COMPILER

[Richard Heathfield]

santosh said:

Kenny McCormack wrote:


I take responsibility for what I post. I have not got "worked up" by
"the core elements", whatever that means.

He means he thinks you're a communal sock-puppet, created by those whom
he doesn't like. (When you get several people making roughly the same
common sense argument, it is not unusual for one or more of them to be
accused of being a sock-puppet.)

Pseudo: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/P/pseudo.html
Sock-puppet: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/S/sock-puppet.html

There is no "core element" in this group. Different people post
according to their independent judgements. Sometimes, it happens that
one or more posters agree.

BTW, what's ethnicity got to do with posting to this group?

It seems that your pet troll Kenny can't bring himself to believe that
someone with a non-European name could possibly be intelligent, so he
is forced to assume that you are a hoax.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard said:

How can debunking be ok but singing the praises not be?

If the product were any good, its proponents would not be driven to
spamming techie newsgroups in a desperate attempt to drum up custom.

 

[santosh]

santosh said:


He means he thinks you're a communal sock-puppet, created by those whom
he doesn't like. (When you get several people making roughly the same
common sense argument, it is not unusual for one or more of them to be
accused of being a sock-puppet.)

Pseudo: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/P/pseudo.html
Sock-puppet: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/S/sock-puppet.html

Hmm, even a casual look at the headers would have shown him that there's no
realistic possibility of me being a "sock-puppet". It's perhaps easier to
forge posts when you're posting through a newsreader, but it is, AFAICT,
much more difficult to do so through Google Groups, which was what I used
till a while back.

That "the core group" would go to effort of painstakingly forge each and
every one of my ~2100 articles to feed their ego... Kenny is much worse
than I thought.

<snip>

 

[Richard]

Richard said:



If the product were any good, its proponents would not be driven to
spamming techie newsgroups in a desperate attempt to drum up custom.

You have mentioned K&R 2 a few times. Does this mean that your "drumming
up custom" indicates that it's no good?

 

[Malcolm McLean]

Richard said:



If the product were any good, its proponents would not be driven to
spamming techie newsgroups in a desperate attempt to drum up custom.

OI. What do you think I'm doing with the thread about my new book?

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard said:

You have mentioned K&R 2 a few times.
Indeed.

Does this mean that your
"drumming up custom" indicates that it's no good?

Since my name is neither Brian Kernighan nor Dennis Ritchie, your point
is utterly devoid of point.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Malcolm McLean said:

OI. What do you think I'm doing with the thread about my new book?

<cough>

 

[Malcolm McLean]

It that on topic? Does anyone really care who YOU *plonk*?

No.

plonks are topical, by convention. It's a kind of metatopic necessary to
smooth running of the ng.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

How can debunking be ok but singing the praises not be? Are you always
so mindlessly destructive in your thinking and judgements?

In a word: yes.

Bashing is entirely acceptable; it's what we do. Praising is, like
mixing primary colors during daylight hours, "Not Done"! - because it
is too easily perceived as spamming. This is the true social cost of
the existence of spam as a fact of life; people begin (quite rightly,
unfortunately) to see it everywhere.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position. Think
carefully about how useful it is to have a "core element" poster with a
decidely, shall we say, ethnic sounding name.

I think that might be carrying it a bit too far :-;[/QUOTE]

I don't. Think about it - all the "core regs" here have blindingly
common white bread names - Brian, Richard (to the n'th power), Keith, etc.

Now, we have someone with an Asian naming spouting the same nonsense.
Just one, mind you. As the santosh psuedo quite rightly points out,
running a pseudo is a lot of work.

 

[Malcolm McLean]

You have mentioned K&R 2 a few times. Does this mean that your
"drumming up custom" indicates that it's no good?

You are obviously unaware the Richard Heathfield is lead author of "C
Unleashed". For some reason he doesn't mention it very often.

 

[Richard]

You are obviously unaware the Richard Heathfield is lead author of "C
Unleashed". For some reason he doesn't mention it very often.

I think I know why. I have read it.

 

[Richard]

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position. Think
carefully about how useful it is to have a "core element" poster with a
decidely, shall we say, ethnic sounding name.

I think that might be carrying it a bit too far :-;

I don't. Think about it - all the "core regs" here have blindingly
common white bread names - Brian, Richard (to the n'th power), Keith, etc.

Now, we have someone with an Asian naming spouting the same nonsense.
Just one, mind you. As the santosh psuedo quite rightly points out,
running a pseudo is a lot of work.
[/QUOTE]

A "Brian" who announces *plonk*s is taking it a bit far I admit. We'll
have a Geoffrey with paisley jumper and nylon slacks discussing whether
a pointer to the first element of an array is really an array pointer
with Roger in his beige cardigan next. You could be on to something :-;

 

[Default User]

>"Default User"


plonks are topical, by convention. It's a kind of metatopic necessary
to smooth running of the ng.

I'll point out again that I have Richard killfiled (long time now).



Brian

 

[John Smith]

Kenny McCormack wrote:



Funny how that works, innit?

P.S. What's really funny is how the core elements worked up this psuedo
with the handle "santosh", to further their whacko position.

I take responsibility for what I post. I have not got "worked up" by "the
core elements", whatever that means.[/QUOTE]

Of course, anonymity is always an option on Usenet, but many of
the "core element" happily identify themselves. Why don't you?

JS

 

[Kenny McCormack]

I'll point out again that I have Richard killfiled (long time now).

To even try to contemplate the monumental ego of someone who thinks we
care about his personal newsreader management habits, is to indulge in an
experience in pain. Note, BTW, that besides his plonk messages and his
TPA messages, Default Loser very, very rarely posts anything of substance,
other than brownnosing "me, too"s.

To the previous poster: No, plonk messages are not on topic (certainly
not in the context of a hyperactive topicality police NG like this one).
Discussion of what is and is not on topic (such as the post you are
reading right now) are on topic. Perhaps this distinction has eluded you.

 

[Richard]

Of course, anonymity is always an option on Usenet, but many of the
"core element" happily identify themselves. Why don't you?

JS

For the same reason many people don't. That Usenet is full of Kooks who
take Usenet into the real world?

Of course, being called "John Smith" you're fairly prolific enough not to
be singled out ....

 

[Richard]

I'm not surprised. But thanks for reinforcing my point. No one cares who
you have in your super star killfile. No one is impressed. No one is in
any way affected by what you do or do not read. Since your main
contribution to this NG appears to be "OT" and "I agree with Keith"
posts then probably no one even bothers reading your "me too" posts.

To even try to contemplate the monumental ego of someone who thinks we
care about his personal newsreader management habits, is to indulge in an
experience in pain. Note, BTW, that besides his plonk messages and
his
Agreed.

TPA messages, Default Loser very, very rarely posts anything of substance,
other than brownnosing "me, too"s.

One of the first I noticed a year or two back with his "OT" and "we
don't ...." messages.

To the previous poster: No, plonk messages are not on topic (certainly
not in the context of a hyperactive topicality police NG like this one).
Discussion of what is and is not on topic (such as the post you are
reading right now) are on topic. Perhaps this distinction has eluded you.

--

 

[Malcolm McLean]

I think I know why. I have read it.

No, it's modesty. Misplaced, in my opinion; a lot of newbies would like to
know that they are engaged with someone who has a book under their belt. He
might sell a few extra copies if he put in his sig.

There's not much point trying to pull someone you dislike down. You might
show yourself to be superior to an idiot, but who needs to show that they
are superior to an idiot? To be superior to a highly talented and able
individual, well that's something.

 

[CBFalconer]

TRY CODEBLOCKS

PLONK