(Xnews) Memory Problems reading goups with millions of posts
SCPO
clue or a workaround to this problem.
Essentially, when Xnews reads a group with 2 or 3 multi-part millions posts
(such as an mp3, dvd, mpg, etc. group), it goes through the normal process
of reading the posts OK, which of course takes awhile. But, as soon as it
tries to thread the multi-parts, Xnews hangs - as if I am having memory
problems or as if it (Xnews) can't handle the strain of this many posts.
I don't think it is memory though: I am runnung a 2.5 Ghz, with 1 of mem
(approx 800 - 900 kb free with Xnews loaded) and am on cable (using
Giganews).
Any thoughts? Appreciate any insight!!
Fairwinds and following seas,
SCPO
US Navy (ret)
Murray Peterson
news:Xns976AD6E812...@216.196.97.131:
> Essentially, when Xnews reads a group with 2 or 3 multi-part millions
> posts (such as an mp3, dvd, mpg, etc. group), it goes through the
> normal process of reading the posts OK, which of course takes awhile.
> But, as soon as it tries to thread the multi-parts, Xnews hangs - as
> if I am having memory problems or as if it (Xnews) can't handle the
> strain of this many posts.
>
> I don't think it is memory though: I am runnung a 2.5 Ghz, with 1 of
> mem (approx 800 - 900 kb free with Xnews loaded) and am on cable
> (using Giganews).
>
> Any thoughts? Appreciate any insight!!
How about some simple math? Each header is about 1000 bytes in size. 3
million headers adds up to almost 3 gigabytes of required RAM. Buy (a lot)
more memory if you want to download that many headers at once.
--
Murray Peterson
Email: murray.s...@shaw.ca
URL: http://members.shaw.ca/murraypeterson/
John Wunderlich
> I hope I am am not being too dense and that maybe someone can give
What you need to do is read these large groups in smaller chunks.
The method of how to do this semi-automatically in Xnews is outlined
in the following archived article:
<http://groups.google.com/group/news.software.readers/msg/e0ea482ec4de9fcd?dmode=source&hl=en>
HTH,
John
fLameDogg
> Essentially, when Xnews reads a group with 2 or 3 multi-part millions
> posts (such as an mp3, dvd, mpg, etc. group), it goes through the
> normal process of reading the posts OK, which of course takes awhile.
> But, as soon as it tries to thread the multi-parts, Xnews hangs - as
> if I am having memory problems or as if it (Xnews) can't handle the
> strain of this many posts.
>
> I don't think it is memory though: I am runnung a 2.5 Ghz, with 1 of
> mem (approx 800 - 900 kb free with Xnews loaded) and am on cable
> (using Giganews).
>
> Any thoughts? Appreciate any insight!!
What Murray Peterson said about memory, but I'll add this: Xnews might
not be the best choice for those kinds of groups. It's great for reading
text and dabbling in picture groups and so forth, but the mammoth binary
groups call for something more specialized. There are newsreaders built
just for this sort of thing. I'm not saying dump Xnews. It's just like
you wouldn't want to hunt large mammals with birdshot (insert obligatory
Veep joke here).
--
fD
"Is it just me, or does the flying spaghetti monster seem like a tastier
version of Cthulhu?" --Trail Mix, Fark forum
Nonymous
> I hope I am am not being too dense and that maybe someone can give me
I've loaded a few million headers before a several times (a.b.multimedia
can be a killer). It can be done. You just have to be patient. It can
take several minutes to thread on my AMD 3800. On your 2.5, ya might just
want to go and see what the mail man brougght today or perhaps start dinner
while you wait. What I usually do is just go to the Processes tab of task
manager, find xnews, then right click and set the priority to 'below
normal'. Then I just let it cook. That way it can do its threading, but I
can still use the PC for other things while I wait without it hogging the
CPU. When it's done it's done.
The memory should be fine. Expect it to a few hundred MB of physical RAM,
but you should be able to manage it with yor 1GB. Make sure your swap file
is big enough, though as it'll make big use of it. As you scroll through
the threads, it will hit the swap file continuously as it swaps threads in
and out of the swap file to RAM.
Really, though, as somebody else said, xnews isn't the best for huge binary
groups.
SCPO
suggestions. BTW - what would you suggest as a reader for large
binary/multi-part groups?
Thanks again,
SCPO
U. S. Navy (Ret)
fLameDogg
216.196.97.131:
> Thanks for taking the time to reply. It really helped. Will try the
> suggestions. BTW - what would you suggest as a reader for large
> binary/multi-part groups?
Opinions differ as far as these types of programs. I'm no expert, but I
have heard of a few, in no particular order: GrabIt, BNR2, Newspro, News
Rover, Newsleecher, Newsbin.
Some of these are freely available and some are not. Of them, I'm most
familiar with GrabIt. It has been said that it doesn't handle the largest
groups as well as some others, but I haven't noticed this. Then again, I'm
not Captain Binary :O)
These are all easily found (probably) via your favorite search engine.
thanatoid
news:Xns976C987AF3661...@216.77.188.18:
> SCPO <SC...@usn.com> wrote in
> news:Xns976C6ACA1B351SCPOusncom@ 216.196.97.131:
>
>> Thanks for taking the time to reply. It really helped.
>> Will try the suggestions. BTW - what would you suggest as
>> a reader for large binary/multi-part groups?
>
> Opinions differ as far as these types of programs. I'm no
> expert, but I have heard of a few, in no particular order:
> GrabIt, BNR2, Newspro, News Rover, Newsleecher, Newsbin.
>
> Some of these are freely available and some are not. Of
> them, I'm most familiar with GrabIt. It has been said
> that it doesn't handle the largest groups as well as some
> others, but I haven't noticed this. Then again, I'm not
> Captain Binary :O)
>
> These are all easily found (probably) via your favorite
> search engine.
>
You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some very
different ones.
Here's another one.
Everything XNews does is in memory.
IMHO, anyone who tries to download more than 50,000 headers at a
time is not terribly computer-savvy, no offense intended.
Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval" box (press
Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has a lot of unread
articles, you will see it)?
Set it to something reasonable (I set it to 15,000 - but I have
an old computer with 64MB), and tick the box to dump headers
each time and you will never have any more problems.
Nothing beats XNews, I don't care what people say. Most people
use M$ OE. At least you know not to do that.
SINNER
[...]
> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some very
> different ones.
Likely, all of them. Used a bunch of suggestions to form his own
opinion. Strictly a guess, but fairly educated I'd bet.
> Here's another one.
> Everything XNews does is in memory.
> IMHO, anyone who tries to download more than 50,000 headers at a
> time is not terribly computer-savvy, no offense intended.
Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and I only have 512
megs of RAM I guess the one lacking savvy is you.
> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval" box (press
> Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has a lot of unread
> articles, you will see it)?
Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if not all
newsreaders worth their weight have the same or similar features.
> Set it to something reasonable (I set it to 15,000 - but I have
> an old computer with 64MB), and tick the box to dump headers
Ahhh, the truth comes out. You are using Hardware that is outdated by
todays standards and because of it, so is your information.
[...]
--
David
Amar-te é trama.
-- palíndromo
thanatoid
news:qr7mc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>
> [...]
>
>> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some
>> very different ones.
>
> Likely, all of them. Used a bunch of suggestions to form
> his own opinion. Strictly a guess, but fairly educated I'd
> bet.
I am sure you are extremely well-educated. Not well-educated
enough not to butt in and speak for others, but still.
>> Here's another one.
>> Everything XNews does is in memory.
>> IMHO, anyone who tries to download more than 50,000
>> headers at a time is not terribly computer-savvy, no
>> offense intended.
>
> Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and I
> only have 512 megs of RAM I guess the one lacking savvy is
> you.
If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000 headers at
a time, then your brain must be very superior indeed. Try a
million for some real fun.
>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval" box
>> (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has a lot
>> of unread articles, you will see it)?
>
> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if not
> all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or similar
> features.
a) And WHY is it a good feature?
b) Not true.
>> Set it to something reasonable (I set it to 15,000 - but I
>> have an old computer with 64MB), and tick the box to dump
>> headers
> Ahhh, the truth comes out. You are using Hardware that is
> outdated by todays standards and because of it, so is your
> information.
Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for not
allowing the corporations to shove their latest bloated
overpriced crap down my throat when everything I want, I can do
just fine with my machine, and faster than you.
And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do annoying prigs
insist on answering posts not directed to them?
Mike Yetto
when thanatoid wrote...
> And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do annoying prigs
> insist on answering posts not directed to them?
And why do they answer an answer as though it were the question? And
while we're at it, why is the green light on the bottom? Where does
the dark go when you turn on the light?
Mike "Ask Jeeves?" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
There's nothing wrong with charity...
as long as it winds up in your pocket.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #144.
SINNER
> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
> news:qr7mc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>> [...]
>>> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some
>>> very different ones.
>> Likely, all of them. Used a bunch of suggestions to form
>> his own opinion. Strictly a guess, but fairly educated I'd
>> bet.
> I am sure you are extremely well-educated. Not well-educated
> enough not to butt in and speak for others, but still.
Not to mention the fact that I clearly stated MY statement was merely a
guess, did you miss that?
>>> Here's another one.
>>> Everything XNews does is in memory.
>>> IMHO, anyone who tries to download more than 50,000
>>> headers at a time is not terribly computer-savvy, no
>>> offense intended.
>> Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and I
>> only have 512 megs of RAM I guess the one lacking savvy is
>> you.
> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000 headers at
> a time, then your brain must be very superior indeed. Try a
> million for some real fun.
But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it? Not to mention
that since Xnews makes multipart bins appear as one file, 250,000 isn't
really that much to look through.
>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval" box
>>> (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has a lot
>>> of unread articles, you will see it)?
>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if not
>> all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or similar
>> features.
> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you have a hard time
looking through 250,000 headers so what do you do when you encounter
such a group and CANNOT do that?
> b) Not true.
Name one that can't. slrn can, Xnews can, Pan can, Sylpheed can, I bet
OE can too, the list goes on.
>>> Set it to something reasonable (I set it to 15,000 - but I
>>> have an old computer with 64MB), and tick the box to dump
>>> headers
>> Ahhh, the truth comes out. You are using Hardware that is
>> outdated by todays standards and because of it, so is your
>> information.
> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for not
> allowing the corporations to shove their latest bloated
> overpriced crap down my throat when everything I want, I can do
> just fine with my machine, and faster than you.
Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what client I was
using before making such a silly accusation? Corporations and Bloat don't
really apply to my OS or NNTP Client of choice.
> And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do annoying prigs
> insist on answering posts not directed to them?
Its the nature of Usenet, if you only expected an answer from the OP
perhaps you should consider email?
--
David
I distinctly remember forgetting that. -Clara Barton
Blinky the Shark
> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for not
> allowing the corporations to shove their latest bloated
> overpriced crap down my throat
Or even the stuff they were selling in the last few years of the last
century.
--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
thanatoid
news:t35nc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some
>>> very different ones.
Since mine was NOT one of them, I felt it could be helpful.
<SNIP>
> Not to mention the fact that I clearly stated MY statement
> was merely a guess, did you miss that?
You said "educated guess". Look up the meaning of "educated
guess". Yours was merely a guess. I was making fun of your usage
of a common-yet-misunderstood cliché.
<SNIP>
>>> Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and I
>>> only have 512 megs of RAM I guess the one lacking savvy
>>> is you.
No, you just have 8 times more RAM. If that makes you smarter,
so be it.
>> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000
>> headers at a time, then your brain must be very superior
>> indeed. Try a million for some real fun.
>
> But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it? Not
> to mention that since Xnews makes multipart bins appear as
> one file, 250,000 isn't really that much to look through.
It depends on what group you are in. If you are talking about a
DVD group where 250,000 headers makes for 3 posts, of course.
But you did not specify these details. In some groups, 250,000
headers is 250,000 articles.
>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval"
>>>> box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has
>>>> a lot of unread articles, you will see it)?
>
>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if
>>> not all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or
>>> similar features.
>
>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>
> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you have a
> hard time looking through 250,000 headers so what do you do
> when you encounter such a group and CANNOT do that?
Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features, Xnews
does it and that's why I won't use anything else. As I said
before, I download 10-30K at a time and that works JUST FINE for
me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not 250K and not one million.
Ponder that one.
(Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm] - Did someone else [tm] the
"ALWAY" version or is that your own creation?)
>> b) Not true.
>
> Name one that can't. slrn can, Xnews can, Pan can, Sylpheed
> can, I bet OE can too, the list goes on.
I've never used OE but from what I've heard even of it, even if
it does, it probably fucks it up. GrabIt (quite popular
recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every stupid
newsreader just to come up with exact statistics for the sake of
proving a generalization. And I have no Mac or Linux experience.
>>>> Set it to something reasonable (I set it to 15,000 - but
>>>> I have an old computer with 64MB), and tick the box to
>>>> dump headers
>
>>> Ahhh, the truth comes out. You are using Hardware that is
>>> outdated by todays standards and because of it, so is
>>> your information.
>
>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for
>> not allowing the corporations to shove their latest
>> bloated overpriced crap down my throat when everything I
>> want, I can do just fine with my machine, and faster than
>> you.
>
> Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
> client I was using before making such a silly accusation?
> Corporations and Bloat don't really apply to my OS or NNTP
> Client of choice.
Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
Obviously, since you do not use OE, it is not a big surprise you
use Linux, and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds of
hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet necessary), I get
along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and a 2GB
Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no internet
connection) just fine. I bet your processor is not a Pentium 90,
is it?
>> And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do annoying
>> prigs insist on answering posts not directed to them?
>
> Its the nature of Usenet, if you only expected an answer
> from the OP perhaps you should consider email?
Many different people are on the Usenet, and some enjoy being
annoying more than others. I tried to be helpful while you
attacked my viewpoint and advice. I find it unfortunate how much
confrontation enters into almost every group.
P.S. - for SCPO
Since several persons feel Xnews is not very good for large
binary multi-parts, I would just like to say that while I have
never DL'd a DVD, I have downloaded entire CD images with it and
never had a single problem. If the post is bad, OTOH, you will
of course have problems (and waste time), but with a little
experience bad posts can be spotted fairly easily. Your problems
are likely due to Windows. It took me years to get it running
right. And you need a bunch of non-MS programs to achieve that.
And I wouldn't TOUCH XP for anything in the world.
SINNER
> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
> news:t35nc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>
>>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>
>>>> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some
>>>> very different ones.
>
> Since mine was NOT one of them, I felt it could be helpful.
>
You are commenting on your own statement there. Perhaps to convice
yourself?
> <SNIP>
>
>> Not to mention the fact that I clearly stated MY statement
>> was merely a guess, did you miss that?
>
> You said "educated guess". Look up the meaning of "educated
> guess". Yours was merely a guess. I was making fun of your usage
> of a common-yet-misunderstood cliché.
No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP came back and said
after reading posted sugegstions, he had made his choce. Nothing Cclice
about it, merely a fact.
>
> <SNIP>
>
>>>> Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and I
>>>> only have 512 megs of RAM I guess the one lacking savvy
>>>> is you.
>
> No, you just have 8 times more RAM. If that makes you smarter,
> so be it.
You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000 headers is not computer
savy. In reality what you meant to say was anyone with an outdated
computer trying to read immense numbers of headers into memory is not
computer savy, so next time SAY that.
>
>>> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000
>>> headers at a time, then your brain must be very superior
>>> indeed. Try a million for some real fun.
>>
>> But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it? Not
>> to mention that since Xnews makes multipart bins appear as
>> one file, 250,000 isn't really that much to look through.
>
> It depends on what group you are in. If you are talking about a
> DVD group where 250,000 headers makes for 3 posts, of course.
> But you did not specify these details. In some groups, 250,000
> headers is 250,000 articles.
>
Applying alittle common sence helps. I RARELY see text groups with
millions of posts as the OP pointed out. Since the majority of newservers
that do have such retention are generally binary related, again I made an
_educated_ guess based on the provided information.
>>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval"
>>>>> box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it has
>>>>> a lot of unread articles, you will see it)?
>>
>>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if
>>>> not all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or
>>>> similar features.
>>
>>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>>
>> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you have a
>> hard time looking through 250,000 headers so what do you do
>> when you encounter such a group and CANNOT do that?
>
> Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features, Xnews
> does it and that's why I won't use anything else. As I said
> before, I download 10-30K at a time and that works JUST FINE for
> me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not 250K and not one million.
> Ponder that one.
Again, you negelect answering the question put forth.
>
> (Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm] - Did someone else [tm] the
> "ALWAY" version or is that your own creation?)
>
You seriously lack wit as well as the simple ability to read and parse a
post.
>>> b) Not true.
>>
>> Name one that can't. slrn can, Xnews can, Pan can, Sylpheed
>> can, I bet OE can too, the list goes on.
>
> I've never used OE but from what I've heard even of it, even if
> it does, it probably fucks it up.
Again, not the issue and OE was not the only one addressed. Why do you
make claims and then refuse to back them up?
> GrabIt (quite popular
> recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every stupid
> newsreader just to come up with exact statistics for the sake of
> proving a generalization. And I have no Mac or Linux experience.
Then why make a sweeping generalization if you cant back it up?
[...]
>>
>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for
>>> not allowing the corporations to shove their latest
>>> bloated overpriced crap down my throat when everything I
>>> want, I can do just fine with my machine, and faster than
>>> you.
[above you discuss software]
>>
>> Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
>> client I was using before making such a silly accusation?
>> Corporations and Bloat don't really apply to my OS or NNTP
>> Client of choice.
>
> Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
Why, YOU were discussing software.
> Obviously, since you do not use OE, it is not a big surprise you
> use Linux,
How the hell do you make that jump?
> and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds of
> hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet necessary),
Not Necessary.
> I get
> along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and a 2GB
> Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no internet
> connection) just fine. I bet your processor is not a Pentium 90,
> is it?
You are correct. I would also bet MOST people arent, yet you seem to
assume they do based on your past spew of incorrect information regarding
your 15,000 header number.
>
>>> And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do annoying
>>> prigs insist on answering posts not directed to them?
>>
>> Its the nature of Usenet, if you only expected an answer
>> from the OP perhaps you should consider email?
>
> Many different people are on the Usenet, and some enjoy being
> annoying more than others. I tried to be helpful while you
> attacked my viewpoint and advice.
I didnt attack it, I corrected it.
> I find it unfortunate how much
> confrontation enters into almost every group.
And I find it unfortunate how many would like to believe they are an
authority on a topic only to find the hardware/software they use is so
outdated they coul not possibly speak on the same level as those with
more current OS/Hardware.
>
> P.S. - for SCPO
> Since several persons feel Xnews is not very good for large
> binary multi-parts, I would just like to say that while I have
> never DL'd a DVD, I have downloaded entire CD images with it and
> never had a single problem.
Downloading is not the problem, its the number of headers at issue, that
is all.
> If the post is bad, OTOH, you will
> of course have problems (and waste time), but with a little
> experience bad posts can be spotted fairly easily. Your problems
> are likely due to Windows. It took me years to get it running
> right.
Any you claim Linux required only hours, I guess you should consider
switching.
[...]
--
David
SCPO
people tried to be helpful and I thank them for taking the time to reply.
Then, some were insulting - maybe not intentionally - but "assuming"
people are not "computer savy" is showing a lack of understanding and
gross ignorance. I have over 20 years on PC's since I built my first SX-
20, but I can ALWAYS learn something new. And, I have learned that
talking down to people is not a great way to engender yourself to
someone.
I will continue to use XNEWS - 'cuz I like it! DUH? And 'cuz it is easy
to setup and use! DUH? And, (this might be a real shock) computers are
supposed to be easy to use and make doing things easier!!!
So, again thanks to those who were able to stick to the subject matter
and help me out. I am in your debt.
To those who suffer from ADD and went off on some tangential thread,
well...
Fairwinds and following seas,
SCPO
U.S. Navy (Ret)
Blinky the Shark
> I will continue to use XNEWS - 'cuz I like it! DUH? And 'cuz it is easy
Might want to update to a version that's not a few years old:
http://blinkynet.net/comp/xnewsrels.html
SCPO
latest version? Jeez, get your head out - Pleeeez!
