structuring off-topicity

Discussion in 'C++' started by Agent Mulder, Jul 18, 2003.

  1. Agent Mulder

    Agent Mulder Guest

    Hi group,

    I thought it might be a good idea to come up with
    a tagging system for off-topic posts, Borland style.
    So instead of the 'generic'

    [OT]Soundcard crashed under VC6.0

    we would have

    [e4017]Soundcard crashed under VC6.0

    where e6017 means something like
    e - error, totally off-topic
    60 - Microsoft VC6.0
    1 -soundcard
    7 - crashed

    For less serious off-topicity there might be a 'w'
    category:

    [w1083]

    read as:
    w - warning
    10 - self-appointed moderator,
    8 - stating only that this is off-topic
    3 - unnecessary rude or harsh tone

    This category is necessary because I consider an
    enumeration of all thing that C++ is *not*, ie Java,
    pinacle, cupcake... off-topic by itself.

    With this list of error- and warning messages, in the
    FAQ presumably, scanning news will be easier and
    faster. Also, it would make for some nice statistics
    after some time (not counting the leap seconds).

    This post itself could well land in the e0000 category,
    general off-topic ;-)

    -X
     
    Agent Mulder, Jul 18, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Agent Mulder" <> wrote in message
    news:bf8e6r$net$1.nb.home.nl...
    > Hi group,
    >
    > I thought it might be a good idea to come up with
    > a tagging system for off-topic posts, Borland style.
    > So instead of the 'generic'
    >
    > [OT]Soundcard crashed under VC6.0
    >
    > we would have
    >
    > [e4017]Soundcard crashed under VC6.0
    >

    Shouldn't it be [e6017] by the nomenclature you suggest :)?
    Wonder where I categorise my post ?

    > where e6017 means something like
    > e - error, totally off-topic
    > 60 - Microsoft VC6.0
    > 1 -soundcard
    > 7 - crashed
    >


    --
    With best wishes,
    J.Schafer
     
    Josephine Schafer, Jul 18, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Agent Mulder" <> wrote...
    > I thought it might be a good idea to come up with
    > a tagging system for off-topic posts, Borland style.


    No, that would legitimise off-topic posts. Off-topic posts
    do not have their place here, tagged or not.

    > [...]
    > This category is necessary because I consider an
    > enumeration of all thing that C++ is *not*, ie Java,
    > pinacle, cupcake... off-topic by itself.


    You are of course entitled to your opinion, but, alas, you're
    incorrect. An explanation to a visitor (who may be lost) that
    he or she is off-topic and _why_ is never off-topic.

    Also, there are no moderators here (contrary to what you might
    want to believe). Everybody is allowed to post. What they
    post may or may not qualify as off-topic, that's for the rest
    of the community to decide (based on their understanding and
    commonly accepted practices). Look at your own post, you're
    expressing your opinion on what is and what isn't off-topic.
    Does that make _you_ a self-appointed moderator?

    > [...]
    > This post itself could well land in the e0000 category,
    > general off-topic ;-)


    I'd rather put it into troll666 category, malicious trolling.
    Tread lightly now.

    Victor
     
    Victor Bazarov, Jul 18, 2003
    #3
  4. Victor Bazarov wrote:
    [...]
    > You are of course entitled to your opinion, but, alas, you're
    > incorrect. An explanation to a visitor (who may be lost) ...


    Can be done via the [off-band] "Reply to Sender Only", idiot.

    regards,
    alexander.
     
    Alexander Terekhov, Jul 18, 2003
    #4
  5. Agent Mulder wrote:

    > Hi group,
    >
    > I thought it might be a good idea to come up with
    > a tagging system for off-topic posts, Borland style.

    [snip]
    >
    > -X


    How about if we just avoid off-topic posts and post
    to the appropriate newsgroups instead?

