On 10 Jul 2018 16:23:39 GMT, Sam Hill wrote:
> I resent being included in your list of "troll" posters.
Hi Sam Hill,
Your post is reasonable - and I will remove you from the canonical list
of worthless trolsl, which includes Rene Lamontage, Char Jackson,
Frank Slootweg, Nil, Diesel, Snit, Good Guy, nospam, etc., and whose
premier example is Wolf K.
Bear in mind...
I've been on Usenet for decades, as have most of the others here.
I'm extremely well educated at the best schools in this country (USA).
I'm always courteous to those who are courteous to me.
But I use a different Usenet model than most of you.
Most of you are "chit chatters", where you constantly post worthless
drivel, as if you're in a coffee shop shooting the breeze with a thousand
of your best friends on the net.
I don't chit chat.
*I pose difficult questions and I summarize the technical solutions.*
Many of my questions are solved with the help of the intelligent few, but
many are not resolved (simply because they're too difficult for most of
us).
Since I care about a solution, and since trolls ruin the picnic the moment
they infest a technical thread, for strategic reasons, I tactically
frontally confront those worthless trolls listed above, whom I consider
cowardly bullies. (I only confront them in threads I care about though.)
For decades I have always strived to be reasonable - where - (this is
important) - where I always purposefully respond in kind to the perceived
intent and implied tone of the person I'm responding to.
So I'm responding to your post, with that same implied intent & tone.
Almost all the time, I believe I infer the implied intent correctly.
But sometimes, rarely, but it's possible - I err.
When I do err, the record shows I have no problem whatsoever apologizing,
as I am always, if nothing else, a reasonable person in all regards.
> I posted *ONE* post in a thread of yours, asking who you were.
You posted this, did you not?
"I see. Well, since he seems to *want* his posts recognized for
some sort of Nobel prizes, it would not make sense to keep changing
his name. Mind-boggling, eh?"
Where, I can't count the number of times I've explained that I don't hide
who I am and that I randomly obfuscate my headers for privacy reasons.
You and Mayayana (and it seems, J.P. Gilliver), all of whom are not trolls,
make the same racist-like mistake to paint individuals as being part of a
despised racial group if you see only a *single attribute* of that despised
racial group.
Everyone despises trolls.
But not every person who desires privacy is a troll.
Both you and Mayayana make the patently ridiculous claim that I just want a
high post count since I care about privacy and since I respond to most
people *in threads I author!*, where I care to come to a solution.
I have explained my strategy and tactics so many times here to ignorant
racist people that I'm tired of saying "not all Blacks are hoodlums, not
all women are sluts, not all Italians are in the mafia, not all Jews are
swindlers, not all Germans are supremecists, not all people wearing
baseball caps are robbing banks", etc.
You & Mayayana see 2 attributes of the troll racial group that you hate:
- I care about privacy so I randomly obfuscate my headers, and,
- I respond to most posts in threads that I personally author
You forget that I don't troll when you label me a troll.
When you did that, I confront you. Immediately.
And I said exactly WHY I confronted you.
Remember, I confront the cowardly trolls who post to threads I care about.
What you fail to understand is:
a. I care about my privacy so I randomly obfuscate headers
b. But ... I never hide who I am.
So those, like you, who say (or imply) I obfuscate headers to avoid
killfiles are making statements that show *their* ignorance since even
trolls like Frank Slootweg, Wolf K, Nil, Diesel, and nospam an *all* figure
out my posts in ten seconds flat (some of them, like Frank Slootweg,
veritably shout out in glee when they've figured out the obvious, in fact).
As an aside, I think it's hilarious that they're so low on the
Dunning-Kruger scale of skills self assessment that they actually do think
they're "geniuses" when they can figure out my posts (where, more to the
humor, they accuse many people of being me, even when they're not me - and
where I just silently laugh to myself since those are on threads that I
don't care about so I don't confront those Slootweg-like trolls - and they
wouldn't believe me anyway).
> Then I acknowledged a
> response to that question. You, on the other hand, have *OVER 300* posts
> in just the last month. (here in a.c.o.w-10)
Do you even comprehend what you just said?
(I doubt you do.)
You make the same ignorant mistake that Char Jackson did, when he
challenged me to show value, where I post *plenty* of very helpful
questions, answers, and tutorials - and where I've done so for *decades(,
which means I have many thousands to my credit.