Robert Singers
[snip]
> Now what did I say that would lead you to believe that I do not have the
> latest version? Jeez, get your head out - Pleeeez!
If you're going to insult people it pays to know what you're talking about
and not make yourself look stupid. Your headers say what version of Xnews
you are running. You're running an old version.
Blinky the Shark
> Now what did I say that would lead you to believe that I do not have the
> latest version? Jeez, get your head out - Pleeeez!
Nothing. But your headers show that you are. Do you knowl what headers
are? If you followed that linkI gave you (which you snipped when you
failed to quote, like a newbie or a Google Groups poster), you'd see the
latest release is from last October (and what the release names *mean*).
Your version is a few years old. It's not my head that's up there,
virtual newbie.
SCPO
Well, my apologies! But, according to the XNEWS site this is the latest
version, with the exception of a test version, which I will pass on until
it gets sorted out!
thanatoid
news:Xns97708458B5314l...@140.99.99.130:
<SNIP>
>>>>> You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were
>>>>> some very different ones.
>>
>> Since mine was NOT one of them, I felt it could be
>> helpful.
>
> You are commenting on your own statement there. Perhaps to
> convice yourself?
WHAT is your problem?
SPCO said:
"Will try the suggestions."
I replied:
"You didn't say WHICH suggestion helped and there were some
very different ones.
Here's another one."
You said:
"Likely, all of them. Used a bunch of suggestions to form his
own opinion. Strictly a guess, but fairly educated I'd bet."
I said:
"Since mine was NOT one of them, I felt it could be helpful."
You said:
"> You are commenting on your own statement there. Perhaps to
convice yourself?"
Now, may I say:
Assuming you meant to type "convince", no, I do not have to
convince myself. I snipped stuff which was necessary only for
someone with a low attention span. I have included it here
twice to help you follow the discussion properly this time.
-- -- --
>>> Not to mention the fact that I clearly stated MY
>>> statement was merely a guess, did you miss that?
>>
>> You said "educated guess". Look up the meaning of
>> "educated guess". Yours was merely a guess. I was making
>> fun of your usage of a common-yet-misunderstood cliché.
>
> No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP came
> back and said after reading posted sugegstions, he had made
> his choce. Nothing Cclice about it, merely a fact.
About as correct as spelling cliché "Cclice" (although you
get points for being rather creative).
>>>>> Since I can DL well above 250,000 headers in Xnews and
>>>>> I only have 512 megs of RAM I guess the one lacking
>>>>> savvy is you.
>>
>> No, you just have 8 times more RAM. If that makes you
>> smarter, so be it.
>
> You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000 headers is
> not computer savy. In reality what you meant to say was
> anyone with an outdated computer trying to read immense
> numbers of headers into memory is not computer savy, so
> next time SAY that.
1) I said "not very computer-savvy" because I didn't want to
say stupid. (After reading others' comments on our little
discourse, I see I perhaps should not have bothered being so
polite.)
Anyone who wants to DL a million headers no matter what
program or platform or processor or memory they have is
stupid, OK? Just my opinion. (I AM allowed an opinion, I
hope, even though I am writing this on a 166MMX?)
And the reason I believe this is because I know that basic
rules of simple logic and reason apply to everything in the
universe - even if you happen to be running an AlienWare
computer with 2 4GB processors and 12GB of RAM with a
pre-release pirate copy of Vista.
2) If it works and does everything one needs, it is not
outdated. There are people smarter than either one of us who
still use DOS because they feel it is better than anything
else.
-- -- --
>>>> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000
>>>> headers at a time, then your brain must be very superior
>>>> indeed. Try a million for some real fun.
>>>
>>> But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it? Not
>>> to mention that since Xnews makes multipart bins appear
>>> as one file, 250,000 isn't really that much to look
>>> through.
>>
>> It depends on what group you are in. If you are talking
>> about a DVD group where 250,000 headers makes for 3 posts,
>> of course. But you did not specify these details. In some
>> groups, 250,000 headers is 250,000 articles.
>>
> Applying alittle common sence helps. I RARELY see text
> groups with millions of posts as the OP pointed out. Since
> the majority of newservers that do have such retention are
> generally binary related, again I made an _educated_ guess
> based on the provided information.
You are backed in a corner and fighting back with a broken
stick. Apparently you must have the last word even if it
makes no sense. As far as your "retention being
binary-related" crap, Giganews has nearly 3 years retention
of text-only groups.
>>>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval"
>>>>>> box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it
>>>>>> has a lot of unread articles, you will see it)?
>>>
>>>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if
>>>>> not all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or
>>>>> similar features.
>>>
>>>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>>>
>>> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you have
>>> a hard time looking through 250,000 headers so what do
>>> you do when you encounter such a group and CANNOT do
>>> that?
>>
>> Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features,
>> Xnews does it and that's why I won't use anything else. As
>> I said before, I download 10-30K at a time and that works
>> JUST FINE for me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not 250K and
>> not one million. Ponder that one.
>
> Again, you negelect answering the question put forth.
Your original paragraph (from "Choice" to "do that?") is a
little hard to understand. I answered the best I could.
If you read my paragraph again (try to concentrate this time)
you will see that it is an answer - to the extent that I
managed to make sense of the question. To spell it out for
you, I dump the piece of shit that can't do the job and I use
something which can. SPCO's problems ARE OS related and not
Xnews related, I don't care if he started with a self-built
SX-20. If he were so smart, he would have been able to
eliminate the problem himself instead of causing this
discussion which he has now re-joined in a rather regrettable
manner.
-- -- --
>> (Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm] - Did someone else [tm]
>> the "ALWAY" version or is that your own creation?)
> You seriously lack wit as well as the simple ability to
> read and parse a post.
Obviously I can't objectively judge my wit quotient any
better than you can judge yours, but I still think my part of
the above 4 lines is considerably wittier than yours. Whether
it was worth writing is another matter.
-- -- --
>>>> b) Not true.
>>>
>>> Name one that can't. slrn can, Xnews can, Pan can,
>>> Sylpheed can, I bet OE can too, the list goes on.
>>
>> I've never used OE but from what I've heard even of it,
>> even if it does, it probably fucks it up.
>
> Again, not the issue and OE was not the only one addressed.
SO I am not even entitled to say that IMO OE blows? And this
coming from a Linux user. SHAME.
-- -- --
> Why do you make claims and then refuse to back them up?
Be more specific. AFAIAC, the next paragraph answers that
question more than adequately.
>> GrabIt (quite popular
>> recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every
>> stupid newsreader just to come up with exact statistics
>> for the sake of proving a generalization. And I have no
>> Mac or Linux experience.
>
> Then why make a sweeping generalization if you cant back it
> up?
YOU said "Most if not all newsreaders worth their weight have
the same or similar features." Sounds like a sweeping
generalization to me. The six or so newsreaders I have tried
were SURPRISINGLY different both in philosophy and features.
Most intelligent people realize that, however unfortunate,
generalizations are almost impossible to avoid at some point
or another in any conversation, but they are aware of the
associated problems.
Among other things, conversations consist of facts, opinions,
and generalizations. All those come in form of statements. I
do not "refuse" to back up statements. No one can back up
every single thing they say and demanding that every
statement be "backed up" by facts is immature and
nonsensical. No one has tried every newsreader there is and
no one knows everything and half or more of everything you
hear and read are lies and fabrications. Truth is a rare
commodity, in the computer industry as much as anywhere else.
Although, again, that sentence is probably something I should
not have bothered responding to.
>>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me
>>>> for not allowing the corporations to shove their latest
>>>> bloated overpriced crap down my throat when everything I
>>>> want, I can do just fine with my machine, and faster
>>>> than you.
>
> [above you discuss software]
Nice assumption, but incorrect. I was talking about both. No
normal person "needs" a dual 4GB machine yet people have
them. Just like almost no one REALLY needs M$ Office (let
alone is capable of understanding more than a tiny portion of
its features), but I would guess (please note I said GUESS so
don't challenge me to prove it, if you can restrain yourself)
it's Office that made M$ even more money than Windows.
>>> Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
>>> client I was using before making such a silly accusation?
>>> Corporations and Bloat don't really apply to my OS or
>>> NNTP Client of choice.
>>
>> Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
>
> Why, YOU were discussing software.
As I just said, that was your assumption. Corporations and
bloat are not exclusive to the software part of the computer
world.
-- -- --
>> Obviously, since you do not use OE, it is not a big
>> surprise you use Linux,
>
> How the hell do you make that jump?
I worded that sentence clumsily. Maybe I am giving non-OE
users too much credit, but OTOH I think you would agree that
someone dead sold on OE would not be likely to switch to
Linux. If I weren't satisfied (finally) with the way my
systems work and if I weren't too lazy to learn Linux, I
myself would probably be switching to it, since I realized
long ago the most problematic programs around are M$
products.
-- -- --
">> Ahhh, the truth comes out. You are using Hardware that is
>> outdated by todays standards and because of it, so is your
>> information.
Quite the reverse. I am using an 8 year old computer EXACTLY
because I know that I don't need anything better for my
internet needs. (If I wanted to play online games at 100fps I
WOULD get a super fast machine and a BB connection. But I
don't so I won't.)
It is people who don't even know the difference between
memory and a hard drive that spend thousands to buy the
"latest and greatest". (I know an M.D. who has a brand new
Dell on his office desk, AFAIK has never turned it on, and
writes all his letters on a fucking IBM Selectric which he
keeps hidden from view! And he uses a LOT of liquid paper,
too!)
> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me for
> not allowing the corporations to shove their latest bloated
> overpriced crap down my throat when everything I want, I
> can do just fine with my machine, and faster than you.
Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
client I was using before making such a silly accusation?
Corporations and Bloat don't really apply to my OS or NNTP
Client of choice."
Already addressed above.
-- -- --
>> and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
>> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds
>> of hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet
>> necessary),
>
> Not Necessary.
Let's just agree to differ. You really must be every
retailer's dream client.
>> I get
>> along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and
>> a 2GB Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no
>> internet connection) just fine. I bet your processor is
>> not a Pentium 90, is it?
>
> You are correct. I would also bet MOST people arent, yet
> you seem to assume they do based on your past spew of
> incorrect information regarding your 15,000 header number.
And you talk about my inability to "parse". Parse that last
sentence, would you? No, most people are NOT Pentium 90's.
And what is they "do" that you are referring to?
And I don't know what part of my "incorrect information
regarding [my] 15,000 header number" is incorrect. I have an
asshole AND I have opinions. Just like you.
>>>> And since you are SOOOO smart... Tell me, why do
>>>> annoying prigs insist on answering posts not directed to
>>>> them?
>>>
>>> Its the nature of Usenet, if you only expected an answer
>>> from the OP perhaps you should consider email?
>>
>> Many different people are on the Usenet, and some enjoy
>> being annoying more than others. I tried to be helpful
>> while you attacked my viewpoint and advice.
>
> I didnt attack it, I corrected it.
You just confused the issue and reminded everyone of how
funny it is that people insist on installing spell checkers
yet never use them anyway. (Yes, I am assuming you have one
installed. And if you don't, you should get one AND use it.)
-- -- --
>> I find it unfortunate how much
>> confrontation enters into almost every group.
>
> And I find it unfortunate how many would like to believe
> they are an authority on a topic only to find the
> hardware/software they use is so outdated they coul not
> possibly speak on the same level as those with more current
> OS/Hardware.
Again, this naive attitude (although I bet the retailers in
your area love you) has already been addressed.
-- -- --
>> P.S. - for SCPO
>> Since several persons feel Xnews is not very good for
>> large binary multi-parts, I would just like to say that
>> while I have never DL'd a DVD, I have downloaded entire CD
>> images with it and never had a single problem.
>
> Downloading is not the problem, its the number of headers
> at issue, that is all.
Enlighten me, Wise One, how you DL anything without getting
the headers first.
>> If the post is bad, OTOH, you will
>> of course have problems (and waste time), but with a
>> little experience bad posts can be spotted fairly easily.
>> Your problems are likely due to Windows. It took me years
>> to get it running right.
>
> Any you claim Linux required only hours, I guess you should
> consider switching.
Read that sentence carefully and slowly. You really should
take a remedial writing course. Anyway, all I said is that I
have no Mac or Linux (etc.) experience, and since I have my
95B and 98SE Lite systems working just fine, I see no reason
to change anything.
In closing - as much as I enjoy exercising my argumentative
skills, we should probably end this. I guess it's up to you.
peace and love
t.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark et all
>
> Well, my apologies! But, according to the XNEWS site this is the latest
> version, with the exception of a test version, which I will pass on until
> it gets sorted out!
Third time: READ the page that Xnews I linked you to, or remain ignorant
about what "test" means.
Second time: QUOTE and ATTRIBUTE or get plonked.
SINNER
[Bunch of crap easily read in the thread but restated for some apparent
reason]
> Now, may I say:
> Assuming you meant to type "convince", no, I do not have to
> convince myself. I snipped stuff which was necessary only for
> someone with a low attention span. I have included it here
> twice to help you follow the discussion properly this time.
Spelling flames are lame. You haven't been here long have you?
[...]
>> No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP came
>> back and said after reading posted sugegstions, he had made
>> his choce. Nothing Cclice about it, merely a fact.
> About as correct as spelling cliché "Cclice" (although you
> get points for being rather creative).
Another? You really don't get this Usenet thing yet.
[...]
>> You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000 headers is
>> not computer savy. In reality what you meant to say was
>> anyone with an outdated computer trying to read immense
>> numbers of headers into memory is not computer savy, so
>> next time SAY that.
> 1) I said "not very computer-savvy" because I didn't want to
> say stupid. (After reading others' comments on our little
> discourse, I see I perhaps should not have bothered being so
> polite.)
I don't care _why_ you said it, you were wrong anyway.
> Anyone who wants to DL a million headers no matter what
> program or platform or processor or memory they have is
> stupid, OK? Just my opinion. (I AM allowed an opinion, I
> hope, even though I am writing this on a 166MMX?)
You are obviously a moron. People that regularly download binaries often
DL 1 million headers. You are allowed an opinion, but it is misinformed.
> And the reason I believe this is because I know that basic
> rules of simple logic and reason apply to everything in the
> universe - even if you happen to be running an AlienWare
> computer with 2 4GB processors and 12GB of RAM with a
> pre-release pirate copy of Vista.
Hehe, I have a 1.2 ghz AMD Thunderbird, real modern hardware.
> 2) If it works and does everything one needs, it is not
> outdated. There are people smarter than either one of us who
> still use DOS because they feel it is better than anything
> else.
You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and make this simple
for you, Your hardware is far from normal. Telling someone they are not
computer savvy because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
retarded.
> -- -- --
^What the hell is that?
>>>>> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000
>>>>> headers at a time, then your brain must be very superior
>>>>> indeed. Try a million for some real fun.
>>>> But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it? Not
>>>> to mention that since Xnews makes multipart bins appear
>>>> as one file, 250,000 isn't really that much to look
>>>> through.
>>> It depends on what group you are in. If you are talking
>>> about a DVD group where 250,000 headers makes for 3 posts,
>>> of course. But you did not specify these details. In some
>>> groups, 250,000 headers is 250,000 articles.
>> Applying alittle common sence helps. I RARELY see text
>> groups with millions of posts as the OP pointed out. Since
>> the majority of newservers that do have such retention are
>> generally binary related, again I made an _educated_ guess
>> based on the provided information.
> You are backed in a corner and fighting back with a broken
> stick. Apparently you must have the last word even if it
> makes no sense. As far as your "retention being
> binary-related" crap, Giganews has nearly 3 years retention
> of text-only groups.
Your point? I said RARELY not never. You do read before you respond,
yes?
>>>>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental retrieval"
>>>>>>> box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a group and if it
>>>>>>> has a lot of unread articles, you will see it)?
>>>>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most if
>>>>>> not all newsreaders worth their weight have the same or
>>>>>> similar features.
>>>>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>>>> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you have
>>>> a hard time looking through 250,000 headers so what do
>>>> you do when you encounter such a group and CANNOT do
>>>> that?
>>> Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features,
>>> Xnews does it and that's why I won't use anything else. As
>>> I said before, I download 10-30K at a time and that works
>>> JUST FINE for me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not 250K and
>>> not one million. Ponder that one.
>> Again, you negelect answering the question put forth.
> Your original paragraph (from "Choice" to "do that?") is a
> little hard to understand. I answered the best I could.
Talk about fighting with a broken stick!
You asked WHY having a feature that allows you to choose how many
headers to dl is a good thing. My number one reason was Choice and then
I proceed to ask you what _you_ would do when you encounter a group with a
number if headers that is too much for you wrap your little head around
if your reader of choice did _not_ have that feature.
You neglected to answer, again.
> If you read my paragraph again (try to concentrate this time)
Careful, that hole you are digging is getting deeper...
> you will see that it is an answer - to the extent that I
> managed to make sense of the question. To spell it out for
> you, I dump the piece of shit that can't do the job and I use
> something which can.
Except you asked Why its a good feature now you tell us all you'd dump a
product without it. Which is it?
> SPCO's problems ARE OS related and not
> Xnews related, I don't care if he started with a self-built
> SX-20. If he were so smart, he would have been able to
> eliminate the problem himself instead of causing this
> discussion which he has now re-joined in a rather regrettable
> manner.
If he adds more ram the problem is gone. Other newsreaders write the
headers to disk instead of memory. How exactly is the OS at fault? (I
should mention here that I use Xnews exclusively under windows) You
should not speak on matter about which you know nothing.
> -- -- --
^again with this thing?
[...]
> -- -- --
>> Why do you make claims and then refuse to back them up?
> Be more specific. AFAIAC, the next paragraph answers that
> question more than adequately.
>>> GrabIt (quite popular
>>> recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every
>>> stupid newsreader just to come up with exact statistics
>>> for the sake of proving a generalization. And I have no
>>> Mac or Linux experience.
>> Then why make a sweeping generalization if you cant back it
>> up?
> YOU said "Most if not all newsreaders worth their weight have
> the same or similar features." Sounds like a sweeping
> generalization to me. The six or so newsreaders I have tried
> were SURPRISINGLY different both in philosophy and features.
But I bet they all have the ability to select all or some headers to be
downloaded, or didn't you check before telling me I am wrong. My
statement is made from experience, something you obviously lack in the
newsreader world.
> Most intelligent people realize that, however unfortunate,
> generalizations are almost impossible to avoid at some point
> or another in any conversation, but they are aware of the
> associated problems.
Problem is, yours was wrong, mine is backed up with fact.
> Among other things, conversations consist of facts, opinions,
> and generalizations. All those come in form of statements. I
> do not "refuse" to back up statements. No one can back up
> every single thing they say and demanding that every
> statement be "backed up" by facts is immature and
> nonsensical.
No. Making a claim as if you are an authority, being called on it and not
backing up your claim is nonsensical.
> No one has tried every newsreader there is and
> no one knows everything and half or more of everything you
> hear and read are lies and fabrications. Truth is a rare
> commodity, in the computer industry as much as anywhere else.
There are websites that have as their tasks to review such pieces of
software, not to mention Usenet groups dedicated to discussion of said
software. Look Up.
> Although, again, that sentence is probably something I should
> not have bothered responding to.
Certainly not in that way.
>>>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me
>>>>> for not allowing the corporations to shove their latest
>>>>> bloated overpriced crap down my throat when everything I
>>>>> want, I can do just fine with my machine, and faster
>>>>> than you.
>> [above you discuss software]
> Nice assumption, but incorrect. I was talking about both.
Assumption? Do you read what you write?
> No
> normal person "needs" a dual 4GB machine yet people have
> them.
And what corporation is shoving that down your throat? A software
Company. The hardware is not bloated and only necessary if your needs
require it. If your time is worth less than a few hundred dollars to
upgrade, that is your choice, again, a good thing.
> Just like almost no one REALLY needs M$ Office (let
Your right, Open Office is fine and free.
> alone is capable of understanding more than a tiny portion of
> its features), but I would guess (please note I said GUESS so
> don't challenge me to prove it, if you can restrain yourself)
> it's Office that made M$ even more money than Windows.
>>>> Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
>>>> client I was using before making such a silly accusation?
>>>> Corporations and Bloat don't really apply to my OS or
>>>> NNTP Client of choice.
