say,
your facebook profile here?

This forum is about C++, and if someone else insults you without reason,
the best you can do is to point it politely out *while staying on topic*
or just drop it. Don't feed the trolls.

I sincerely hope I ain't feeding one. Prove me right, please. Stop the
hatemail. We don't need any more spam that the one scamjob companies are
providing.

First and last e-mail from me on the subject.

Thanks,
Matteo

PS. some of the writers *might be* homosexual, by the way, so using that
as an insult makes you an homophobic, and that is not a compliment I am
making. Please respect the 99% percent of people here that did not
insult you in any way. Given and not granted that the remaining 1% did.
Statistically, about one in ten/eleven of them is not heterosexual, and
that means almost everyone has at least an homosexual friend (even
though maybe not knowing it). I don't want to discuss this any more,
because it is off-topic.

 

[Juha Nieminen]

They lose an argument because I provide supporting links from Stroustrup and
intellegnet arguments, while they provide no more than, they know it all
therefor they are right, as an argument.

They show nothing more than fear , they are cowards and lack intelligence
and wit.
This forum has turned into the most homosexual group of losers I ever seen
in my life.

At least you are here to enterain us by providing some good laughs.

Plonk.

I *wish* that was true. I'm assuming you are just lying, as always.

 

[Noah Roberts]

They lose an argument because I provide supporting links from Stroustrup and
intellegnet arguments, while they provide no more than, they know it all
therefor they are right, as an argument.

You do realize that neither amounts to anything more than an appeal to
authority, right?

Just because Stroustrup, Sutter, Alexandrescu, Myers, etc... say
something doesn't make it true. It's true if it's true, and generally
these people have it mostly figured out but even the "gods" make
mistakes.

I'm somewhat lead to question whether you're actually representing your
opponents correctly. Did they really provide no reasoning? If so,
shame on them. If they did provide their own reasons, and all you did
was quote authority... shame on you.

 

[Paul]

You do realize that neither amounts to anything more than an appeal to
authority, right?

Just because Stroustrup, Sutter, Alexandrescu, Myers, etc... say
something doesn't make it true. It's true if it's true, and generally
these people have it mostly figured out but even the "gods" make
mistakes.

I'm somewhat lead to question whether you're actually representing your
opponents correctly. Did they really provide no reasoning? If so,
shame on them. If they did provide their own reasons, and all you did
was quote authority... shame on you.

Leigh's argument ended up being that a member function did not exist at
runtime.
How else can I prove this is complete nonsense except to quote from
respected authorities on the subject? It's not appealing to anything.
He didn't give any reason at all for this particular argument of his. He
just thinks he should be right because he is, and when I produce proof he
just resorts to calling me a troll and running away from the argument. It is
him that is doing the trolling as he is creating an argument with no
reasonable intelligence behind it.

The behavour of these people used to amuse me but now they simply disgust me
with their arrogance and lack of intelligence.

 

[Default User]

says...

You do realize that

I can't believe any one is still reading, let alone responding to this
troll.



Brian

 

[Paul]

The solution to your problem is simple: stop reading this newsgroup.

Nah its ok I don't need any life advice, I have had to put up with idiots
all my life.

Perhaps you are another arsehole who is telling me to **** off in a gay way,
or perhaps you genuinely think you are giving some kind of advice. Either
way I don't give a dam tbh

good luck or go die , whatever is appropriate.

 

[Goran]

 This forum has turned into the most homosexual group of losers I ever seen
in my life.

That seem to be in a derisive tone. Is there something wrong with
homosexual groups, or... what memo I didn't get?

Goran.

 

[Hubert Kleinheistermann]

Am 02.02.2011 20:48, schrieb Paul:

Leigh's argument ended up being that a member function did not exist at
runtime.
How else can I prove this is complete nonsense except to quote from
respected authorities on the subject? It's not appealing to anything.
He didn't give any reason at all for this particular argument of his. He
just thinks he should be right because he is, and when I produce proof
he just resorts to calling me a troll and running away from the
argument. It is him that is doing the trolling as he is creating an
argument with no reasonable intelligence behind it.

The behavour of these people used to amuse me but now they simply
disgust me with their arrogance and lack of intelligence.

I am not a native speaker of English and I'm wondering:
what does "troll" mean in this context?

 

[Paul]

Am 02.02.2011 20:48, schrieb Paul:

I am not a native speaker of English and I'm wondering:
what does "troll" mean in this context?

I don't know , these people seem to use it as some derogatory insult to mean
you are worthless.

 

[MiB]

I am not a native speaker of English and I'm wondering:
what does "troll" mean in this context?