My challenge back to the Rene Lamontagne-like trolls is "show me what value
you *added* to this newsgroups' overall tribal knowledge".
*You completely confuse the number of posts with the value added.*
Your thought process is a trait of very stupid people, is it not?
So, I can easily prove that you post things that only stupid people would
think, but that in and of itself doesn't make you a troll, I agree.
But to confuse number of posts with added value is really a stupid thing
you just did, Sam Hill. Very stupid.
Remember, I confront facts frontally.
How many tidbits of *added value* did *you* post in that same period that
you lambaste my numbers of posts?
Offhand, I've recently posted questions with *detailed solutions* (garnered
with advice by purposefully helpful people like Paul & Rudy, of course) on
- Removing RAID dung from disks so that we can dual boot
- Changing BIOS settings so that Grub accepts dual boots
- Interfacing seamlessly with iOS simultaneously with dual boots
- Adding superhidden filename extensions back into Windows
- Using Windows to populate Android APKs to eliminate
- Using Windows to create GPS routes on geocalibrated USGS maps
- Adding many methods of creating colored cmd-here-as-admin windows
- Explaining with tremendous detail how to replicate WinXP context menus
- Outlining with detail how to create useful curlit & pingit menus
- Explaining exactly how to set up click-to-slide shutdown
- Figuring out how to disable the gateway to protect from VPN errors
- Adding a powerful rolodex command to easily grep an address text file
- Adding a powerful encrypted password 'vipw' command for safe decryption
- How to clean up a windows installation of useless "core features"
- The three score documented steps on how to set up a new Windows desktop
- A customized tutorial for setting up gVIM on Windows (sans turd files)
- Solving why the cascade-menu tutorial didn't show up in tribal archives
- How to click-to-edit extensionless files (which very few people know)
- Solving (with Paul's help!) the mystery of the windows binary tile menu
- Debugging why tor & opera browser tile-menu icons are screwy (unsolved)
- Opening an arbitrary directory from the Start > Run box (unsolved)
- How to archive this newsgroup on Google Groups (unsolved)
- How to debug a legacy printer setup issue (unsolved)
- How to best network Windows/iOS/Android/Linux (unsolved)
- Turning off Cortana so that it doesn't spy on you (unsolved)
etc.
The fact is that I post a lot, that's true.
But the fact is that I add value.
How many of you reading this added that much value in the same time period?
If you or Mayayana or J.P. Gilliver (who are not trolls - you're all just
exhibiting ignorantly racist thought processes) or the common worthless
chat-spam trolls Rene Lamontagne, Wolf K, Frank Slootweg, Nil, Diesel, and
nospam or even the truly sick trolls like Snit or the truly dangerous
trolls like Good Guy ...
If you (or any of those trolls) make the sophomoric mistake of thinking the
way you apparently think - then I'm going to set you straight.
All I have to ask you is the same question I ask of all trolls:
Q: *Compare your value added to that of mine, before you label me a troll.*
In all cases, the trolls add zero value.
A. Hence, plonking those trolls, as Paul advises, loses zero value.
B. Howeever, plonking me (which you're welcome to do), loses you value.
Those are incontrovertible facts.
Plonk me if you don't want value.
But don't call me a troll.
>> The less energy spent on him, the better as you're likely one of the
>> very few who reads his posts.
>
> I'm sure very few read yours as well...
Hehhehheh ... look at that list above of the value I added (along with help
from intelligent folks here, rare as they are).
Then compare that with the list of value *you* added (which, upon a quick
search, seems to be "zero" value added by Sam Hill in that same time
frame).
Let's summarize this diatribe, since I do think you were being reasonable
in this last post of yours, which is the one I'm responding to directly:
1. I'll take you off the list of common trolls so you're no longer in the
canonical troll group which includes Frank Slootweg, Char Jackson,
Rene Lamantagne, nospam, Nil, Diesel, and the premier worthless troll,
Wolf K.
2. But please do consider whether you've ever posted even a single iota
of added technical value to this newsgroup, before you accuse others
of what even you, yourself, can't defend (because I frontally confront,
with facts, those cowardly bully trolls who post their trollish drivel
in threads that I care about coming to a technical solution).