>>> Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
>> Why, YOU were discussing software.
> As I just said, that was your assumption. Corporations and
> bloat are not exclusive to the software part of the computer
> world.
How is hardware bloated?
>>> and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
>>> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds
>>> of hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet
>>> necessary),
>> Not Necessary.
> Let's just agree to differ. You really must be every
> retailer's dream client.
You are hilarious. You have contradicted yourself on just about every
point you've attempted, this one is no different. Up here we discuss that
it is not necessary to spend HOURS tweaking Linux (A NON Consumer OS)
and you tell me I am a retailers dream?! And then you proceed to below
tell us it takes _MONTHS_ for you to get Windows running correctly.
>>> I get
>>> along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and
>>> a 2GB Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no
>>> internet connection) just fine. I bet your processor is
>>> not a Pentium 90, is it?
>> You are correct. I would also bet MOST people arent, yet
>> you seem to assume they do based on your past spew of
>> incorrect information regarding your 15,000 header number.
> And you talk about my inability to "parse". Parse that last
> sentence, would you? No, most people are NOT Pentium 90's.
> And what is they "do" that you are referring to?
You obviously got the point. The refuge of a man losing an argument is
spelling and grammar.
> And I don't know what part of my "incorrect information
> regarding [my] 15,000 header number" is incorrect. I have an
> asshole AND I have opinions. Just like you.
The part that grabbing more than 15,000 is lacking savvy. Have you been
paying attention?
[...]
>-- -- --
>>> I find it unfortunate how much
>>> confrontation enters into almost every group.
>> And I find it unfortunate how many would like to believe
>> they are an authority on a topic only to find the
>> hardware/software they use is so outdated they coul not
>> possibly speak on the same level as those with more current
>> OS/Hardware.
> Again, this naive attitude (although I bet the retailers in
> your area love you) has already been addressed.
I would love to your hear your explanation of this point.
The fact that you want to argue that I am a retailers dream is
ridiculous. Do you still have a B&W TV and a Rotary Phone?
> -- -- --
>>> P.S. - for SCPO
>>> Since several persons feel Xnews is not very good for
>>> large binary multi-parts, I would just like to say that
>>> while I have never DL'd a DVD, I have downloaded entire CD
>>> images with it and never had a single problem.
>> Downloading is not the problem, its the number of headers
>> at issue, that is all.
> Enlighten me, Wise One, how you DL anything without getting
> the headers first.
NZB read up on it. See? That said, still not the point. I didn't say not
to DL headers.
>>> If the post is bad, OTOH, you will
>>> of course have problems (and waste time), but with a
>>> little experience bad posts can be spotted fairly easily.
>>> Your problems are likely due to Windows. It took me years
>>> to get it running right.
>> Any you claim Linux required only hours, I guess you should
>> consider switching.
> Read that sentence carefully and slowly. You really should
> take a remedial writing course.
LOLOLOL. Why? Windows took you MONTHS, Linux only hours by your claim.
That insinuates Linux is easier for you. See? I actually READ what you
write, you should try it sometime.
[...]
--
David
Tucano na CUT.
-- palíndromo
Blinky the Shark
> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and make this simple
> for you, Your hardware is far from normal. Telling someone they are not
> computer savvy because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
> retarded.
Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era Pentium?
SINNER
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and make this simple
>> for you, Your hardware is far from normal. Telling someone they are not
>> computer savvy because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>> retarded.
> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era Pentium?
Ayup.
--
David
Have a taco.
-- P.S. Beagle
thanatoid
news:25drc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> [Bunch of crap easily read in the thread but restated for
> some apparent reason]
Since it is now painfully obvious you can't remember what anyone
says and are too lazy to re-read the posts, I provided the
relevant sections in order to help you out. A waste of time,
obviously.
>> Now, may I say:
>> Assuming you meant to type "convince", no, I do not have
>> to convince myself. I snipped stuff which was necessary
>> only for someone with a low attention span. I have
>> included it here twice to help you follow the discussion
>> properly this time.
>
> Spelling flames are lame. You haven't been here long have
> you?
>
From what I have so far been able to <GUESS> about you, I have
been on the net longer than you have been jerking off. I said
GUESS, OK? You may just be retarded.
> [...]
>
>>> No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP
>>> came back and said after reading posted sugegstions, he
>>> had made his choce. Nothing Cclice about it, merely a
>>> fact.
>
>> About as correct as spelling cliché "Cclice" (although you
>> get points for being rather creative).
>
> Another? You really don't get this Usenet thing yet.
If bad spelling and incomprehensible syntax is what Usenet is
all about, then I don't.
> [...]
>
>>> You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000 headers
>>> is not computer savy. In reality what you meant to say
>>> was anyone with an outdated computer trying to read
>>> immense numbers of headers into memory is not computer
>>> savy, so next time SAY that.
>
>> 1) I said "not very computer-savvy" because I didn't want
>> to say stupid. (After reading others' comments on our
>> little discourse, I see I perhaps should not have bothered
>> being so polite.)
>
> I don't care _why_ you said it, you were wrong anyway.
As I said, we both have assholes and opinions. Or am I wrong
again?
>> Anyone who wants to DL a million headers no matter what
>> program or platform or processor or memory they have is
>> stupid, OK? Just my opinion. (I AM allowed an opinion, I
>> hope, even though I am writing this on a 166MMX?)
>
> You are obviously a moron. People that regularly download
> binaries often DL 1 million headers. You are allowed an
> opinion, but it is misinformed.
Except for pleasant time-wasting such as this, I only dl
binaries and I have never needed to dl anywhere near that number
of headers.
But then again I looked at the entire 100K+ group list to see
what I was interested in when setting up my newsreader, I am
aware of the existence of the "catch up and purge" feature, and
I am at my computer hours and hours every day, I know that
quality is more important than quantity (i.e. most of what is
posted anywhere is not worth dl'g), and I am familiar with the
concept of organization and the fact that almost everything gets
reposted sooner or later anyway.
So, while you MAY be right that people OFTEN dl a million
headers, most people in the world are also idiots.
>> And the reason I believe this is because I know that basic
>> rules of simple logic and reason apply to everything in
>> the universe - even if you happen to be running an
>> AlienWare computer with 2 4GB processors and 12GB of RAM
>> with a pre-release pirate copy of Vista.
>
> Hehe, I have a 1.2 ghz AMD Thunderbird, real modern
> hardware.
I was not talking about you. I used "you" in the sense of "one",
sorry. For someone with your machine, you sure are a great
champion for the latest technology though. Haven't you noticed
that your machine does everything you need just as mine does for
me?
>> 2) If it works and does everything one needs, it is not
>> outdated. There are people smarter than either one of us
>> who still use DOS because they feel it is better than
>> anything else.
>
> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from normal.
> Telling someone they are not computer savvy because YOUR
> hardware cant handle it is borderline retarded.
What the fuck constitutes "normal" hardware? Are you insane?
>> -- -- --
>
> ^What the hell is that?
It's a divider to help you get less confused by a text document
of more than a 100 words. It didn't seem to help.
>>>>>> If you enjoy scrolling through and analyzing 250,000
>>>>>> headers at a time, then your brain must be very
>>>>>> superior indeed. Try a million for some real fun.
>
>>>>> But that wasn't the issue you were addressing was it?
>>>>> Not to mention that since Xnews makes multipart bins
>>>>> appear as one file, 250,000 isn't really that much to
>>>>> look through.
>
>>>> It depends on what group you are in. If you are talking
>>>> about a DVD group where 250,000 headers makes for 3
>>>> posts, of course. But you did not specify these details.
>>>> In some groups, 250,000 headers is 250,000 articles.
>
>>> Applying alittle common sence helps. I RARELY see text
>>> groups with millions of posts as the OP pointed out.
>>> Since the majority of newservers that do have such
>>> retention are generally binary related, again I made an
>>> _educated_ guess based on the provided information.
>
>> You are backed in a corner and fighting back with a broken
>> stick. Apparently you must have the last word even if it
>> makes no sense. As far as your "retention being
>> binary-related" crap, Giganews has nearly 3 years
>> retention of text-only groups.
>
> Your point? I said RARELY not never. You do read before you
> respond, yes?
(closing eyes and shaking head in disbelief)
>>>>>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental
>>>>>>>> retrieval" box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a
>>>>>>>> group and if it has a lot of unread articles, you
>>>>>>>> will see it)?
>
>>>>>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most
>>>>>>> if not all newsreaders worth their weight have the
>>>>>>> same or similar features.
>
>>>>>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>
>>>>> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you
>>>>> have a hard time looking through 250,000 headers so
>>>>> what do you do when you encounter such a group and
>>>>> CANNOT do that?
>
>>>> Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features,
>>>> Xnews does it and that's why I won't use anything else.
>>>> As I said before, I download 10-30K at a time and that
>>>> works JUST FINE for me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not
>>>> 250K and not one million. Ponder that one.
>
>>> Again, you negelect answering the question put forth.
>
>> Your original paragraph (from "Choice" to "do that?") is a
>> little hard to understand. I answered the best I could.
>
> Talk about fighting with a broken stick!
It is your stick that is getting more and more frayed. I prefer
to use logic in my arguments.
> You asked WHY having a feature that allows you to choose
> how many headers to dl is a good thing. My number one
> reason was Choice and then I proceed to ask you what _you_
> would do when you encounter a group with a number if
> headers that is too much for you wrap your little head
> around if your reader of choice did _not_ have that
> feature.
>
> You neglected to answer, again.
>
>> If you read my paragraph again (try to concentrate this
>> time)
>
> Careful, that hole you are digging is getting deeper...
I wasn't aware I was digging a hole. There already are enough in
your brain. And I guess concentrating is not something you are
able to do. Nor is asking someone to concentrate usually
considered an insult. Well, maybe in your case.
>> you will see that it is an answer - to the extent that I
>> managed to make sense of the question. To spell it out for
>> you, I dump the piece of shit that can't do the job and I
>> use something which can.
>
> Except you asked Why its a good feature now you tell us all
> you'd dump a product without it. Which is it?
I'm sorry, I can't dumb down my writing style so you can follow
it.
IIRC, GrabIt doesn't, all others do, but they either require
IE/OE to be installed since they run on their engine or have
other stupid flaws, or are simply overpriced when Xnews is
better and free. (Although I paid Luu a decent chunk of money
for it anyway.)
>> Most intelligent people realize that, however unfortunate,
>> generalizations are almost impossible to avoid at some
>> point or another in any conversation, but they are aware
>> of the associated problems.
>
> Problem is, yours was wrong, mine is backed up with fact.
Only in your highly-distorted perception of reality.
>> Among other things, conversations consist of facts,
>> opinions, and generalizations. All those come in form of
>> statements. I do not "refuse" to back up statements. No
>> one can back up every single thing they say and demanding
>> that every statement be "backed up" by facts is immature
>> and nonsensical.
>
> No. Making a claim as if you are an authority, being called
> on it and not backing up your claim is nonsensical.
Why do you keep on calling me an authority? I am neither an
authority or the smartest person in the world (or this group).
Relax, will you?
>> No one has tried every newsreader there is and
>> no one knows everything and half or more of everything you
>> hear and read are lies and fabrications. Truth is a rare
>> commodity, in the computer industry as much as anywhere
>> else.
>
> There are websites that have as their tasks to review such
> pieces of software, not to mention Usenet groups dedicated
> to discussion of said software. Look Up.
>
> http://www.newsreaders.com
Been there. So you trust reviewers more than your own brain?
Actually, in your case, that may not be a bad thing to do.
>> Although, again, that sentence is probably something I
>> should not have bothered responding to.
>
> Certainly not in that way.
Excuse me for hurting your feelings, flower princess.
>>>>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me
>>>>>> for not allowing the corporations to shove their
>>>>>> latest bloated overpriced crap down my throat when
>>>>>> everything I want, I can do just fine with my machine,
>>>>>> and faster than you.
>
>>> [above you discuss software]
>
>> Nice assumption, but incorrect. I was talking about both.
>
> Assumption? Do you read what you write?
You either have the attention span of a daffodil or have simply
lost yourself in this argument.
>> No
>> normal person "needs" a dual 4GB machine yet people have
>> them.
>
> And what corporation is shoving that down your throat? A
> software Company. The hardware is not bloated and only
> necessary if your needs require it. If your time is worth
> less than a few hundred dollars to upgrade, that is your
> choice, again, a good thing.
Even Intel and AMD have admitted that processor speeds have gone
beyond anything reasonably required and are have changed their
manner of identifying them because the numbers have become
meaningless. Still, some people like to trade in last year's
model for a brand-new car every year.
>> Just like almost no one REALLY needs M$ Office (let
>
> Your right, Open Office is fine and free.
Which does not make it any more necessary for a normal person to
have than M$ Office. For example, judging by your communication
so far, you probably don't even know how to set up tabs or
styles let alone know how to create a custom database from
scratch.
>> alone is capable of understanding more than a tiny portion
>> of its features), but I would guess (please note I said
>> GUESS so don't challenge me to prove it, if you can
>> restrain yourself) it's Office that made M$ even more
>> money than Windows.
>
>>>>> Did you happen to check my headers to actually SEE what
>>>>> client I was using before making such a silly
>>>>> accusation? Corporations and Bloat don't really apply
>>>>> to my OS or NNTP Client of choice.
>
>>>> Decide whether you are talking about hardware or
>>>> software.
>
>>> Why, YOU were discussing software.
>
>> As I just said, that was your assumption. Corporations and
>> bloat are not exclusive to the software part of the
>> computer world.
>
> How is hardware bloated?
A 4GB processor is a bloat in its own way. See above. Of course,
in a few years you will probably have the option of buying a
20GB processor. Will it help you to make typos faster?
>>>> and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
>>>> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after
>>>> hundreds of hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate
>>>> yet necessary),
>
>>> Not Necessary.
>
>> Let's just agree to differ. You really must be every
>> retailer's dream client.
>
> You are hilarious. You have contradicted yourself on just
> about every point you've attempted, this one is no
> different. Up here we discuss that it is not necessary to
> spend HOURS tweaking Linux (A NON Consumer OS) and you tell
> me I am a retailers dream?! And then you proceed to below
> tell us it takes _MONTHS_ for you to get Windows running
> correctly.
Jeezus. This is ALL I ever said about Linux:
"Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
Obviously, since you do not use OE, it is not a big surprise you
use Linux, and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds of
hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet necessary), I get
along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and a 2GB
Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no internet
connection) just fine. I bet your processor is not a Pentium 90,
is it?"
Will you at least try to keep track on who you are writing to?
Or get off crack for long enough to come up with a decent
logical argument?
>>>> I get
>>>> along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet
>>>> and a 2GB Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no
>>>> internet connection) just fine. I bet your processor is
>>>> not a Pentium 90, is it?
>
>>> You are correct. I would also bet MOST people arent, yet
>>> you seem to assume they do based on your past spew of
>>> incorrect information regarding your 15,000 header
>>> number.
>
>> And you talk about my inability to "parse". Parse that
>> last sentence, would you? No, most people are NOT Pentium
>> 90's. And what is they "do" that you are referring to?
>
> You obviously got the point. The refuge of a man losing an
> argument is spelling and grammar.
Sometimes. Sometimes they are just so amazed by new linguistic
inventions that they are can't help but comment.
>> And I don't know what part of my "incorrect information
>> regarding [my] 15,000 header number" is incorrect. I have
>> an asshole AND I have opinions. Just like you.
>
> The part that grabbing more than 15,000 is lacking savvy.
> Have you been paying attention?
I SAID in the last post that I should have said "STUPID" and
that it is my OPINION. But I guess you are the only one allowed
to have opinions and make generalizations.
>>>> I find it unfortunate how much
>>>> confrontation enters into almost every group.
>
>>> And I find it unfortunate how many would like to believe
>>> they are an authority on a topic only to find the
>>> hardware/software they use is so outdated they coul not
>>> possibly speak on the same level as those with more
>>> current OS/Hardware.
>
>> Again, this naive attitude (although I bet the retailers
>> in your area love you) has already been addressed.
>
> I would love to your hear your explanation of this point.
WHICH point are you talking about (quote please)?
> The fact that you want to argue that I am a retailers
> dream is ridiculous. Do you still have a B&W TV and a
> Rotary Phone?
No, I don't. But isn't the fact that I am writing this on a 166
enough for you? BTW, isn't it just AMAZING how a 166 allows me
to do it AND get it posted, isn't it? I must be a fucking
magician, huh?
>>>> P.S. - for SCPO
>>>> Since several persons feel Xnews is not very good for
>>>> large binary multi-parts, I would just like to say that
>>>> while I have never DL'd a DVD, I have downloaded entire
>>>> CD images with it and never had a single problem.
>
>>> Downloading is not the problem, its the number of headers
>>> at issue, that is all.
>
>> Enlighten me, Wise One, how you DL anything without
>> getting the headers first.
>
> NZB read up on it. See? That said, still not the point. I
> didn't say not to DL headers.
Not all providers support nzb. And a definite minority of
posters provide them.
>>>> If the post is bad, OTOH, you will
>>>> of course have problems (and waste time), but with a
>>>> little experience bad posts can be spotted fairly
>>>> easily. Your problems are likely due to Windows. It took
>>>> me years to get it running right.
>
>>> Any you claim Linux required only hours, I guess you
>>> should consider switching.
See above, Mr. "me hears (sic) to many peoples (sic) at unce
(sic) but me think dere (sic) is only me and one ozher (sic)
person in the wuld (sic)". (Look up "sic" in the dictionary
before saying anything, OK?)
>> Read that sentence carefully and slowly. You really should
>> take a remedial writing course.
>
> LOLOLOL. Why? Windows took you MONTHS, Linux only hours by
> your claim. That insinuates Linux is easier for you. See? I
> actually READ what you write, you should try it sometime.
See previous comment.
Since you could not leave bad enough alone, I guess you are
enjoying this pointless exchange as much as I am. Let's keep on,
then. This is actually getting more and more amusing.
regards
t.
thanatoid
news:qcerc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
Yes, this is "THEY" guy.
It was custom-built to order in September 1997, actually, and
still works fine as you can see. The only thing I upgraded was
the HD.
But I guess your shiny new machine makes your dick bigger, so
it's worth every penny, right?
Blinky the Shark
> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
> news:qcerc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>
>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>
>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>> retarded.
>>
>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>> Pentium?
>>
>> Ayup.
>>
>
> Yes, this is "THEY" guy.
>
> It was custom-built to order in September 1997, actually, and
> still works fine as you can see. The only thing I upgraded was
Except when its inadequacy manifests itself in issues like the one that
brought you here.
> the HD.
>
> But I guess your shiny new machine makes your dick bigger, so
> it's worth every penny, right?
No, it just means I don't have issues caused by decade-old hardware.
SINNER
> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
> news:25drc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>
[...]
>
> From what I have so far been able to <GUESS> about you, I have
> been on the net longer than you have been jerking off. I said
> GUESS, OK? You may just be retarded.
Care to make that wager interesting?
>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP
>>>> came back and said after reading posted sugegstions, he
>>>> had made his choce. Nothing Cclice about it, merely a
>>>> fact.
>>
>>> About as correct as spelling cliché "Cclice" (although you
>>> get points for being rather creative).
>>
>> Another? You really don't get this Usenet thing yet.
>
> If bad spelling and incomprehensible syntax is what Usenet is
> all about, then I don't.
Oh Puhleeze. It was all very comprehendable, now your are just ToRllinG.
>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000 headers
>>>> is not computer savy. In reality what you meant to say
>>>> was anyone with an outdated computer trying to read
>>>> immense numbers of headers into memory is not computer
>>>> savy, so next time SAY that.
>>
>>> 1) I said "not very computer-savvy" because I didn't want
>>> to say stupid. (After reading others' comments on our
>>> little discourse, I see I perhaps should not have bothered
>>> being so polite.)
>>
>> I don't care _why_ you said it, you were wrong anyway.
>
> As I said, we both have assholes and opinions. Or am I wrong
> again?
You are wrong when you say that someone that is computer saavy will not
need/want to DL more than 15,000 headers at once. That is not an opinion,
it is a misguided, incorrct statement.