Als "Troll" wird jemand bezeichnet, der provokative, beleidigende oder
andere manipulative Kommentare in Foren posted, mit dem alleinigen
Zweck möglichst viele Antworten auf seinen Post zu bekommen. Der
Ausdruck selbst ist in der Regel nicht beleidigend gemeint, er gibt
nur dem leider sehr realen Phänomen einen Namen. Trolle sind stolz auf
Ihre "Leistungen", zu viele oder zu harte Beleidigungen sorgen zu
schnell dafür, dass die anderen Forenteilnehmer den Troll ignorieren.
Des öfteren wirst du Antworten zu einem Troll-Kommentar mit dem Wort
"plonk" sehen, damit ist das Geräusch gemeint, mit dem der Troll am
Boden des Kill-Files des verwendeten News-Anzeigeprogramms aufschlägt,
was andeutet, das weitere Kommentare des Trolls ausgefiltert werden.
Ein 'guter' Troll versucht ein echtes Problem im Themengebiet des
gewählten Forums vorzutäuschen und gibt weitere Kommentare nur ab, um
einen Streit am Laufen zu halten, so dass noch mehr Antworten
provoziert werden.

For non-German speakers, the translation:
"Troll" is a term for a person that posts provocative, insulting or
otherwise manipulative comments to discussion groups with the sole
purpose of generating as many as possible responses. The term by
itself is usually not meant as an insult, it only gives a name to this
sadly real phenomenon. Trolls take pride in their doing, if they use
too many, or too strong insults, they quickly get ignored by other
people. You will often see responses like "plonk" to a troll comment,
imitating the sound that comes from dumping the offender into the news
reader's kill file, filtering out of sight any future posts from this
source.
A 'good' troll pretends to be on topic to the news group and will post
further comments only to keep up a dissent, provoking more replies.

MiB

 

[Keith H Duggar]

Despite popular misconception, it has nothing to do with
mythical creatures that live under bridges.

It's derived from fishing. In that context, to troll is to drag one's
bait through the water, in hopes of attracting a fish. To troll usenet
is much the same, posting "bait" comments aimed at inciting an arg-
ument. The noun "troll" is simply someone who trolls.

Given Sherm's short summary above you should be able to find a
number of interesting discussions and articles about trolls and
trolling. It really does provide fascinating insight into human
psychology and the peculiar ease with which one can induce or
force a behavior in another.

For example, one can easily force a response from Leigh Johnson
by simply suggesting one use "int", in any context, in any thread
on this forum where the word "unsigned" appears. Moreover, one
can force a practically indefinite stream of responses from him
by continuing to argue the superiority of int.

In other words, anyone can control Leigh Johnson at their leisure
forcing him to post again and again as they will. For all intents
and purposes (whether sincere as with non-trolling or insincere as
with trolling), he is simply physiologically incapable of choosing
not to post.

KHD

 

[Gunter Schelfhout]

Paul wrote:

[knip]

Nah its ok I don't need any life advice, I have had to put up with idiots
all my life.

If everybody is driving on the other lane...

[knip]

 

[Keith H Duggar]

Thanks to KHD for the fine example of trolling above.

/Leigh

Quod erat demonstrandum, Q.E.D.

KHD

 

[Paul]

Paul wrote:

[knip]

Nah its ok I don't need any life advice, I have had to put up with idiots
all my life.

If everybody is driving on the other lane...

[knip]

Maybe you are in the wrong country.

 

[Keith H Duggar]

KHD, Kanze and Steinbach are fine examples of "occasional trolls" which
IMO are worse (or at least more annoying) than full-blooded trolls due
to their insidious nature.  Unfortunately their posts sometimes have
value which means killfiling them is not really an option.

/Leigh

Quod erat demonstrandum, Q.E.D.

KHD

 

[Paul]

KHD, Kanze and Steinbach are fine examples of "occasional trolls" which
IMO are worse (or at least more annoying) than full-blooded trolls due

Is this expression some kind of confused mutation of red-blooded and
full-blown ?
Or is he referrring to the arterial system of a troll?

 

[Keith H Duggar]

Q.E.D.

/Leigh

Hubert, hopefully this serves as a vivid example of trolling. In
this case I was trolling, obviously, and Leigh was my sock puppet.
Should I so desire I could continue controlling and manipulating
him into posting again and again; as I said he (and many others
vulnerable to trolling and susceptible to such mind control) are
physiologically incapable of any alternative course of action; they
are simply doomed to respond again and again at the trolls whims.

Of course this was a simple unsophisticated demonstration requiring
little effort on my part (having such an easy mark) and, my purpose
having been met, it will end soon (unless another continues pulling
the puppet strings). However, trolling can reach a sophistication
you would not believe. And if the troll seeks merely to provoke
postings and garner attention in can continue for a long time.

KHD

 

[Paul]

Q.E.D.

/Leigh

After being QED'd he attempts to terminate the conversation by branding his
opponent a troll.

I think that's another QED point to me.

 

[Paul]

The transparency of KHD's meta-troll above is a troll typical of KHD (him
being an "occasional troll"). He does try rather hard though considering
the time he must spend on his responses (assuming one considers individual
post word count as a relevant metric) belying his claim of little effort
expended on his part.

If you enjoy lowest common denominator meta-nonsense I recommend you see
the film "Inception".

/Leigh

One word:

OWNED!