Come on, you aren't really this stupid, are you?
Google doesn't give a shit about Usenet abuse, spam, trolls, or
anything else. That you imagine they will read your post here and take
action is quite quaint. Look at all the links to porno, Paypal scams,
Sportshoe and fake watch ads; all posted via Google accounts.
And more importantly, I don't post via Google. I don't use a Google
account at all.
Your invincible ignorance about how Usent works, for someone who has
beeen abusing it for 20 years, is quite an achievement.
And of course, you are the prime troll in this newsgroup. You fill it
day after day with off-topic and abusive posts. And even worse, your
poetry.
You recently threatened me, personally and apparently physically:
though of course I know this is just hot air.
(And "go non-linear"? Do you imagine you can give yourself a licence
to commit violence by saying that? Idiot.)
I am aware that my posts responding to some of your foolish and
offensive remarks may be annoying to others, so I limit them. I think
I post much less than 1% of the number, and certainly the verbiage,
than you do.
Shao, if at this time it is technically impossible to remove Sanders,
then if you are concerned with the bullying in this ng, you need to
post a complaint to Sanders in public.
My behavior, which is the use of free speech to counter uncalled-for
personal attacks, is not germane. If necessary, I will post modern-
format sonnets in foul language in response to Sanders.
I'm asking you to see the difference between setting up an account to
attack individuals off-topic, and a brisk response to those attacks
for which I take full and non-anonymous responsibility.
There is an absence of mutually supportive behavior in this ng save
amongst people who show themselves willing to be reputation-killers:
the people who are unwilling to read email from their targets, like
Seebach, and the people who constantly claim to be "ignoring the
troll" whilst constantly calling the troll a troll in a way meant to
wound and to damage people professionally.
As Yeats said, the good lack all conviction while the worst are full
of passionate intensity.
You were recently nagged to death by Seebs to think as he does about
void pointers despite the fact that a few months ago, a real, working
developer of a significant C product came in here and said, "hi, I use
'em, they work, bye".
Now, Seebie's Mommy may wuv him. Guess what? I don't care, because
when I tried to spare this ng a flame war and sent him an email
requesting an offline discussion, he posted in public the statement
that he deleted that email unread. He clearly was unwilling to discuss
things like a man, so I proceeded to watch his posts and study his
code, to find that he was not only uneducated in computer science but
an incompetent coder and a wannabe.
I said so, under my name in a way that is fully traceable, taking
responsibility for every line I've written, ready to defend what I
have said by re-learning C, a language which Princeton thought me
competent in, since they had me teach new CS majors that language and
assist John Nash wrt C. I used foul language, because the real
foulness is deliberately destroying a professional reputation in
dulcet terms as Seebs does with Schildt. I used poetry, because the
ability to write original metrical and rhyming verse is guaranteed to
create Shock and Awe in the sort of techies who can only paste rock
lyrics.
And in so doing, I created well-attended and useful threads ABOUT THE
C LANGUAGE. I wrote code, I fixed code, and I read other people's
code. This drove the killer apes here wild, since one's not supposed
to be simultaneously literate, and a good coder.
When two kids say simultaneously "he started it", guess what. One of
them probably did. I am tired of having to kick ass here in self-
defense and in defense of others. I realize that the corporate world
runs on the management of what remains a brutal, twilight struggle
between killer apes. I think we can change that. We'd better.