>
>>> Anyone who wants to DL a million headers no matter what
>>> program or platform or processor or memory they have is
>>> stupid, OK? Just my opinion. (I AM allowed an opinion, I
>>> hope, even though I am writing this on a 166MMX?)
>>
>> You are obviously a moron. People that regularly download
>> binaries often DL 1 million headers. You are allowed an
>> opinion, but it is misinformed.
>
> Except for pleasant time-wasting such as this, I only dl
> binaries and I have never needed to dl anywhere near that number
> of headers.
You also haven't needed a PC that is a current hardware spec. For the 15th
time, Your scenario is NOT the common one and your opinions are all based
on your very tiny world.
>
> But then again I looked at the entire 100K+ group list to see
> what I was interested in when setting up my newsreader, I am
> aware of the existence of the "catch up and purge" feature, and
> I am at my computer hours and hours every day, I know that
> quality is more important than quantity (i.e. most of what is
> posted anywhere is not worth dl'g), and I am familiar with the
> concept of organization and the fact that almost everything gets
> reposted sooner or later anyway.
>
> So, while you MAY be right that people OFTEN dl a million
> headers, most people in the world are also idiots.
So, first I was wrong, but now I am right and we are all idiots and only
you know the golden way? Kewl, just want to make sure I understand who
things work in your world.
>
>>> And the reason I believe this is because I know that basic
>>> rules of simple logic and reason apply to everything in
>>> the universe - even if you happen to be running an
>>> AlienWare computer with 2 4GB processors and 12GB of RAM
>>> with a pre-release pirate copy of Vista.
>>
>> Hehe, I have a 1.2 ghz AMD Thunderbird, real modern
>> hardware.
>
> I was not talking about you. I used "you" in the sense of "one",
> sorry. For someone with your machine, you sure are a great
> champion for the latest technology though. Haven't you noticed
> that your machine does everything you need just as mine does for
> me?
That was the WINDOWS machine I was refering to since we were discussing
windows software. I also have a Linux Laptop with a 2.4 GHZ Mobile and 512
megs of ram that runs Linux. Are you keeping up?
>
>>> 2) If it works and does everything one needs, it is not
>>> outdated. There are people smarter than either one of us
>>> who still use DOS because they feel it is better than
>>> anything else.
>>
>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from normal.
>> Telling someone they are not computer savvy because YOUR
>> hardware cant handle it is borderline retarded.
>
> What the fuck constitutes "normal" hardware? Are you insane?
Normal is what you can go out to any computer store and buy TODAY. Sample
1000 computer users and see how many of them have hardware newer than
yours, that would be normal. How is that insane?
You prefer waiting 3 minutes for your machine to boot and all the time you
lose waiting for programs to run, or even finding programs that will run on
your outdated, unsupported software/hardware. THAT is insane!
>
>>> -- -- --
>>
>> ^What the hell is that?
>
> It's a divider to help you get less confused by a text document
> of more than a 100 words. It didn't seem to help.
Its useless fodder, it didnt help because it is superfluorious and you add
it arbitrarily. You are aweful at insults as well. Usenet really isnt for
you.
[...]
>
>>>>>>>>> Why do you think XNews has an "incremental
>>>>>>>>> retrieval" box (press Ctl-Enter when entering a
>>>>>>>>> group and if it has a lot of unread articles, you
>>>>>>>>> will see it)?
>>
>>>>>>>> Uhm because Luu thought it was a good feature? Most
>>>>>>>> if not all newsreaders worth their weight have the
>>>>>>>> same or similar features.
>>
>>>>>>> a) And WHY is it a good feature?
>>
>>>>>> Choice is ALWAY A Good Thing [tm]. You just said you
>>>>>> have a hard time looking through 250,000 headers so
>>>>>> what do you do when you encounter such a group and
>>>>>> CANNOT do that?
>>
>>>>> Besides its hundreds of great semi-documented features,
>>>>> Xnews does it and that's why I won't use anything else.
>>>>> As I said before, I download 10-30K at a time and that
>>>>> works JUST FINE for me. Xnews' default is 15K, BTW. Not
>>>>> 250K and not one million. Ponder that one.
>>
>>>> Again, you negelect answering the question put forth.
>>
>>> Your original paragraph (from "Choice" to "do that?") is a
>>> little hard to understand. I answered the best I could.
>>
>> Talk about fighting with a broken stick!
>
> It is your stick that is getting more and more frayed. I prefer
> to use logic in my arguments.
So when will you start?
>
>> You asked WHY having a feature that allows you to choose
>> how many headers to dl is a good thing. My number one
>> reason was Choice and then I proceed to ask you what _you_
>> would do when you encounter a group with a number if
>> headers that is too much for you wrap your little head
>> around if your reader of choice did _not_ have that
>> feature.
>>
>> You neglected to answer, again.
>>
>>> If you read my paragraph again (try to concentrate this
>>> time)
>>
>> Careful, that hole you are digging is getting deeper...
>
> I wasn't aware I was digging a hole.
I know, thats why I warned you. I am a pretty nice guy arent I?
> There already are enough in
> your brain. And I guess concentrating is not something you are
> able to do. Nor is asking someone to concentrate usually
> considered an insult. Well, maybe in your case.
>
Yup, you are getting weaker with each post. Instead of answering the
questions you do nothing but insult...
>>> you will see that it is an answer - to the extent that I
>>> managed to make sense of the question. To spell it out for
>>> you, I dump the piece of shit that can't do the job and I
>>> use something which can.
>>
>> Except you asked Why its a good feature now you tell us all
>> you'd dump a product without it. Which is it?
>
> I'm sorry, I can't dumb down my writing style so you can follow
> it.
You need to dumb yourself down to understand your own writing. I read and
comprehend just find. Youve been all over the place and cant even keep up
with your own diatribes nor answer any questions. Sorry I fluster you so,
maybe you should take a day off before you respond.
[...]
>>
>>>> Why do you make claims and then refuse to back them up?
>>
>>> Be more specific. AFAIAC, the next paragraph answers that
>>> question more than adequately.
>>
>>>>> GrabIt (quite popular
>>>>> recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every
>>>>> stupid newsreader just to come up with exact statistics
>>>>> for the sake of proving a generalization. And I have no
>>>>> Mac or Linux experience.
>>
>>>> Then why make a sweeping generalization if you cant back
>>>> it up?
>>
>>> YOU said "Most if not all newsreaders worth their weight
>>> have the same or similar features." Sounds like a sweeping
>>> generalization to me. The six or so newsreaders I have
>>> tried were SURPRISINGLY different both in philosophy and
>>> features.
>>
>> But I bet they all have the ability to select all or some
>> headers to be downloaded, or didn't you check before
>> telling me I am wrong. My statement is made from
>> experience, something you obviously lack in the newsreader
>> world.
>
> IIRC, GrabIt doesn't, all others do, but they either require
> IE/OE to be installed
What the FUCK are you talking about?
> since they run on their engine or have
> other stupid flaws, or are simply overpriced when Xnews is
> better and free. (Although I paid Luu a decent chunk of money
> for it anyway.)
>
>>> Most intelligent people realize that, however unfortunate,
>>> generalizations are almost impossible to avoid at some
>>> point or another in any conversation, but they are aware
>>> of the associated problems.
>>
>> Problem is, yours was wrong, mine is backed up with fact.
>
> Only in your highly-distorted perception of reality.
>
Nope, please back up your statement. I can.
>>> Among other things, conversations consist of facts,
>>> opinions, and generalizations. All those come in form of
>>> statements. I do not "refuse" to back up statements. No
>>> one can back up every single thing they say and demanding
>>> that every statement be "backed up" by facts is immature
>>> and nonsensical.
>>
>> No. Making a claim as if you are an authority, being called
>> on it and not backing up your claim is nonsensical.
>
> Why do you keep on calling me an authority?
Becasue you make statements that insinuate that you are yet you know
nothing about the topics you are debating.
> I am neither an
> authority or the smartest person in the world (or this group).
> Relax, will you?
On this we can certainly agree.
>
>>> No one has tried every newsreader there is and
>>> no one knows everything and half or more of everything you
>>> hear and read are lies and fabrications. Truth is a rare
>>> commodity, in the computer industry as much as anywhere
>>> else.
>>
>> There are websites that have as their tasks to review such
>> pieces of software, not to mention Usenet groups dedicated
>> to discussion of said software. Look Up.
>>
>> http://www.newsreaders.com
>
> Been there. So you trust reviewers more than your own brain?
> Actually, in your case, that may not be a bad thing to do.
Again, WTF are you taking about, we are have a FEATURE discussion, opinions
mean NOTHING. The reader either has the feature or dosent, it is either
useful of not. Youve been on both sides of the fence, isnt your butt
starting to hurt?
>
>>> Although, again, that sentence is probably something I
>>> should not have bothered responding to.
>>
>> Certainly not in that way.
>
> Excuse me for hurting your feelings, flower princess.
You are such a waste of effort. Youve become UnFun.
>
>>>>>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill me
>>>>>>> for not allowing the corporations to shove their
>>>>>>> latest bloated overpriced crap down my throat when
>>>>>>> everything I want, I can do just fine with my machine,
>>>>>>> and faster than you.
>>
>>>> [above you discuss software]
>>
>>> Nice assumption, but incorrect. I was talking about both.
>>
>> Assumption? Do you read what you write?
>
> You either have the attention span of a daffodil or have simply
> lost yourself in this argument.
You are the absolute worst debater I have ever had the pleasure to thrash.
THe only luser here is you and it is all in plain text and available on G2
for all to see. Save the MID's for your kids, if you ever spawn.
>
>>> No
>>> normal person "needs" a dual 4GB machine yet people have
>>> them.
>>
>> And what corporation is shoving that down your throat? A
>> software Company. The hardware is not bloated and only
>> necessary if your needs require it. If your time is worth
>> less than a few hundred dollars to upgrade, that is your
>> choice, again, a good thing.
>
> Even Intel and AMD have admitted that processor speeds have gone
> beyond anything reasonably required and are have changed their
> manner of identifying them because the numbers have become
> meaningless. Still, some people like to trade in last year's
> model for a brand-new car every year.
Tell that to Cray, Pixar, Disney et al. You are a fool. You know every
possible applicatioin of CPU power. Clustering is a waste? Really, give up
now, do yourself a favor and save the emabaressment (likely to late for
that...)
>
>>> Just like almost no one REALLY needs M$ Office (let
>>
>> Your right, Open Office is fine and free.
>
> Which does not make it any more necessary for a normal person to
> have than M$ Office.
Here we go again. Preaching to the choir....
> For example, judging by your communication
> so far, you probably don't even know how to set up tabs or
> styles let alone know how to create a custom database from
> scratch.
LOL, How could you possibly make such rediculous assumptions. I work for a
company that produces Finacial softwaree backed by MSSQL, Pervasive and
Oracle DB's written in languges from Magic to C to Java. I am the SME for
10 of these products and liase directly with the programmers and customers,
You?
[...]
>>
>> How is hardware bloated?
>
> A 4GB processor is a bloat in its own way.
In its own way? What a fucking douche.
> See above. Of course,
> in a few years you will probably have the option of buying a
> 20GB processor. Will it help you to make typos faster?
So its your argument that even though its available, no one will need it?
Like I said, do you still use a B&W TV and Rotary Phone, neiter is obsolete
in that they both still work, right?
>
>>>>> and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
>>>>> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after
>>>>> hundreds of hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate
>>>>> yet necessary),
>>
>>>> Not Necessary.
>>
>>> Let's just agree to differ. You really must be every
>>> retailer's dream client.
>>
>> You are hilarious. You have contradicted yourself on just
>> about every point you've attempted, this one is no
>> different. Up here we discuss that it is not necessary to
>> spend HOURS tweaking Linux (A NON Consumer OS) and you tell
>> me I am a retailers dream?! And then you proceed to below
>> tell us it takes _MONTHS_ for you to get Windows running
>> correctly.
>
> Jeezus. This is ALL I ever said about Linux:
>
> "Decide whether you are talking about hardware or software.
> Obviously, since you do not use OE, it is not a big surprise you
> use Linux, and my hat's off to you for that. Linux is too
> complicated for me to get into and anyway, after hundreds of
> hours of tweaking (admittedly unfortunate yet necessary), I get
> along with 95B on a 166MMX/64MB/33.6 for the internet and a 2GB
> Pentium with 98SE Lite for real work (and no internet
> connection) just fine. I bet your processor is not a Pentium 90,
> is it?"
Yeah, and?
>
> Will you at least try to keep track on who you are writing to?
> Or get off crack for long enough to come up with a decent
> logical argument?
You still dont get it even though I spelled it out clear as day.
You claim Linux is hard, you spent HOURS twaeakin
You LOVE windows but it takes you MONTHS to tweak
HOURS<WEEKS which stands to reason that while you claim linux is to hard
for you, your stament says otherwise, just like the rest of your drivel.
[snip becasue I just got tired of making you look lie a fool over and over
and over]
>
> Since you could not leave bad enough alone, I guess you are
> enjoying this pointless exchange as much as I am. Let's keep on,
> then. This is actually getting more and more amusing.
Yes, to everyone in here seeing how stupid you really are.
--
David
»Q«
<news:Xns9771D6987...@216.196.97.131>:
> Blinky the Shark et all
He hasn't eaten everything.
Yet.
--
»Q«
SINNER
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>>
>> > SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
>> > news:25drc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>> >
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >
>> > From what I have so far been able to <GUESS> about you, I have
>> > been on the net longer than you have been jerking off. I said
>> > GUESS, OK? You may just be retarded.
>>
>> Care to make that wager interesting?
>
> <http://www.neatorama.com/neat/worst-sin.htm>
>
Hey! I am not playing with MYSELF, I am playing with 'Teh ToRlls'
--
David
fLameDogg
news:MrQ9771872FA...@QsFQDN.dyndns.org:
So he *is* a tiger shark. I kinda thought so.
--
fD
"Is it just me, or does the flying spaghetti monster seem like a tastier
version of Cthulhu?" --Trail Mix, Fark forum
Blinky the Shark
> »Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
> news:MrQ9771872FA...@QsFQDN.dyndns.org:
>
>> SCPO <SC...@usn.com> wrote in
>> <news:Xns9771D6987...@216.196.97.131>:
>>
>>> Blinky the Shark et all
>>
>> He hasn't eaten everything.
>>
>> Yet.
>
> So he *is* a tiger shark. I kinda thought so.
A shark of a different stripe, at least...
thanatoid
news:pan.2006.02.21....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:22:14 -0600, thanatoid wrote:
>
>> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
>> news:qcerc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>>
>>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>>
>>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>>> retarded.
>>>
>>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>>> Pentium?
>>>
>>> Ayup.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, this is "THEY" guy.
>>
>> It was custom-built to order in September 1997, actually,
>> and still works fine as you can see. The only thing I
>> upgraded was
>
> Except when its inadequacy manifests itself in issues like
> the one that brought you here.
Nothing brought me here, I offered some logical and practical
advice to someone who was asking for it. Basics apply to
everything. You can have a Ferrari but if you shift from 4th
gear to reverse, the transmission will fall apart. I never
dreamed this group was so full of insecure toddlers who can't
handle any opinion except their own.
>> the HD.
>>
>> But I guess your shiny new machine makes your dick bigger,
>> so it's worth every penny, right?
>
> No, it just means I don't have issues caused by decade-old
> hardware.
a) It's not a decade, it's 8½ years.
b) Neither do I. There hasn't been a program written in the last
5 years which is anything but a bloated ripoff of something
someone wrote in the early 90's when computers were still the
province of people with some brains, instead of what they have
recently become, just another piece of crap to add to your "home
entertainment center".
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
> news:pan.2006.02.21....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:22:14 -0600, thanatoid wrote:
>>
>>> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
>>> news:qcerc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>>>
>>>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>>>> retarded.
>>>>
>>>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>>>> Pentium?
>>>>
>>>> Ayup.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is "THEY" guy.
>>>
>>> It was custom-built to order in September 1997, actually,
>>> and still works fine as you can see. The only thing I
>>> upgraded was
>>
>> Except when its inadequacy manifests itself in issues like
>> the one that brought you here.
>
> Nothing brought me here, I offered some logical and practical
I thought you were having tiny-memory problems.
thanatoid
Since, as you know, I use a 166MMX with Win95B for the internet,
you probably also know that 64MB is all 95 can make use of. And
I have no problems. You just have to think a moment before you
decide to do certain memory-intensive things (like dl'g a
million headers).
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
> news:pan.2006.02.22....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
>> I thought you were having tiny-memory problems.
>>
>
> Since, as you know, I use a 166MMX with Win95B for the internet,
> you probably also know that 64MB is all 95 can make use of. And
No, I don't know that it has that limit.
> I have no problems. You just have to think a moment before you
> decide to do certain memory-intensive things (like dl'g a
> million headers).
And then not do them, I'd think.
thanatoid
news:Xns977189E7E4752l...@140.99.99.130:
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>> From what I have so far been able to <GUESS> about you, I
>> have been on the net longer than you have been jerking
>> off. I said GUESS, OK? You may just be retarded.
>
> Care to make that wager interesting?
How exactly do you propose we do that? Besides I SAID it was
just an assumption, although people's words DO reflect their
mental age.
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> No, it was correct usage. It was educated since the OP
>>>>> came back and said after reading posted sugegstions, he
>>>>> had made his choce. Nothing Cclice about it, merely a
>>>>> fact.
>>>
>>>> About as correct as spelling cliché "Cclice" (although
>>>> you get points for being rather creative).
>>>
>>> Another? You really don't get this Usenet thing yet.
>>
>> If bad spelling and incomprehensible syntax is what Usenet
>> is all about, then I don't.
>
> Oh Puhleeze. It was all very comprehendable, now your are
> just ToRllinG.
Yes, comprehendable, and ToRllinG. Thanks for making me laugh.
>
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> You said _anyone_ trying to get more that 15,000
>>>>> headers is not computer savy. In reality what you meant
>>>>> to say was anyone with an outdated computer trying to
>>>>> read immense numbers of headers into memory is not
>>>>> computer savy, so next time SAY that.
>>>
>>>> 1) I said "not very computer-savvy" because I didn't
>>>> want to say stupid. (After reading others' comments on
>>>> our little discourse, I see I perhaps should not have
>>>> bothered being so polite.)
>>>
>>> I don't care _why_ you said it, you were wrong anyway.
>>
>> As I said, we both have assholes and opinions. Or am I
>> wrong again?
>
> You are wrong when you say that someone that is computer
> saavy will not need/want to DL more than 15,000 headers at
> once. That is not an opinion, it is a misguided, incorrct
> statement.
You not only need a remedial writing course, you also need a
dictionary. BADLY.
Until you manage to get off the joystick long enough to buy one,
FYI:
Noun: opinion
1. A personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or
certainty
2. A belief or sentiment shared by most people; the voice of the
people
3. A message expressing a belief about something; the expression
of a belief that is held with confidence but not substantiated
by positive knowledge or proof
4. The legal document stating the reasons for a judicial
decision
5. The reason for a court's judgment (as opposed to the decision
itself)
6. A vague idea in which some confidence is placed
[WordWeb.info]
>>>> Anyone who wants to DL a million headers no matter what
>>>> program or platform or processor or memory they have is
>>>> stupid, OK? Just my opinion. (I AM allowed an opinion, I
>>>> hope, even though I am writing this on a 166MMX?)
>>>
>>> You are obviously a moron. People that regularly download
>>> binaries often DL 1 million headers. You are allowed an
>>> opinion, but it is misinformed.
>>
>> Except for pleasant time-wasting such as this, I only dl
>> binaries and I have never needed to dl anywhere near that
>> number of headers.
>
> You also haven't needed a PC that is a current hardware
> spec. For the 15th time, Your scenario is NOT the common
> one and your opinions are all based on your very tiny
> world.
If you know how to enter another person's consciousness,
abandoning your own, and see the world THEIR way, I am sure
humanity would be very grateful to you for sharing that
knowledge. And no, doing lots of drugs doesn't count.