    --
    Thomas Matthews

    C++ newsgroup welcome message:
    http://www.slack.net/~shiva/welcome.txt
    C++ Faq: http://www.parashift.com/c -faq-lite
    C Faq: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/c-faq/top.html
    alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ faq:
    http://www.raos.demon.uk/acllc-c /faq.html
    Other sites:
    http://www.josuttis.com -- C++ STL Library book
     
    Thomas Matthews, Jul 18, 2003
    #5
  6. Re: [OT]Re: structuring off-topicity

    "Andre Kostur" <> wrote...
    > Alexander Terekhov <> wrote in news:3F17FD0E.3E64FF79
    > @web.de:
    >
    > >
    > > Victor Bazarov wrote:
    > > [...]
    > >> You are of course entitled to your opinion, but, alas, you're
    > >> incorrect. An explanation to a visitor (who may be lost) ...

    > >
    > > Can be done via the [off-band] "Reply to Sender Only", idiot.

    >
    > Haven't been around newsgroups much in the last couple of years much?

    It's
    > now very few and far between that posters have legitimate email addresses
    > listed, thus Reply to Sender is useless. Generally they've been anti-spam
    > mangled. Plus, by educating one off-topic poster, the reply becomes
    > educational to other readers as well.


    Andre, don't feed trolls. They belong in killfiles. Do not
    give anybody a reason to put your address next to his there.
     
    Victor Bazarov, Jul 18, 2003
    #6
  7. Agent Mulder

    Andre Kostur Guest

    [OT]Re: structuring off-topicity

    Alexander Terekhov <> wrote in news:3F17FD0E.3E64FF79
    @web.de:

    >
    > Victor Bazarov wrote:
    > [...]
    >> You are of course entitled to your opinion, but, alas, you're
    >> incorrect. An explanation to a visitor (who may be lost) ...

    >
    > Can be done via the [off-band] "Reply to Sender Only", idiot.


    Haven't been around newsgroups much in the last couple of years much? It's
    now very few and far between that posters have legitimate email addresses
    listed, thus Reply to Sender is useless. Generally they've been anti-spam
    mangled. Plus, by educating one off-topic poster, the reply becomes
    educational to other readers as well.
     
    Andre Kostur, Jul 18, 2003
    #7
  8. Re: [OT]Re: structuring off-topicity

    Victor Bazarov wrote:
    >
    > "Andre Kostur" <> wrote...
    > > Alexander Terekhov <> wrote in news:3F17FD0E.3E64FF79
    > > @web.de:
    > >
    > > >
    > > > Victor Bazarov wrote:
    > > > [...]
    > > >> You are of course entitled to your opinion, but, alas, you're
    > > >> incorrect. An explanation to a visitor (who may be lost) ...
    > > >
    > > > Can be done via the [off-band] "Reply to Sender Only", idiot.

    > >
    > > Haven't been around newsgroups much in the last couple of years much?

    > It's
    > > now very few and far between that posters have legitimate email addresses
    > > listed, thus Reply to Sender is useless.


    Please see the "[1]" link in the message of mine referenced below.

    "That would be consistent with the viewpoint that it's appropriate to put
    the burden of avoiding spam on people who want to send mail to you,
    rather than having to deal with it yourself. I'm with Quinn: people who
    deliberately make it difficult for me to send them mail will not receive
    mail from me."


    > Generally they've been anti-spam
    > > mangled. Plus, by educating one off-topic poster, the reply becomes
    > > educational to other readers as well.

    >
    > Andre, don't feed trolls. They belong in killfiles. Do not
    > give anybody a reason to put your address next to his there.


    http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=
    (Subject: Re: When to use typename and when class)

    regards,
    alexander.
     
    Alexander Terekhov, Jul 18, 2003
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Simon Harris

    Structuring Site/Solution

    Simon Harris, Oct 5, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    373
    Patrice
    Oct 5, 2004
  2. Damien

    Structuring of large application

    Damien, Jan 5, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    322
    Brandon Potter
    Jan 5, 2005
  3. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    346
  4. Stephen Riehm
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    750
    Stephen Riehm
    Nov 3, 2004
  5. Blue
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    744
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Jan 3, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page