>> But then again I looked at the entire 100K+ group list to
>> see what I was interested in when setting up my
>> newsreader, I am aware of the existence of the "catch up
>> and purge" feature, and I am at my computer hours and
>> hours every day, I know that quality is more important
>> than quantity (i.e. most of what is posted anywhere is not
>> worth dl'g), and I am familiar with the concept of
>> organization and the fact that almost everything gets
>> reposted sooner or later anyway.
>>
>> So, while you MAY be right that people OFTEN dl a million
>> headers, most people in the world are also idiots.
>
> So, first I was wrong, but now I am right and we are all
> idiots and only you know the golden way? Kewl, just want to
> make sure I understand who things work in your world.
I can't even follow this crap.
>>>> And the reason I believe this is because I know that
>>>> basic rules of simple logic and reason apply to
>>>> everything in the universe - even if you happen to be
>>>> running an AlienWare computer with 2 4GB processors and
>>>> 12GB of RAM with a pre-release pirate copy of Vista.
>>>
>>> Hehe, I have a 1.2 ghz AMD Thunderbird, real modern
>>> hardware.
>>
>> I was not talking about you. I used "you" in the sense of
>> "one", sorry. For someone with your machine, you sure are
>> a great champion for the latest technology though. Haven't
>> you noticed that your machine does everything you need
>> just as mine does for me?
>
> That was the WINDOWS machine I was refering to since we
> were discussing windows software. I also have a Linux
> Laptop with a 2.4 GHZ Mobile and 512 megs of ram that runs
> Linux. Are you keeping up?
Are you PERMANENTLY on crack? How the fuck is anyone supposed to
know how many computers you have and how many run what and what
their specs are? For the record, I told you exactly what I have
and why I have it and why I am satisfied with it.
>>>> 2) If it works and does everything one needs, it is not
>>>> outdated. There are people smarter than either one of us
>>>> who still use DOS because they feel it is better than
>>>> anything else.
>>>
>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>> retarded.
>>
>> What the fuck constitutes "normal" hardware? Are you
>> insane?
>
> Normal is what you can go out to any computer store and buy
> TODAY. Sample 1000 computer users and see how many of them
> have hardware newer than yours, that would be normal. How
> is that insane?
You ARE the perfect product of the consumer society.
> You prefer waiting 3 minutes for your machine to boot and
> all the time you lose waiting for programs to run, or even
> finding programs that will run on your outdated,
> unsupported software/hardware. THAT is insane!
I will bet anything my machine boots faster than yours and runs
every program I have on it faster than yours (with the exception
of music file conversion which is what I bought the 2nd machine
for).
>>
>>>> -- -- --
>>>
>>> ^What the hell is that?
>>
>> It's a divider to help you get less confused by a text
>> document of more than a 100 words. It didn't seem to help.
>
> Its useless fodder, it didnt help because it is
> superfluorious and you add it arbitrarily. You are aweful
> at insults as well. Usenet really isnt for you.
"Superfluorious"??? Are we talking about dental care now?
Again, thanks for making me laugh out loud. I don't mind telling
you my life blows and you are providing some VERY welcome comic
relief.
>>> You asked WHY having a feature that allows you to choose
>>> how many headers to dl is a good thing. My number one
>>> reason was Choice and then I proceed to ask you what
>>> _you_ would do when you encounter a group with a number
>>> if headers that is too much for you wrap your little head
>>> around if your reader of choice did _not_ have that
>>> feature.
>>>
>>> You neglected to answer, again.
>>>
>>>> If you read my paragraph again (try to concentrate this
>>>> time)
>>>
>>> Careful, that hole you are digging is getting deeper...
>>
>> I wasn't aware I was digging a hole.
>
> I know, thats why I warned you. I am a pretty nice guy
> arent I?
Tell me where you live, maybe we can go to a movie "or
something".
>> There already are enough in
>> your brain. And I guess concentrating is not something you
>> are able to do. Nor is asking someone to concentrate
>> usually considered an insult. Well, maybe in your case.
>>
>
> Yup, you are getting weaker with each post. Instead of
> answering the questions you do nothing but insult...
YOU started with the insults. (You probably thought "prig" was a
misspelling of prick but it isn't. DICTIONARY!)
Not to mention that your entire first post to me was totally
unnecessary. But since you appear intent on keeping this going
until one of us dies, I am just trying to modify my posts to
adjust to your level. It's hard, but I'm trying.
>>>> you will see that it is an answer - to the extent that I
>>>> managed to make sense of the question. To spell it out
>>>> for you, I dump the piece of shit that can't do the job
>>>> and I use something which can.
>>>
>>> Except you asked Why its a good feature now you tell us
>>> all you'd dump a product without it. Which is it?
>>
>> I'm sorry, I can't dumb down my writing style so you can
>> follow it.
>
> You need to dumb yourself down to understand your own
> writing. I read and comprehend just find. Youve been all
> over the place and cant even keep up with your own
> diatribes nor answer any questions. Sorry I fluster you so,
> maybe you should take a day off before you respond.
Again, laughing out loud. (I suppose not typing LOL is another
reason I should be forcibly barred from the Usenet, huh?)
>>>>> Why do you make claims and then refuse to back them up?
>>>
>>>> Be more specific. AFAIAC, the next paragraph answers
>>>> that question more than adequately.
>>>
>>>>>> GrabIt (quite popular
>>>>>> recently) can't, for one. I am not going to try every
>>>>>> stupid newsreader just to come up with exact
>>>>>> statistics for the sake of proving a generalization.
>>>>>> And I have no Mac or Linux experience.
>>>
>>>>> Then why make a sweeping generalization if you cant
>>>>> back it up?
>>>
>>>> YOU said "Most if not all newsreaders worth their weight
>>>> have the same or similar features." Sounds like a
>>>> sweeping generalization to me. The six or so newsreaders
>>>> I have tried were SURPRISINGLY different both in
>>>> philosophy and features.
>>>
>>> But I bet they all have the ability to select all or some
>>> headers to be downloaded, or didn't you check before
>>> telling me I am wrong. My statement is made from
>>> experience, something you obviously lack in the
>>> newsreader world.
I am glad you have the time and patience to try every newsreader
there is for every platform. But I guess they figured out some
time ago that it's pointless to actually try to make you do any
actual work in the office.
>> IIRC, GrabIt doesn't, all others do, but they either
>> require IE/OE to be installed
>
> What the FUCK are you talking about?
I am surprised you don't know this, but there are some ersatz
browsers/newsreaders which will not run unless IE5 or higher is
installed. But please don't ask me for names, I can't remember
them. I'm sure you can find the time to do some research.
>> since they run on their engine or have
>> other stupid flaws, or are simply overpriced when Xnews is
>> better and free. (Although I paid Luu a decent chunk of
>> money for it anyway.)
>>
>>>> Most intelligent people realize that, however
>>>> unfortunate, generalizations are almost impossible to
>>>> avoid at some point or another in any conversation, but
>>>> they are aware of the associated problems.
>>>
>>> Problem is, yours was wrong, mine is backed up with fact.
DICTIONARY!!!! NOW!!!!!!!
>> Only in your highly-distorted perception of reality.
>>
> Nope, please back up your statement. I can.
Don't just say it, do it! I can't wait!
>
>>>> Among other things, conversations consist of facts,
>>>> opinions, and generalizations. All those come in form of
>>>> statements. I do not "refuse" to back up statements. No
>>>> one can back up every single thing they say and
>>>> demanding that every statement be "backed up" by facts
>>>> is immature and nonsensical.
>>>
>>> No. Making a claim as if you are an authority, being
>>> called on it and not backing up your claim is
>>> nonsensical.
>>
>> Why do you keep on calling me an authority?
>
> Becasue you make statements that insinuate that you are yet
> you know nothing about the topics you are debating.
If you permit me the immodesty of quoting myself:
1) "I have no Mac or Linux experience."
2) "Linux is too complicated for me to get into (...)"
3) "It took me years to get (Windows) running right."
4) "There are people smarter than either one of us (...)"
5) "I worded that sentence clumsily."
6) "(...) and if I weren't too lazy to learn Linux (...)"
7) "I am neither an authority or the smartest person in the
world (or this group)."
Yes, I must really think I am a MAJOR computing authority. GET
THAT DICTIONARY NOW AND LOOK UP "AUTHORITY"!
>> I am neither an
>> authority or the smartest person in the world (or this
>> group). Relax, will you?
>
> On this we can certainly agree.
So why do you keep on whining that I speak like the ultimate
authority on computers? How insecure ARE you? It's called
opinions. (Again, see def. provided above.)
>>>> No one has tried every newsreader there is and
>>>> no one knows everything and half or more of everything
>>>> you hear and read are lies and fabrications. Truth is a
>>>> rare commodity, in the computer industry as much as
>>>> anywhere else.
>>>
>>> There are websites that have as their tasks to review
>>> such pieces of software, not to mention Usenet groups
>>> dedicated to discussion of said software. Look Up.
>>>
>>> http://www.newsreaders.com
>>
>> Been there. So you trust reviewers more than your own
>> brain? Actually, in your case, that may not be a bad thing
>> to do.
>
> Again, WTF are you taking about, we are have a FEATURE
> discussion, opinions mean NOTHING. The reader either has
> the feature or dosent, it is either useful of not. Youve
> been on both sides of the fence, isnt your butt starting to
> hurt?
Again, thanks for a good laugh. "We are have"? Is English your
first language? Because I am beginning to suspect it may not be,
in which case I owe you an apology. Seriously.
As I have said repeatedly, I have no time or inclination to
experiment with every newsreader out there. I can't think of a
SINGLE feature Xnews lacks, and I know it has many I have yet to
stumble upon. (I don't use Word - or whatever - for spell
checking, I have an all-purpose spell check program that works
in everything - as could everyone who instead prefers to bitch
about no spell checker in Xnews. The last time I installed
Office on my machine was when I had to design a database in
Access and after I was done I deleted it right away.)
>>>> Although, again, that sentence is probably something I
>>>> should not have bothered responding to.
>>>
>>> Certainly not in that way.
>>
>> Excuse me for hurting your feelings, flower princess.
>
> You are such a waste of effort. Youve become UnFun.
So why do you keep writing? Are you developing a love/hate crush
on me? And when did I promise to be Fun? I am an awful person,
haven't you realized it yet?
>>>>>>>> Well, I guess you'd better just come over and kill
>>>>>>>> me for not allowing the corporations to shove their
>>>>>>>> latest bloated overpriced crap down my throat when
>>>>>>>> everything I want, I can do just fine with my
>>>>>>>> machine, and faster than you.
>>>
>>>>> [above you discuss software]
>>>
>>>> Nice assumption, but incorrect. I was talking about
>>>> both.
>>>
>>> Assumption? Do you read what you write?
>>
>> You either have the attention span of a daffodil or have
>> simply lost yourself in this argument.
>
> You are the absolute worst debater I have ever had the
> pleasure to thrash. THe only luser here is you and it is
> all in plain text and available on G2 for all to see. Save
> the MID's for your kids, if you ever spawn.
You can relax, I have no kids and will never have any.
And as further proof of me not being an authority (while
committing the awful crime of allowing myself to have opinions),
I have no idea what G2 or MID stand for. Anyway, I am not
ashamed of what I am writing. I would be x-no archiving
otherwise.
>>>> No
>>>> normal person "needs" a dual 4GB machine yet people have
>>>> them.
>>>
>>> And what corporation is shoving that down your throat? A
>>> software Company. The hardware is not bloated and only
>>> necessary if your needs require it. If your time is worth
>>> less than a few hundred dollars to upgrade, that is your
>>> choice, again, a good thing.
>>
>> Even Intel and AMD have admitted that processor speeds
>> have gone beyond anything reasonably required and are have
>> changed their manner of identifying them because the
>> numbers have become meaningless. Still, some people like
>> to trade in last year's model for a brand-new car every
>> year.
>
> Tell that to Cray, Pixar, Disney et al. You are a fool. You
> know every possible applicatioin of CPU power. Clustering
> is a waste? Really, give up now, do yourself a favor and
> save the emabaressment (likely to late for that...)
I said 'NORMAL PERSON". Like you or me at home, wasting time
doing this. I was not talking about multinationals or telco's or
ISP's or Pixar. Really grasping at straws, aren't you?
>>>> Just like almost no one REALLY needs M$ Office (let
>>>
>>> Your right, Open Office is fine and free.
>>
>> Which does not make it any more necessary for a normal
>> person to have than M$ Office.
>
> Here we go again. Preaching to the choir....
>
>> For example, judging by your communication
>> so far, you probably don't even know how to set up tabs or
>> styles let alone know how to create a custom database from
>> scratch.
>
> LOL, How could you possibly make such rediculous
> assumptions. I work for a company that produces Finacial
> softwaree backed by MSSQL, Pervasive and Oracle DB's
> written in languges from Magic to C to Java. I am the SME
> for 10 of these products and liase directly with the
> programmers and customers, You?
"Finacial"? "Softwaree"? Do you have softwaree jamborees?
Assuming you aren't just lying, you must have a very good (and
VERY patient) secretary that types communications for you, or
you would have been fired ages ago. And how you ever got the job
is a mystery only your obviously delusional boss can answer.
>>> How is hardware bloated?
>>
>> A 4GB processor is a bloat in its own way.
>
> In its own way? What a fucking douche.
Yes, like you are an idiot in your own charming way.
>> See above. Of course,
>> in a few years you will probably have the option of buying
>> a 20GB processor. Will it help you to make typos faster?
>
> So its your argument that even though its available, no one
> will need it? Like I said, do you still use a B&W TV and
> Rotary Phone, neiter is obsolete in that they both still
> work, right?
SOME people will need it but not everyone. Why do you keep on
sticking to your juvenile attitudes and harassing me?
Adjective: obsolete
1. Old; no longer in use or valid or fashionable
2. No longer in use
[WordWeb.info]
It may be old and unfashionable, but AFAIAC if it does what I
want it to do, it's not obsolete. (That was an opinion, see
definition provided above.) Someday soon, when the shit really
hits the fan, you will regret having thrown that typewriter out.
(If you had one in the first place, which come to think of it,
is doubtful.)
Where DO you get your drugs? Must be a very potent variety.
AGAIN, I never said anything about Linux taking hours to set up.
I know NOTHING ABOUT IT and I don't know HOW LONG it takes to
set up. FUCK!!! Can you even READ??? (It being patently obvious
you can barely write a coherent sentence without at least one
misspelled word.)
And I FAR from love Windows, but since I have managed (after a
lot of tweaking) to get it to work the way it should out of the
box, I have no major issues with it. (Not with my versions,
anyway. I will certainly never put XP or Vista on any of my
machines.)
> [snip becasue I just got tired of making you look lie a
> fool over and over and over]
>
>> Since you could not leave bad enough alone, I guess you
>> are enjoying this pointless exchange as much as I am.
>> Let's keep on, then. This is actually getting more and
>> more amusing.
>
> Yes, to everyone in here seeing how stupid you really are.
I would LOVE to see poll results (from among those who have
enough time to waste to follow this discussion) as to who is
stupider. I admit I am stupid for ever having replied to you in
the first place, but I hate to tell you buddy, you're no genius.
You'd better make sure your bosses never read any of your posts.
Anyway, until the next time...
How's the weather in your parts these days?
t.
Robert Singers
>> Yes, to everyone in here seeing how stupid you really are.
>
> I would LOVE to see poll results (from among those who have
> enough time to waste to follow this discussion) as to who is
> stupider. I admit I am stupid for ever having replied to you in
> the first place, but I hate to tell you buddy, you're no genius.
> You'd better make sure your bosses never read any of your posts.
You're not looking like the sharpest knife in the block, bud.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Foemina Erit Ruina Tua
Ponder
In <news:Xns9772D800897B8rsingers@IP-Hidden> you wrote:
> You're not looking like the sharpest knife in the block, bud.
He's not using it either. 636 lines got blocked by my size filter ;)
--
PGP key ID - DSS:0x2661A952
Ponder - Homepage: http://www.colin-jones.co.uk ICQ# 1707811
Skittles Team: http://www.ddskittles.co.uk
SINNER
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns977189E7E4752l...@140.99.99.130:
[nothing worth wasting any more time on]
You are like a Rubik's cube, Fun when you first get it, I get bored quickly
and back up on the shelf with you until I need a good laugh.
Next time you feel like giving advice make sure you are using a PC not a
calculator.
--
David
Unix has a command called 'nice' which allows a user to voluntarily
reduce the priority of his job. No one ever uses it.
-- Andrew Tanenbaum
Mike Yetto
when thanatoid wrote...
> I would LOVE to see poll results (from among those who have
> enough time to waste to follow this discussion) as to who is
> stupider.
You have my vote.
Mike "but that's just my opinion" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
A deal is a deal (...until a better one comes along).
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #16.
Frank Slootweg
> It was April the forty-first, being a quadruple leap year,
> when thanatoid wrote...
>
> > I would LOVE to see poll results (from among those who have
> > enough time to waste to follow this discussion) as to who is
> > stupider.
>
> You have my vote.
And mine [1].
Can we also vote on spelling-lames, especially on misdirected ones?
[1] Isn't this dictatorship? Aren't there supposed to be multiple
candidates when you are allowed to vote?
thanatoid
news:43fddc53$0$64926$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl:
There ARE two candidates, me and SINNER. Just as in the
"democratic" U.S.A. Assuming I understood the way the poll
turned out, 5 of you think I am stupider than SINNER and no one
thinks SINNER is stupider than I. Fine, I accept that.
Nevertheless the intelligence of the people who apparently DID
have enough time to waste reading the crap he and I have been
writing is automatically under suspicion, not to mention that
most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet dwellers
unfortunately not being an exception (maybe they were once in
DOS and pre-DOS days).
And if a spelling-lame is a comment on bad spelling, please show
me a single one where I was wrong. I did leave in two or three
repeated words while rewriting sentences but that is not bad
spelling, just a stupid (obviously) oversight. And owning a
computer (or a typewriter, OR a piece of paper and a pencil)
does NOT entitle one to defile a language. But I suppose sooner
or later we'll all be swinging from trees with our tails anyway.
Can't stop de-evolution.
BTW, Ponder, blocking posts over 500 or 600 lines is something I
don't understand (I remember, we already established I'm
stupid). But SOME subjects take time to discuss and in SINNER's
case, while smarter than me he might be, it was rather obvious a
lot of quoting was needed in a (futile and stupid) attempt to
help follow my stupid lines of reasoning.
OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my stupidity has
more to do with the fact that I have the audacity to use a 166
with a 33.6 modem than with any of the arguments which were
discussed. But then again, I'm stupid.
Regards,
t.
Frank Slootweg
> Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in
> news:43fddc53$0$64926$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl:
>
> > Mike Yetto <mike....@nycap.invalid> wrote:
> >> It was April the forty-first, being a quadruple leap year,
> >> when thanatoid wrote...
> >>
> >> > I would LOVE to see poll results (from among those who
> >> > have enough time to waste to follow this discussion) as
> >> > to who is stupider.
> >>
> >> You have my vote.
> >
> > And mine [1].
> >
> > Can we also vote on spelling-lames, especially on
> > misdirected ones?
> >
> > [1] Isn't this dictatorship? Aren't there supposed to be
> > multiple candidates when you are allowed to vote?
>
> There ARE two candidates, me and SINNER.
<woosh>
> Just as in the
> "democratic" U.S.A. Assuming I understood the way the poll
> turned out, 5 of you think I am stupider than SINNER and no one
> thinks SINNER is stupider than I. Fine, I accept that.
> Nevertheless the intelligence of the people who apparently DID
> have enough time to waste reading the crap he and I have been
> writing is automatically under suspicion,
"waste"? Isn't that up to 'us' (TINU) to decide? What was that thingy
again about opinions and all that?
> not to mention that
> most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet dwellers
> unfortunately not being an exception
This newsgroup isn't your run of the mill Usenet group and 'we' are
not your run of the mill subscribers/contributors.
> (maybe they were once in
> DOS and pre-DOS days).
"DOS"? You *are* a newbie, aren't you? (Just kidding.)
> And if a spelling-lame is a comment on bad spelling,
It isn't. (Well, not just that.)
> please show
> me a single one where I was wrong.
The ones which were intentional spelling 'errors'.
Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame /
intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but criticizing
those who *have* such experience is making you look silly.
[deleted]
> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my stupidity has
> more to do with the fact that I have the audacity to use a 166
> with a 33.6 modem than with any of the arguments which were
> discussed.
If "your" (also) refers to me, then you're wrong. My opinion of you
has nothing to do with the hardware (or software) you use.
> But then again, I'm stupid.
No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this discussion and
you would not be reading this.
Blinky the Shark
> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my stupidity has
> more to do with the fact that I have the audacity to use a 166
> with a 33.6 modem than with any of the arguments which were
> discussed. But then again, I'm stupid.
That aside, some guy just appeared in 24hoursupport.helpdesk running
W95 and a 33.6 modem, with downloading problems. Perhaps a legacy
specialist like yourself can give him a hand. No, I'm serious. The
thread is "computer freezes when on the internet", if you feel like doing
something positive for a change.
Or...somehow I can't get the idea out of my head that that's you, over
there, using a different nym. I don't care enough to check headers. But
he does repeat over and over that it can't be his old hardware causing the
problems, so there are certainly parallels.
Blinky the Shark
Frank Slootweg wrote:
> thanatoid wrote:
> "waste"? Isn't that up to 'us' (TINU) to decide? What was that thingy
> again about opinions and all that?
There certainly is an us. Okay, everyone that's part of us raise your
hands. Of course the real us won't believe the impostors...
> Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame /
> intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but criticizing
> those who *have* such experience is making you look silly.
He's new to the froup... :)
>> But then again, I'm stupid.
> No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this discussion and
> you would not be reading this.
So far you haven't convinced me that his self-appraisal is off the mark.
:)
Frank Slootweg
>
> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > thanatoid wrote:
>
> > "waste"? Isn't that up to 'us' (TINU) to decide? What was that thingy
> > again about opinions and all that?
>
> There certainly is an us. Okay, everyone that's part of us raise your
> hands. Of course the real us won't believe the impostors...
Yes, I also think there's an us, and I dislike these silly
TIN<something> disclaimers, but if you leave them out, there'll be
someone whining about *that*, so ...
> > Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame /
> > intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but criticizing
> > those who *have* such experience is making you look silly.
>
> He's new to the froup... :)
Yes, and "alright", is that all right, all-right, allright or none of
the above? :-)
> >> But then again, I'm stupid.
>
> > No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this discussion and
> > you would not be reading this.
>
> So far you haven't convinced me that his self-appraisal is off the mark.
> :)
Well, apparently I had an off-day and accidentily was somewhat nice. I
assure you that that's quite untypical and not likely to re-occur, so
you might want to hold on to that MID, so that you can embarrass me with
it at a later date. (Does GG do after-the-fact XNAYs? :-) [1])
[1] Yes, I know they, sort of, do.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>> > thanatoid wrote:
>>
>> > "waste"? Isn't that up to 'us' (TINU) to decide? What was that thingy
>> > again about opinions and all that?
>>
>> There certainly is an us. Okay, everyone that's part of us raise your
>> hands. Of course the real us won't believe the impostors...
>
> Yes, I also think there's an us, and I dislike these silly
> TIN<something> disclaimers, but if you leave them out, there'll be
> someone whining about *that*, so ...
Yeah, I see that all the time in another group. Something as inoffensive
as "if you provide more information we can be more helpful" draws shouts
of TINW!
>> > Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame /
>> > intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but
>> > criticizing those who *have* such experience is making you look
>> > silly.
>>
>> He's new to the froup... :)
>
> Yes, and "alright", is that all right, all-right, allright or none of
> the above? :-)
I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot (or alot) of that"
are simply examples of unacceptable bad writing.
>> >> But then again, I'm stupid.
>>
>> > No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this discussion
>> > and
>> > you would not be reading this.
>>
>> So far you haven't convinced me that his self-appraisal is off the
>> mark. :)
>
> Well, apparently I had an off-day and accidentily was somewhat nice. I
You cad!
> assure you that that's quite untypical and not likely to re-occur, so
Or recur, as we say in the highly educated and sophisticated Western
democracies. ;)
> you might want to hold on to that MID, so that you can embarrass me with
> it at a later date. (Does GG do after-the-fact XNAYs? :-) [1])
Ixnay.
> [1] Yes, I know they, sort of, do.
Only if you (TCIAY)[1] whine to them.
[1]There Certainly Is A You. There is the personal you, and the
collective, nonspecific you.
Frank Slootweg
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:14:00 +0000, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >> > Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame /
> >> > intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but
> >> > criticizing those who *have* such experience is making you look
> >> > silly.
> >>
> >> He's new to the froup... :)
> >
> > Yes, and "alright", is that all right, all-right, allright or none of
> > the above? :-)
>
> I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot (or alot) of that"
> are simply examples of unacceptable bad writing.
Well, if it's good enough for James Joyce, it's good enough for me! :-)
<http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=all%20right> See "Usage
Note:".
[deleted]
> > assure you that that's quite untypical and not likely to re-occur, so
>
> Or recur, as we say in the highly educated and sophisticated Western
> democracies. ;)
Yeah, "re-occur" looked kind of wrong. But what do we have here? A
shark giving English lessons to a Dutchman? I don't think so! :-)
> > you might want to hold on to that MID, so that you can embarrass me with
> > it at a later date. (Does GG do after-the-fact XNAYs? :-) [1])
>
> Ixnay.
>
> > [1] Yes, I know they, sort of, do.
>
> Only if you (TCIAY)[1] whine to them.
>
> [1]There Certainly Is A You. There is the personal you, and the
> collective, nonspecific you.
Yeah, but which case is it!? I think there's just no excuse for
sloppy, ambiguous writing like that!
Mike Yetto
when thanatoid wrote...
> There ARE two candidates, me and SINNER. Just as in the
> "democratic" U.S.A. Assuming I understood the way the poll
> turned out, 5 of you think I am stupider than SINNER and no one
> thinks SINNER is stupider than I. Fine, I accept that.
>
If that's the case, why do you still yammer on?
Mike "why not yammer off?" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
Satisfaction is not guaranteed.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #19.
Blinky the Shark
> It was April the forty-first, being a quadruple leap year,
> when thanatoid wrote...
>
>> There ARE two candidates, me and SINNER. Just as in the
>> "democratic" U.S.A. Assuming I understood the way the poll
>> turned out, 5 of you think I am stupider than SINNER and no one
>> thinks SINNER is stupider than I. Fine, I accept that.
>>
>
> If that's the case, why do you still yammer on?
>
> Mike "why not yammer off?" Yetto
[clap clap]
Hope it worked.
»Q«
<news:Xns97738FDC2...@216.196.97.135>:
> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my stupidity has
> more to do with the fact that I have the audacity to use a 166
> with a 33.6 modem than with any of the arguments which were
> discussed.
It was your /reaction/ after Blinky merely mentioned your processor
which convinced me of your (relative) stupidity. He just asked if you
were the guy using an old Pentium, and you responded with a flame about
penis sizes.
Maybe I'm just not seeing all the posts in which people disparage your
hardware, which would explain why you are so defensive about it.
--
»Q«
thanatoid
news:b73uc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns977189E7E4752l...@140.99.99.130:
>
> [nothing worth wasting any more time on]
>
> You are like a Rubik's cube, Fun when you first get it, I
> get bored quickly and back up on the shelf with you until I
> need a good laugh.
>
> Next time you feel like giving advice make sure you are
> using a PC not a calculator.
>
My sincere congratulations on ending this - also on your first
post (ever?) without spelling mistakes, although your grammar
still needs work.
It's been fun, hasn't it?
BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
just a calculator.
Regards
t.
SINNER
> SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> wrote in
> news:b73uc3x...@news.gates-of-hell.com:
>
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>> news:Xns977189E7E4752l...@140.99.99.130:
>>
>> [nothing worth wasting any more time on]
>>
>> You are like a Rubik's cube, Fun when you first get it, I
>> get bored quickly and back up on the shelf with you until I
>> need a good laugh.
>>
>> Next time you feel like giving advice make sure you are
>> using a PC not a calculator.
>>
>
> My sincere congratulations on ending this
Apparently I didn't, you needed the last word.
> - also on your first
> post (ever?) without spelling mistakes, although your grammar
> still needs work.
>
> It's been fun, hasn't it?
If you like feeling like a fool in front of hundreds (thousands?) of
people, I guess you could say it was fun for you. Educating retards is
the definition of idiocy. You continue to do the same thing over and over
expecting the results to change. This makes me an idiot. I thought I
could educate you yet you've proven over and over that you either chose
not to learn or that you are simply incapable of it. Another window into
your intellect below:
>
> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
> just a calculator.
>
So now its your arguement that calculators don't generate letters or that
if something generates letters it cannot be a calculator? Why could you
just not leave well enough alone? With every post your stupidity becomes
more and more apparent.
FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very good and math
with 1's and 0's.
--
David
thanatoid
and SCPO:
Thank you for you kind comments.
I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
over. Very strange.
Please excuse the global reply, but I'm sure you will
recognize your words.
1)
>> Nevertheless the intelligence of the people who apparently
>> DID have enough time to waste reading the crap he and I
>> have been writing is automatically under suspicion,
> "waste"? Isn't that up to 'us' (TINU) to decide? What was
> that thingy again about opinions and all that?
See below for a definition of an opinion. In MY opinion,
writing let alone reading our discussion was largely a waste
of time, although not without its rather amusing moments.
2)
>> not to mention that
>> most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet dwellers
>> unfortunately not being an exception
> This newsgroup isn't your run of the mill Usenet group and
> 'we' are
>not your run of the mill subscribers/contributors.
I'm glad you have such a high opinion of yourself and your
exclusive club of mutual adoration, but a Usenet group is a
Usenet group, just like a cow is a cow, regardless of its
color.
3)
>> And if a spelling-lame is a comment on bad spelling,
> It isn't. (Well, not just that.)
Too bad you couldn't provide a complete definition while you
were at it.
4)
>> please show
>> me a single one where I was wrong.
> The ones which were intentional spelling 'errors'.
> Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame
> /
>intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but
>criticizing those who *have* such experience is making you
>look silly.
Since SINNER's last post (where, to his great credit, he
finally ends this crap between us) has NO spelling errors, it
would not appear his errors were "intentional". I have seen
people's "intentional" errors (Julius for jealous -
brilliant!) but his were just of the uneducated variety. So I
think (opine, see below) he either finally installed a spell
checker or started using the one he always had. Or maybe he
had his secretary write the last post.
5)
>> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
>> the arguments which were discussed.
> If "your" (also) refers to me, then you're wrong. My
> opinion of you
>has nothing to do with the hardware (or software) you use.
Since I said that before you joined the thread, it couldn't
possibly refer to you as well.
6)
>> But then again, I'm stupid.
> No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this
> discussion and
>you would not be reading this.
Thank you, and I know I'm not (not as smart as I was 30 years
go, but not stupid). Just going with the poll results.
7)
>I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot (or
>alot) of that" are simply examples of unacceptable bad
>writing.
Nice to see someone who still believes in quality.
8)
>> I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot
>> (or alot) of that" are simply examples of unacceptable bad
>> writing.
> Well, if it's good enough for James Joyce, it's good
> enough for me! :-)
You are not one of the last century's greatest writers. No
one did what he did with language before. He was creating a
new form of artistic expression via language deconstruction
and modification. Usenet dwellers just leave their typos and
spelling errors in and think that makes them part of a
special club. (Unless they're just stupid, like SINNER {I may
be stupider according to the poll, but he is still stupid.})
9)
>>That aside, some guy just appeared in
>>24hoursupport.helpdesk running W95 and a 33.6 modem, with
>>downloading problems. Perhaps a legacy specialist like
>>yourself can give him a hand. No, I'm serious. The thread
>>is "computer freezes when on the internet", if you feel
>>like doing something positive for a change.
>>Or...somehow I can't get the idea out of my head that
>>that's you, over there, using a different nym. I don't
>>care enough to check headers. But he does repeat over and
>>over that it can't be his old hardware causing the
>>problems, so there are certainly parallels.
Of course it's me, NO ONE ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD STILL USES
THAT KIND OF HARDWARE. Perhaps you didn't bother to read the
whole post - I do tend to go on and on, and I apologize for
it, but can't help it - anyway, if it's good enough for
Proust, it's good enough for me ;-) It's not a downloading
problem. The computer can be doing nothing, just be online,
and it will happen. NEVER offline. All else aside, if anyone
can help me with it, I would really appreciate it. Stupid
people like me have to ask for help sometimes. I'm actually
more curious WHAT is causing it than in how to eliminate it.
And if someone can PROVE it is my old hardware, I probably
will build a new computer. Nothing wrong with getting a new
computer if you actually need it.
10)
>> (...) 5 of you think I am stupider than SINNER and no one
>> thinks SINNER is stupider than I. Fine, I accept that.
>>
>If that's the case, why do you still yammer on?
One or both of the following: a) a discussion is not
necessarily over just because a poll on the participants'
intelligence has been taken b) I'm stupid.
11)
>> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
>> the arguments which were discussed.
>It was your /reaction/ after Blinky merely mentioned your
>processor which convinced me of your (relative) stupidity.
>He just asked if you were the guy using an old Pentium, and
>you responded with a flame about penis sizes.
I agree it was very juvenile (and we already know I'm
stupid). But it's a common phrase to use when people insist
something is better when it isn't necessarily so at all.
Just for the record (and for the 5 of you who like polls),
WHAT can a 4GB machne with 1GB RAM loaded with with
XtraProblems (I'm not mentioning broadband, I think it's
irrelevant to people who are not super pseudo-info addicts,
not in a hurry, and who don't video or voice-chat or play
online games) do (besides playing video games at ridiculously
high frame rates, feeding money to evil corporations and
doing SOME things like huge music file conversion
significantly faster) any BETTER than a 166 or even a 486/33?
PLEASE enlighten me. As I said, there are people smarter than
me OR SINNER, or perhaps any of you as well, who still run
DOS because they know it does everything >they< need.
I am perhaps a little defensive, but I am equally "defensive"
about anything that works fine yet is constantly dissed
because it is not "this year's model". Many people just HAVE
to trade in the car they bought last year for this year's
model, year after year. The ultimate in brainless
consumerism. I don't think very highly of the consumer
society. (But then again I'm just stupid.)
My "piece of shit" 166 w/95B boots in less than 10 seconds
and no partition ever takes longer than 2 minutes to defrag,
usually less than 20 seconds. Can you guys say the same? And
I don't play video games, don't edit video, and I have a 2GB
P4 machine to do music conversions/processing.
12)
>To those who suffer from ADD and went off on some tangential
>thread, well...
For the record, all I ever did was to offer an (IMO)
reasonable solution to your problem which had not been
already proposed by someone else. It was SINNER who went
nuts, although he may be less stupid than me.
BTW, you said:
And, I have learned that talking down to people is not a
great way to engender yourself to someone.
enïgenïder (en jenÇdÉr) v., -dered, -derïing ó v.t.1. to
produce, cause, or give rise to: Hatred engendered violence.
2. to beget; procreate. ó v.i.3. to be produced or caused;
come into existence. [1275ñ1325; ME < OF engendrer < L
ingenerÄre = in- EN-1 + generÄre to beget; see GENERATE]
13)
>>> I will continue to use XNEWS - 'cuz I like it! DUH? And
>>> 'cuz it is easy
>Might want to update to a version that's not a few years old
>(...)
Why upgrade if it works fine? I know you are a Linux user,
but still, Microsoft LOVES people like you.
New crime - not using the latest version (of whatever).
Jeezus. If a programmer(s) haven't put everything that's
reasonably required into a program by version 4, then they
are either greedy assholes who hold back so you will buy the
next version or they are just idiots. Just my opinion (see
below).
14)
>Third time: READ the page that Xnews I linked you to, or
>remain ignorant about what "test" means.
Given the way 90% of software actually behaves once it's
outside the designer's head and on someone's computer, it's
all test or beta versions. Some people just like to call
everything they output "test" for their own reasons. Anyway,
as I said, if it does everything you need, why upgrade?
Micrografx (MTRIP) made a great graphics program which worked
fine with every release. You didn't need 7.02c to finally get
it to run right. Tell that to Quark, Adobe or Microsoft. And
many of them CHARGE you for those bug fixes!
15)
For those of you who think they are the voice of a supreme
being, all you are doing is stating opinions, occasionally
backed by some presumed facts which others could disprove.
And, while perhaps that is what some of you think makes this
group so special, opinions happen to be the most basic of a
discussion's elements, necessary, and not a crime.
16)
DEFINITION OF OPINION:
oïpinïion (É pinÇyÉn) n.
1. a belief or judgment based on grounds insufficient to
produce complete certainty. 2. a personal view, attitude, or
appraisal. 3. the formal expression of a professional
judgment: a second medical opinion. 4. the formal statement
by a judge or court of the principles used in reaching a
decision on a case. 5. a judgment or estimate of a person
or thing with respect to character, merit, etc. 6. a
favorable estimate; esteem. [1250ñ1300; ME < OF < L opçnié,
der. of opçnÄrç to OPINE]
17)
Peace and love
t.
P.S.
Regrettably, SINNER returned, even though all I did was wish
him well, more or less. So, for you, my smarter-than-me
friend::
>>Educating retards is the definition of idiocy.
I'm sure special education professionals will agree with your
words of wisdom. Just ask one of yours.
> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's
> not just a calculator.
>>So now its your arguement that calculators don't generate
>>letters or that if something generates letters it cannot be
>>a calculator? Why could you just not leave well enough
>>alone? With every post your stupidity becomes more and more
>>apparent.
calïcuïlaïtor (kalÇkyÉ lçêtÉr) n.1. a small,
hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that performs
calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate calculation.
3. a person who calculates or computes. [1375ñ1425; late ME <
L]
>FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
>good and math with 1's and 0's.
One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you have
managed to make (aside from the grammar). Inside, yes. Not as
far as the output.
In closing:
SINNER, PLEASE let it go. I can't because I'm stupider!!!
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky wrote:
>>>That aside, some guy just appeared in
>>>24hoursupport.helpdesk running W95 and a 33.6 modem, with
>>>downloading problems. Perhaps a legacy specialist like
>>>yourself can give him a hand. No, I'm serious. The thread
>>>is "computer freezes when on the internet", if you feel
>>>like doing something positive for a change.
>
>>>Or...somehow I can't get the idea out of my head that
>>>that's you, over there, using a different nym. I don't
>>>care enough to check headers. But he does repeat over and
>>>over that it can't be his old hardware causing the
>>>problems, so there are certainly parallels.
>
> Of course it's me, NO ONE ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD STILL USES
> THAT KIND OF HARDWARE.
Okay.
> And if someone can PROVE it is my old hardware, I probably
> will build a new computer. Nothing wrong with getting a new
> computer if you actually need it.
I doubt that such a thing could be proven to you.
> I am perhaps a little defensive, but I am equally "defensive"
> about anything that works fine yet is constantly dissed
> because it is not "this year's model". Many people just HAVE
> to trade in the car they bought last year for this year's
> model, year after year. The ultimate in brainless
> consumerism. I don't think very highly of the consumer
> society. (But then again I'm just stupid.)
I just bought my first car since 1983.
>>>> I will continue to use XNEWS - 'cuz I like it! DUH? And
>>>> 'cuz it is easy
>
>>Might want to update to a version that's not a few years old
>>(...)
>
> Why upgrade if it works fine? I know you are a Linux user,
> but still, Microsoft LOVES people like you.
Yeah, upgrading a freeware program to a current version is a lot like
buying Windows version after Windows version. Duh.
> New crime - not using the latest version (of whatever). Jeezus. If a
> programmer(s) haven't put everything that's reasonably required into a
> program by version 4, then they are either greedy assholes who hold back
> so you will buy the next version or they are just idiots. Just my
> opinion (see below).
Yeah, Luu should've put yEnc capability ito Xnews nine years ago when
he launched Xnews, before anyone had heard of yEnc. Instead of in an
upgrade. Duh.
Blinky the Shark
> thanatoid wrote:
>
>> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
>> just a calculator.
>
> 07734? 710 77345? (Bet that dates me to within a couple of years.)
Datapoint: I remember who showed me that, and I think I worked with him
in 1973. :)
Frank Slootweg
> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto, Q,
> and SCPO:
>
> Thank you for you kind comments.
>
> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> over. Very strange.
We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts. Anyway, we
decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
> Please excuse the global reply, but I'm sure you will
> recognize your words.
>
[deleted]
> 2)
>
> >> not to mention that
> >> most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet dwellers
> >> unfortunately not being an exception
>
> > This newsgroup isn't your run of the mill Usenet group and 'we'
> > are not your run of the mill subscribers/contributors.
>
> I'm glad you have such a high opinion of yourself and your
> exclusive club of mutual adoration, but a Usenet group is a
> Usenet group, just like a cow is a cow, regardless of its
> color.
If you really think that, then that's yet another display of your
(relative) newbieness.
> 3)
>
> >> And if a spelling-lame is a comment on bad spelling,
>
> > It isn't. (Well, not just that.)
>
> Too bad you couldn't provide a complete definition while you
> were at it.
Hint: Spelling- .....lame. Got it it now?
> 4)
>
> >> please show me a single one where I was wrong.
>
> > The ones which were intentional spelling 'errors'.
>
> > Apparently you have no experience with this (spelling-lame
> > / intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright, but
> > criticizing those who *have* such experience is making you look
> > silly.
>
> Since SINNER's last post (where, to his great credit, he
> finally ends this crap between us) has NO spelling errors, it
> would not appear his errors were "intentional". I have seen
> people's "intentional" errors (Julius for jealous -
> brilliant!) but his were just of the uneducated variety. So I
> think (opine, see below) he either finally installed a spell
> checker or started using the one he always had. Or maybe he
> had his secretary write the last post.
No, there were several intentional ones. I think you got one or two,
but missed several others, and thought (and said) that they were
accidental.
But indeed David's spelling got 'worse' as the thread 'progressed'. I
guess he just could not be bothered to waste even more time by typing
carefully. Can't say I blame him.
> 5)
>
> >> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
> >> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
> >> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
> >> the arguments which were discussed.
>
> > If "your" (also) refers to me, then you're wrong. My
> > opinion of you has nothing to do with the hardware (or software) you
> > use.
>
> Since I said that before you joined the thread, it couldn't
> possibly refer to you as well.
See how silly you are? You can't possibly know at what time I joined
the thread. You know when I first *posted* in it, not when I *joined*.
Since I'm talking about my opinion of you, (only) my reading is
relevant, not my posting.
> 6)
>
> >> But then again, I'm stupid.
>
> > No, you're not. If you were, we would not have had this
> > discussion and you would not be reading this.
>
> Thank you, and I know I'm not (not as smart as I was 30 years
> go, but not stupid). Just going with the poll results.
>
> 7)
>
> >I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot (or
> >alot) of that" are simply examples of unacceptable bad
> >writing.
>
> Nice to see someone who still believes in quality.
>
> 8)
>
> >> I think "that's alright" and certainly "I've seen allot
> >> (or alot) of that" are simply examples of unacceptable bad
> >> writing.
>
> > Well, if it's good enough for James Joyce, it's good
> > enough for me! :-)
>
> You are not one of the last century's greatest writers.
May I suggest you look up the concept of humor/humour? Apparently it's
completely alien to you.
[much deleted]
> > BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's
> > not just a calculator.
>
> >>So now its your arguement that calculators don't generate
> >>letters or that if something generates letters it cannot be
> >>a calculator? Why could you just not leave well enough
> >>alone? With every post your stupidity becomes more and more
> >>apparent.
>
> cal?cu?la?tor (kal?ky? l??t?r) n.1. a small,
> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that performs
> calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate calculation.
> 3. a person who calculates or computes. [1375?1425; late ME <
> L]
>
> >FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
> >good and math with 1's and 0's.
>
> One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you have
> managed to make (aside from the grammar). Inside, yes. Not as
> far as the output.
You seem to think that there's only one definition of "calculator".
Well, you're wrong. And why is a computer called a computer if it does
much more, and quite different things, than/from compute? And why do
some current "calculator"s give graphic (i.e. "not just numbers")
output? Bottom line: Like David said, please quit while you're behind.
[deleted]
SINNER
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:43:16 -0600, Ann Hodges wrote:
>
>> thanatoid wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
>>> just a calculator.
>>
>> 07734? 710 77345? (Bet that dates me to within a couple of years.)
>
> Datapoint: I remember who showed me that, and I think I worked with him
> in 1973. :)
>
>
Heh, My Mom showed it to me :)
--
David
Blinky the Shark
> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
>> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
>> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
>> over. Very strange.
>
> We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts. Anyway, we
> decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
All his base are belong to you guys.
SINNER
[...]
> But indeed David's spelling got 'worse' as the thread 'progressed'. I
> guess he just could not be bothered to waste even more time by typing
> carefully. Can't say I blame him.
Ding Ding!
My hands were shaking at the utter insanity of the posts and they got
longer and longer. I just could not be bothered to F7 it and confirm/deny.
It was bad enough to do a quick once over before a ZZ.
--
David
Peter J Ross
> thanatoid wrote:
>
>> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
>> just a calculator.
>
> 07734? 710 77345? (Bet that dates me to within a couple of years.)
You owe me a new monitor. I dropped it while turning it over.
PJR :-)
--
Have you been touched ___ ___ Hammer of Thor, Jan 2006
by His noodly / _ \ / _ \
appendage? ( (_) )( (_) ) Pierre Salinger Memorial
\_ _/ \_ _/ Hook, Line & Sinker, Dec
STOP GLOBAL __ _.-\\----//--._ 2003 & May 2005
WARMING _ / _\___.-'/ _| / _\ /\/\`-._.-.__ _
NOW, (_\_)| \___ ||_ ((_ //\/\\ _.-._ \-' ) AHM Wittiest
JIM LAD! \__) __) | _| _) ) || || (_ \_.-' Troll of the
/_-. || \_/ || .-'-.\ Year, 2003
http:// _._// / .--._______.-'\ \ \\__._ 2004 & 2005
www. /_._/ \ \ )) \__._)
venganza (/ _.-') ( `-._ wsd 42 ~ mhm 34x8
.org/ (_.-' :F_P: `--._) smeeter 30 ~ mwpl 12
SINNER
[...]
> cal cu la tor (kal'kyü l tür) n.1. a small,
> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that performs
> calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate calculation.
> 3. a person who calculates or computes. [1375-1425; late ME <
> L]
Where, in the your definition above does it state that letters are not
allowed in the calculations?
You've no doubt, in your _years_ on usenet heard of hexadecimal right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexadecimal
You quoted me as to make a point, except you didn't. What else is new?
Also, quoting from my post and putting it another post not attributed to me
is poor netiquette, You have MUCH to learn, but we all know, you wont.
>>FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
>>good and math with 1's and 0's.
> One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you have
> managed to make (aside from the grammar).
Yet you cant make even _one_.
> Inside, yes. Not as
> far as the output.
Which means less than nothing, it still fits into _your_ analysis of the
definition you posted, hence its a calulator.
--
David
SINNER
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > But indeed David's spelling got 'worse' as the thread
>> > 'progressed'. I
>> > guess he just could not be bothered to waste even more time by
>> > typing carefully. Can't say I blame him.
>>
>> Ding Ding!
>>
>> My hands were shaking at the utter insanity of the posts and they got
>> longer and longer. I just could not be bothered to F7 it and
>> confirm/deny. It was bad enough to do a quick once over before a ZZ.
>
> The last several posts hit my max-lines filter; did I miss much?
>
I'd say no, but he might have a different _opinion_ ;)
It hit my maxline filter on leafnode after the last batch also.
--
David
»Q«
<news:Xns97747B7F5...@216.196.97.135>:
> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto, Q,
> and SCPO:
>
> Thank you for you kind comments.
YVW.
> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> over. Very strange.
You expressed interest in folks' judgments about whose posts were
more stupid. Do you really find it strange that you got such
judgements in replies, or just strange that you won the straw poll?
>>> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>>> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>>> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
>>> the arguments which were discussed.
>
>> It was your /reaction/ after Blinky merely mentioned your
>> processor which convinced me of your (relative) stupidity.
>> He just asked if you were the guy using an old Pentium, and
>> you responded with a flame about penis sizes.
>
> I agree it was very juvenile (and we already know I'm
> stupid). But it's a common phrase to use when people insist
> something is better when it isn't necessarily so at all.
If Blinky had insisted on such a thing, or indeed even implied it,
that might explain your reaction to his question. Since he didn't,
it doesn't.
--
»Q«
links to Xnews resources: New URL.
<http://xnews.remarqs.net/> Same old content.
Mike Yetto
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:43:16 -0600, Ann Hodges
> <aho...@sylacauga.al.invalid> wrote in news.software.readers:
>
>> thanatoid wrote:
>>
>>> BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers, it's not a
>>> just a calculator.
>>
>> 07734? 710 77345? (Bet that dates me to within a couple of years.)
>
> You owe me a new monitor. I dropped it while turning it over.
>
You Pastafarians never do things the easy way. Turn your keyboard
over and retype.
Mike "was that design really intelligent?" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
Peace is good for business.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #35.
Mike Yetto
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:05:17 +0000, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
>>> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
>>> over. Very strange.
>>
>> We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts.
>> Anyway, we
>> decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
>
> All his base are belong to you guys.
>
>
You mipslept "youse guys."
Mike "misplet... mipselt?" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
No good deed ever goes unpunished.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #285.
thanatoid
news:43ff58ed$0$83955$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl:
> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
>> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto,
>> Q, and SCPO:
>>
>> Thank you for you kind comments.
>>
>> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
>> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
>> over. Very strange.
>
> We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts.
> Anyway, we
> decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
I didn't say you didn't have the right to take over the thread
and his advanced intelligence and clever posting manner, just
that you did. And while many of you have posted very good info
and interesting opinions in the past, you are now beginning to
sound as stupid as he is. Perhaps I should have used different
words to make it simpler to understand.
>
>> Please excuse the global reply, but I'm sure you will
>> recognize your words.
>>
> [deleted]
>> 2)
>>
>> >> not to mention that
>> >> most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet
>> >> dwellers unfortunately not being an exception
>>
>> > This newsgroup isn't your run of the mill Usenet group
>> > and 'we'
>> > are not your run of the mill subscribers/contributors.
>>
>> I'm glad you have such a high opinion of yourself and your
>> exclusive club of mutual adoration, but a Usenet group is
>> a Usenet group, just like a cow is a cow, regardless of
>> its color.
>
> If you really think that, then that's yet another display
> of your
> (relative) newbieness.
Oh, the ego... the conceit... the memories of getting beat up in
grade school...
>
>> 3)
>>
>> >> And if a spelling-lame is a comment on bad spelling,
>>
>> > It isn't. (Well, not just that.)
>>
>> Too bad you couldn't provide a complete definition while
>> you were at it.
>
> Hint: Spelling- .....lame. Got it it now?
Kind of but not really. But I'm stupid, remember?
>
>> 4)
>>
>> >> please show me a single one where I was wrong.
>>
>> > The ones which were intentional spelling 'errors'.
>>
>> > Apparently you have no experience with this
>> > (spelling-lame
>> > / intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright,
>> > but criticizing those who *have* such experience is
>> > making you look silly.
>>
>> Since SINNER's last post (where, to his great credit, he
>> finally ends this crap between us) has NO spelling errors,
>> it would not appear his errors were "intentional". I have
>> seen people's "intentional" errors (Julius for jealous -
>> brilliant!) but his were just of the uneducated variety.
>> So I think (opine, see below) he either finally installed
>> a spell checker or started using the one he always had. Or
>> maybe he had his secretary write the last post.
>
> No, there were several intentional ones. I think you got
> one or two,
> but missed several others, and thought (and said) that they
> were accidental.
I did not see ANY "intentional" misspellings in any of that
uneducated moron's posts, not to mention the fact that when
people start making intentional misspellings for fun (or
whatever you want to call it), they are really being pathetic. I
don't find "chatroom-style casing" (I don't know what the common
term for tH1s is) or bad spelling creative, impressive or
amusing, just stupid.
Just like I was not impressed by what happened in the late 80's
when some magazine editors decided that "creative" layouts were
more important than the fact that you could no longer read the
text. As still often happens on web pages designed by people too
"creative" for their own good.
> But indeed David's spelling got 'worse' as the thread
> 'progressed'. I
> guess he just could not be bothered to waste even more time
> by typing carefully. Can't say I blame him.
>> 5)
>>
>> >> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>> >> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>> >> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any
>> >> of the arguments which were discussed.
>>
>> > If "your" (also) refers to me, then you're wrong. My
>> > opinion of you has nothing to do with the hardware (or
>> > software) you use.
>>
>> Since I said that before you joined the thread, it
>> couldn't possibly refer to you as well.
>
> See how silly you are? You can't possibly know at what
> time I joined
> the thread. You know when I first *posted* in it, not when
> I *joined*. Since I'm talking about my opinion of you,
> (only) my reading is relevant, not my posting.
I wasn't aware lurking a thread (or group) is equal to joining
one. Boy, am I stupid. Please come over and spank me.
I'm on Giganews and I went by their article numbers. I don't
know (nor will I bother checking) where your posts originate
from or how many servers they have to get through to reach GN or
how long you have been reading what newsgroup before you decided
to post something yourself.
Or maybe I just lack your ability to know who says what before
they even say it.
<SNIP>
> May I suggest you look up the concept of humor/humour?
> Apparently it's
> completely alien to you.
There's smart humor and stupid humor. I may be stupid, but I
prefer smart humor.
> [much deleted]
>
>> > BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers,
>> > it's not just a calculator.
>>
>> >>So now its your arguement that calculators don't
>> >>generate letters or that if something generates letters
>> >>it cannot be a calculator? Why could you just not leave
>> >>well enough alone? With every post your stupidity
>> >>becomes more and more apparent.
>>
>> cal?cu?la?tor (kal?ky? l??t?r) n.1. a small,
>> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that
>> performs calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate
>> calculation. 3. a person who calculates or computes.
>> [1375?1425; late ME < L]
>>
>> >FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
>> >good and math with 1's and 0's.
>>
>> One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you
>> have managed to make (aside from the grammar). Inside,
>> yes. Not as far as the output.
>
> You seem to think that there's only one definition of
> "calculator".
Three actuallly, and I quoted them above for you.
> Well, you're wrong. And why is a computer called a computer
> if it does much more, and quite different things, than/from
> compute?
We're really getting way too deep into a single ridiculous point
that idiot made, but FYI, all a computer does IS compute. The
fact that the output of that computing can be seen on the screen
or printed on paper or posted on the web or whatever does not
change the fact it was all computed and only later (whether it
took an hour or a millisecond) further processed for that
output. Or are you going to say a printer or a set of speakers
are computers?
> And why do some current "calculator"s give graphic
> (i.e. "not just numbers") output? Bottom line: Like David
> said, please quit while you're behind.
Those are called "graphic display calculators" and are in fact
tiny computers, if you excuse my pedestrian terminology. Their
specs often mention their RAM. Basic calculators don't have RAM,
they are barely more than electric abacuses (or abaci - for
those who like to argue about proper Greek and Latin plurals -
both are correct).
SINNER said "calculator" and (at least to me, and especially in
context) that clearly implied he was talking about the simplest
kind. Of course, I may have misunderstood, after all, I am
stupid.
thanatoid
»news:MrQ9774A58BD...@QsFQDN.dyndns.org:
> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote in
> <news:Xns97747B7F5...@216.196.97.135>:
>
>> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto,
>> Q, and SCPO:
>>
>> Thank you for you kind comments.
>
> YVW.
>
>> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
>> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
>> over. Very strange.
>
> You expressed interest in folks' judgments about whose
> posts were more stupid. Do you really find it strange that
> you got such judgements in replies, or just strange that
> you won the straw poll?
You make astounding associations. I was talking about the fact
that SINNER said he was going to stop writing in this thread,
and (to my surprise - since I know you guys are not the idiots
that he is) you gleefully grabbed the ball and kept on running.
AFA the straw poll, I was not surprised. Less than 1/10 of the
world's population has enough intelligence to be worth engaging
in a conversation (let alone a major discussion). While I do not
have the IQ of a genius, I happen to be in that group, which
means that statistically I am probably among the 1 or 2 smartest
people out of any 15 or so persons. There are about 10
contributors to this thread. So it makes statistical sense that
5 (or was it 6) of them decided >>I<< was stupid. Do you follow?
(And let's not get into how easy it is to fabricate lies with
statistics. This one is VERY simple.)
As far as computer knowledge, it is crystal clear (and I have
said so several times already) that most if not ALL of you know
MUCH more than I do, but that does not make you any smarter or
better at arguments (mot to mention spelling or syntax) nor does
it make your opinions facts. As far as SINNER himself, judging
by what he has presented here, he should probably be in a
supervised care facility.
>>>> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>>>> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>>>> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
>>>> the arguments which were discussed.
>>
>>> It was your /reaction/ after Blinky merely mentioned your
>>> processor which convinced me of your (relative)
>>> stupidity. He just asked if you were the guy using an old
>>> Pentium, and you responded with a flame about penis
>>> sizes.
>>
>> I agree it was very juvenile (and we already know I'm
>> stupid). But it's a common phrase to use when people
>> insist something is better when it isn't necessarily so at
>> all.
>
> If Blinky had insisted on such a thing, or indeed even
> implied it, that might explain your reaction to his
> question. Since he didn't, it doesn't.
Allow me to quote from the post in question:
> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>
>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>> retarded.
>
>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>> Pentium?
To you, that does not imply he is criticising my "antique and
obsolete" hardware?
He did it again in a later post referring to my "download
problems" post (although it is not about "download problems") in
the 24hrhelpdesk group. You can look it up yourself, I'm getting
tired of this.
thanatoid
news:Xns97748EAEE6F34l...@140.99.99.130:
> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>
> [...]
>
>> cal cu la tor (kal'kyü l tür) n.1. a small,
>> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that
>> performs calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate
>> calculation. 3. a person who calculates or computes.
>> [1375-1425; late ME < L]
>
>
> Where, in the your definition above does it state that
> letters are not allowed in the calculations?
Here's another one, you idiot:
Noun: calculation
1. The procedure of calculating; determining something by
mathematical or logical methods
2. Problem solving that involves >>>NUMBERS OR QUANTITIES<<<
(emphasis mine)
3. Planning something carefully and intentionally
[WordWeb.info]
> You've no doubt, in your _years_ on usenet heard of
> hexadecimal right?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexadecimal
BION I have. Now show me a hexadecimal hand-held CALCULATOR.
Laptops or PDA's don't count since they are COMPUTERS.
> You quoted me as to make a point, except you didn't. What
> else is new?
Apparently your stupidity and inability to make valid arguments
IS reaching new heights.
> Also, quoting from my post and putting it another post not
> attributed to me is poor netiquette, You have MUCH to
> learn, but we all know, you wont.
I don't believe I did anything of the sort. If I did, quote it
(FULLY). I did write one global answer to about 6 of you but
that's not the same, and most people with a normal attention
span shuld be able to recognize which quotes were theirs. I
realize that excludes you.
>
>>>FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
>>>good and math with 1's and 0's.
>
>> One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you
>> have managed to make (aside from the grammar).
>
> Yet you cant make even _one_.
Apparently not many that YOU are capable of understanding.
>> Inside, yes. Not as
>> far as the output.
>
> Which means less than nothing, it still fits into _your_
> analysis of the definition you posted, hence its a
> calulator.
"fits into _your_ analysis of the definition you posted" ???
What the fuck does THAT mean? I didn't analyze anything, I just
provided a definition for a word (one of MANY) which you dont't
know the meaning of.
This is really getting tiresome. It was funny for a while, but
it is just becoming boring.
Why don't you just shut the fuck up and shove your "CALULATOR"
up your ass? I would guess it will be a perfect fit.
thanatoid
news:pan.2006.02.24....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:02:39 -0600, thanatoid wrote:
>
>> Blinky wrote:
>
>>>>That aside, some guy just appeared in
>>>>24hoursupport.helpdesk running W95 and a 33.6 modem, with
>>>>downloading problems. Perhaps a legacy specialist like
>>>>yourself can give him a hand. No, I'm serious. The
>>>>thread is "computer freezes when on the internet", if you
>>>>feel like doing something positive for a change.
>>
>>>>Or...somehow I can't get the idea out of my head that
>>>>that's you, over there, using a different nym. I don't
>>>>care enough to check headers. But he does repeat over
>>>>and over that it can't be his old hardware causing the
>>>>problems, so there are certainly parallels.
>>
>> Of course it's me, NO ONE ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD STILL
>> USES THAT KIND OF HARDWARE.
>
> Okay.
>
>> And if someone can PROVE it is my old hardware, I probably
>> will build a new computer. Nothing wrong with getting a
>> new computer if you actually need it.
>
> I doubt that such a thing could be proven to you.
Let's not be silly. You are the ones who won't listen to
anything but the voices in your conceited brains. Almost
anything can be proven (even to me, but maybe not to you) except
opinions. For some reason a lot of people seem to believe that
whatever they happen to think are automatically facts and not
JUST OPINIONS. For some reason, this group REALLY excels at it
(is THAT what one of you meant when he said this group is
"special"?). Even though I provided definitions of "opinion" for
those linguistically-impaired.
>> I am perhaps a little defensive, but I am equally
>> "defensive" about anything that works fine yet is
>> constantly dissed because it is not "this year's model".
>> Many people just HAVE to trade in the car they bought last
>> year for this year's model, year after year. The ultimate
>> in brainless consumerism. I don't think very highly of the
>> consumer society. (But then again I'm just stupid.)
>
> I just bought my first car since 1983.
>
Good for you. Really.
>>>>> I will continue to use XNEWS - 'cuz I like it! DUH? And
>>>>> 'cuz it is easy
>>
>>>Might want to update to a version that's not a few years
>>>old (...)
>>
>> Why upgrade if it works fine? I know you are a Linux user,
>> but still, Microsoft LOVES people like you.
>
> Yeah, upgrading a freeware program to a current version is
> a lot like buying Windows version after Windows version.
> Duh.
Besides the fact $ is or is not involved, there is no
difference. FWIW, I paid Luu for his excellent program.
>> New crime - not using the latest version (of whatever).
>> Jeezus. If a programmer(s) haven't put everything that's
>> reasonably required into a program by version 4, then they
>> are either greedy assholes who hold back so you will buy
>> the next version or they are just idiots. Just my opinion
>> (see below).
>
> Yeah, Luu should've put yEnc capability ito Xnews nine
> years ago when he launched Xnews, before anyone had heard
> of yEnc. Instead of in an upgrade. Duh.
Now you're just being ridiculous and you know it. OF COURSE my
statement excludes totally new technological innovations. Or are
you too "smart" to have automatically understood that?
Interestingly enough, as opposed to useless (and IM(stupid)O)
advances like $500 3-D accelerators so people can play Asteroids
or Doom with new fancy titles and "dazzling" graphics, and more
and more complex yet still equally boring flash intros for the
MTV generation, etc. etc., I think yEnc is one of the few things
that have happened in the last 5 years that is actually useful.
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
> news:pan.2006.02.24....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
>> Yeah, upgrading a freeware program to a current version is
>> a lot like buying Windows version after Windows version.
>> Duh.
> Besides the fact $ is or is not involved, there is no
> difference. FWIW, I paid Luu for his excellent program.
Except that cats aren't dogs, there's no difference between them.
>>> New crime - not using the latest version (of whatever).
>>> Jeezus. If a programmer(s) haven't put everything that's
>>> reasonably required into a program by version 4, then they
>>> are either greedy assholes who hold back so you will buy
>>> the next version or they are just idiots. Just my opinion
>>> (see below).
>>
>> Yeah, Luu should've put yEnc capability ito Xnews nine
>> years ago when he launched Xnews, before anyone had heard
>> of yEnc. Instead of in an upgrade. Duh.
>
> Now you're just being ridiculous and you know it. OF COURSE my
> statement excludes totally new technological innovations. Or are
> you too "smart" to have automatically understood that?
No, I did not hear Mr. Luddite say that.
> Interestingly enough, as opposed to useless (and IM(stupid)O)
> advances like $500 3-D accelerators so people can play Asteroids
> or Doom with new fancy titles and "dazzling" graphics, and more
> and more complex yet still equally boring flash intros for the
> MTV generation, etc. etc., I think yEnc is one of the few things
> that have happened in the last 5 years that is actually useful.
And heaven forfend that you should ever have a client that can handle it.
Frank Slootweg
> Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in
> news:43ff58ed$0$83955$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl:
>
> > thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
> >> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto,
> >> Q, and SCPO:
> >>
> >> Thank you for you kind comments.
> >>
> >> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> >> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> >> over. Very strange.
> >
> > We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts.
> > Anyway, we
> > decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
>
> I didn't say you didn't have the right to take over the thread
> and his advanced intelligence and clever posting manner, just
> that you did. And while many of you have posted very good info
> and interesting opinions in the past, you are now beginning to
> sound as stupid as he is. Perhaps I should have used different
> words to make it simpler to understand.
Exactly which part of "not" in "We have not taken over" didn't you
understand? (And your "right" side-track attempt is irrelevant.)
So what we have is that you say we have taken over and I say we
haven't. End of story. No ifs, not buts.
> >> Please excuse the global reply, but I'm sure you will
> >> recognize your words.
> >>
> > [deleted]
> >> 2)
> >>
> >> >> not to mention that
> >> >> most of the world's population IS stupid, Usenet
> >> >> dwellers unfortunately not being an exception
> >>
> >> > This newsgroup isn't your run of the mill Usenet group
> >> > and 'we'
> >> > are not your run of the mill subscribers/contributors.
> >>
> >> I'm glad you have such a high opinion of yourself and your
> >> exclusive club of mutual adoration, but a Usenet group is
> >> a Usenet group, just like a cow is a cow, regardless of
> >> its color.
> >
> > If you really think that, then that's yet another display
> > of your
> > (relative) newbieness.
>
> Oh, the ego... the conceit... the memories of getting beat up in
> grade school...
Do you really claim that each and every Usenet group has the same
quality, content, level of expertise, etc., etc.? Of course you don't.
Of the groups to which I subscribe, this is one of the most pleasant
ones. Knowledgeable and helpful people, who are friendly to new-comers/
newbies, provided that those new-comers/newbies return the favor. Also
there is often quite a lot of humor and other fooling around. IMO,
that's a good thing.
[deleted]
> >> 4)
> >>
> >> >> please show me a single one where I was wrong.
> >>
> >> > The ones which were intentional spelling 'errors'.
> >>
> >> > Apparently you have no experience with this
> >> > (spelling-lame
> >> > / intentional spelling 'errors') matter. That's alright,
> >> > but criticizing those who *have* such experience is
> >> > making you look silly.
> >>
> >> Since SINNER's last post (where, to his great credit, he
> >> finally ends this crap between us) has NO spelling errors,
> >> it would not appear his errors were "intentional". I have
> >> seen people's "intentional" errors (Julius for jealous -
> >> brilliant!) but his were just of the uneducated variety.
> >> So I think (opine, see below) he either finally installed
> >> a spell checker or started using the one he always had. Or
> >> maybe he had his secretary write the last post.
> >
> > No, there were several intentional ones. I think you got
> > one or two,
> > but missed several others, and thought (and said) that they
> > were accidental.
>
> I did not see ANY "intentional" misspellings in any of that
> uneducated moron's posts,
Yes, I said you missed them. Why do you repeatedly respond in a
manner which implies that you disprove someone's point, while you
actually prove it?
> not to mention the fact that when
> people start making intentional misspellings for fun (or
> whatever you want to call it), they are really being pathetic. I
> don't find "chatroom-style casing" (I don't know what the common
> term for tH1s is) or bad spelling creative, impressive or
> amusing, just stupid.
I was *not* referring to examples of "chatroom-style casing" (while
there indeed was (I believe) one of those).
[deleted]
> >> 5)
> >>
> >> >> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
> >> >> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
> >> >> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any
> >> >> of the arguments which were discussed.
> >>
> >> > If "your" (also) refers to me, then you're wrong. My
> >> > opinion of you has nothing to do with the hardware (or
> >> > software) you use.
> >>
> >> Since I said that before you joined the thread, it
> >> couldn't possibly refer to you as well.
> >
> > See how silly you are? You can't possibly know at what
> > time I joined
> > the thread. You know when I first *posted* in it, not when
> > I *joined*. Since I'm talking about my opinion of you,
> > (only) my reading is relevant, not my posting.
>
> I wasn't aware lurking a thread (or group) is equal to joining
> one. Boy, am I stupid. Please come over and spank me.
You *really* have a reading/comprehesion problem, don't you?
*I* was talking about my opinion of you. *That* is formed by stuff I
read, not by stuff I write, i.e. it was formed by the *whole* thread,
not just the part 'after' my first response. I *responded* (see above)
to something you wrote ("OTOH ..."). *That* (what you wrote) was written
*after* my first response, so it *could* apply to me. You could have
simply answered that it did not apply to me, but instead you responded
with an invalid argument.
[deleted]
> > May I suggest you look up the concept of humor/humour?
> > Apparently it's
> > completely alien to you.
>
> There's smart humor and stupid humor. I may be stupid, but I
> prefer smart humor.
Actually Blinky was pretending to have a go at me and I responded
accordingly. I can understand that you didn't get Blinky's
tongue-in-cheek stuff, but my response had a smiley. If you thought it
was not funny, you could have ignored it or said so, but instead you
took it seriously and now, after it has been pointed out to you, come
with a "stupid humor" copout.
> > [much deleted]
> >
> >> > BTW, if it can generate letters and not just numbers,
> >> > it's not just a calculator.
> >>
> >> >>So now its your arguement that calculators don't
> >> >>generate letters or that if something generates letters
> >> >>it cannot be a calculator? Why could you just not leave
> >> >>well enough alone? With every post your stupidity
> >> >>becomes more and more apparent.
> >>
> >> cal?cu?la?tor (kal?ky? l??t?r) n.1. a small,
> >> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that
> >> performs calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate
> >> calculation. 3. a person who calculates or computes.
> >> [1375?1425; late ME < L]
> >>
> >> >FWIW, your computer is nothing but a big calculator very
> >> >good and math with 1's and 0's.
> >>
> >> One of the first accurate and intelligent statements you
> >> have managed to make (aside from the grammar). Inside,
> >> yes. Not as far as the output.
> >
> > You seem to think that there's only one definition of
> > "calculator".
>
> Three actuallly,
Too funny!
> and I quoted them above for you.
So, you seem to think that your *source of information* is the only
one. Well, you're wrong again. Over time there have been several,
somehat different, interpretations, of "calculator". But even today,
your source's explanations are not the only valid ones.
> > Well, you're wrong. And why is a computer called a computer
> > if it does much more, and quite different things, than/from
> > compute?
>
> We're really getting way too deep into a single ridiculous point
> that idiot made, but FYI, all a computer does IS compute. The
> fact that the output of that computing can be seen on the screen
> or printed on paper or posted on the web or whatever does not
> change the fact it was all computed and only later (whether it
> took an hour or a millisecond) further processed for that
> output. Or are you going to say a printer or a set of speakers
> are computers?
True, but the point is that a computer computes *and* generates output
and a caclulator calculates *and* generates output. So for all intents
and purposes, computers and calculator are *similar*, like the terms
compute and calculate are similar.
Note: I, and I'm sure 'we', *do* understand that the terms computer
and calculator do not *fully* overlap *all the time*, but you imply that
there is *no* overlap *ever*. That is obviously wrong and is all 'we'
are saying.
> > And why do some current "calculator"s give graphic
> > (i.e. "not just numbers") output? Bottom line: Like David
> > said, please quit while you're behind.
>
> Those are called "graphic display calculators" and are in fact
> tiny computers, if you excuse my pedestrian terminology.
Indeed, they are called calculators. Their label, documentation, etc.
may say "graphic display calculator". But people will say things like
"Can I borrow your calculator?", like they say "Can I borrow your car?",
not "Can I borrow your four-wheel drive sports utility vehicle?".
So I'm glad we finally 'agree' that a "calculator" can have
non-numerical output. *That* was all I/'we' was/were saying.
[deleted]
> SINNER said "calculator" and (at least to me, and especially in
> context) that clearly implied he was talking about the simplest
> kind. Of course, I may have misunderstood, after all, I am
> stupid.
Well, you apparently missed *why* he said it. I.e. you got hung up on
the use of a particular word, but, apparently, missed the point.
Frank Slootweg
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97748EAEE6F34l...@140.99.99.130:
> > You've no doubt, in your _years_ on usenet heard of
> > hexadecimal right?
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexadecimal
>
> BION I have. Now show me a hexadecimal hand-held CALCULATOR.
> Laptops or PDA's don't count since they are COMPUTERS.
The HP 16C. It's a programmer's calculator. Does HEX, octal, binary,
etc., is - for crying out loud - programmable (I guess that makes it a
"computer" in your terminology), etc.. So you'd better write to HP how
wrong they are! What a bunch of morons!
[deleted]
Torchy
news:Xns9775A6AA...@216.196.97.135:
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97748EAEE6F34l...@140.99.99.130:
>
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> cal cu la tor (kal'kyü l tür) n.1. a small,
>>> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that
>>> performs calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate
>>> calculation. 3. a person who calculates or computes.
>>> [1375-1425; late ME < L]
>>
>>
>> Where, in the your definition above does it state that
>> letters are not allowed in the calculations?
>
> Here's another one, you idiot:
>
> Noun: calculation
> 1. The procedure of calculating; determining something by
> mathematical or logical methods
> 2. Problem solving that involves >>>NUMBERS OR QUANTITIES<<<
> (emphasis mine)
> 3. Planning something carefully and intentionally
> [WordWeb.info]
>
>> You've no doubt, in your _years_ on usenet heard of
>> hexadecimal right?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexadecimal
>
> BION I have. Now show me a hexadecimal hand-held CALCULATOR.
My hexadecimal CALCULATOR is a Casio model fx-570 scientific, quite old
now and no longer in stock by they do other, more modern models. However
I personally like the 570 as it fits in my shirt pocket, does hex to
octal conversions plus all the usual scientific stuff most of which I
don't use.
--
Torchy
My stupidity is only limited to my ability to misunderstand
SINNER
> SINNER <arcade...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:Xns97748EAEE6F34l...@140.99.99.130:
>> * thanatoid wrote in news.software.readers:
>> [...]
>>> cal cu la tor (kal'kyü l tür) n.1. a small,
>>> hand-operated electronic or mechanical device that
>>> performs calculations. 2. a set of tables that facilitate
>>> calculation. 3. a person who calculates or computes.
>>> [1375-1425; late ME < L]
>> Where, in the your definition above does it state that
>> letters are not allowed in the calculations?
> Here's another one, you idiot:
> Noun: calculation
> 1. The procedure of calculating; determining something by
> mathematical or logical methods
> 2. Problem solving that involves >>>NUMBERS OR QUANTITIES<<<
> (emphasis mine)
> 3. Planning something carefully and intentionally
Hmmm, I don't see Handheld in that definition OR anything about letters,
did I miss it? Did you type it in invisible binary?
>> You've no doubt, in your _years_ on usenet heard of
>> hexadecimal right?
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexadecimal
> BION I have. Now show me a hexadecimal hand-held CALCULATOR.
> Laptops or PDA's don't count since they are COMPUTERS.
I'll just sit here and whistle while everyone else continues to show you
how stupid you are.
*whistle*
Would you like me to post a link to a picture so you can wrap wee little
brain around it?
>> You quoted me as to make a point, except you didn't. What
>> else is new?
> Apparently your stupidity and inability to make valid arguments
> IS reaching new heights.
This is getting hilarious, did I spell that right?
>> Also, quoting from my post and putting it another post not
>> attributed to me is poor netiquette, You have MUCH to
>> learn, but we all know, you wont.
> I don't believe I did anything of the sort.
I am too lazy to bother pulling up message-ids, suffice it to say, you
did. It was in your address to a good portion of the regulars to this
group in which you did NOT address me nor attribute my quote but you
placed it in your post anyway.
> If I did, quote it
> (FULLY). I did write one global answer to about 6 of you but
> that's not the same,
You are a fool, plain and simple. It is EXACTLY the same. You used a
quote from one of my posts in your diatribe.
> and most people with a normal attention
> span shuld be able to recognize which quotes were theirs.
Except that its not just me you are talking to you fucking idiot. After
you understand Usenet come back and try this discussion again.
>> Which means less than nothing, it still fits into _your_
>> analysis of the definition you posted, hence its a
>> calulator.
> "fits into _your_ analysis of the definition you posted" ???
> What the fuck does THAT mean?
Perhaps if I put in Bible terms you'll get it?
2 Timothy 2:15
You are not 'rightly dividing the word' You INTERPRETED the definition
instead of understanding it, which is your MO.
[...]
--
David
Man has made his bedlam; let him lie in it.
-- Fred Allen
SINNER
[...]
>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>> retarded.
>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>> Pentium?
> To you, that does not imply he is criticising my "antique and
> obsolete" hardware?
You thin skinned whiny little bitch. NO he did not criticizing anything:
crit·i·cize (kr\u012dt'\u012d-s\u012bz') pronunciation
v., -cized, -ciz·ing, -ciz·es.
v.tr.
1. To find fault with: criticized the decision as unrealistic. See
Usage Note at critique.
2. To judge the merits and faults of; analyze and evaluate.
[...]
--
David
Let's send the Russians defective lifestyle accessories!
»Q«
<news:Xns9775A656...@216.196.97.135>:
> »Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
> »news:MrQ9774A58BD...@QsFQDN.dyndns.org:
>
>> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote in
>> <news:Xns97747B7F5...@216.196.97.135>:
>>
>>> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto,
>>> Q, and SCPO:
>>>
>>> Thank you for you kind comments.
>>
>> YVW.
>>
>>> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
>>> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
>>> over. Very strange.
>>
>> You expressed interest in folks' judgments about whose
>> posts were more stupid. Do you really find it strange that
>> you got such judgements in replies, or just strange that
>> you won the straw poll?
>
> You make astounding associations.
And then you confirm them:
> I was talking about the fact that SINNER said he was going to stop
> writing in this thread, and (to my surprise - since I know you
> guys are not the idiots that he is) you gleefully grabbed the ball
> and kept on running.
Whose ball? SINNER's? Yours? Where have you spotted glee?
> AFA the straw poll, I was not surprised. Less than 1/10 of the
> world's population has enough intelligence to be worth engaging
> in a conversation (let alone a major discussion). While I do not
> have the IQ of a genius, I happen to be in that group, which
> means that statistically I am probably among the 1 or 2 smartest
> people out of any 15 or so persons. There are about 10
> contributors to this thread. So it makes statistical sense that
> 5 (or was it 6) of them decided >>I<< was stupid. Do you follow?
I follow, with the note that they didn't say you are stupid, just
more stupid than SINNER.
You believe the vast majority of people are beneath your
intelligence, and you believe that most of those people are too
stupid to recognize how intelligent you are.
Do you suppose many of the people in the thread will fail to see the
irony of your argument above? Even so, it does explain much of what
you've written in n.s.r lately, so I have to admit it was responsive
to the subject in general.
> (And let's not get into how easy it is to fabricate lies with
> statistics. This one is VERY simple.)
And the argument is very simply wrong from a statistical point of
view, even if your ludicrous premises about the population at large
are accepted. n.s.r threads have nothing like randomly selected
participants, nor does Usenet itself.
> As far as computer knowledge, it is crystal clear (and I have
> said so several times already) that most if not ALL of you know
> MUCH more than I do, but that does not make you any smarter or
> better at arguments
You have beaten that straw man to a bloody pulp, no mean feat. Can
he have some respite now?
> (mot to mention spelling or syntax)
Yes, best mot to mention them.
>>>>> OTOH I can't help feeling that your opinion of my
>>>>> stupidity has more to do with the fact that I have the
>>>>> audacity to use a 166 with a 33.6 modem than with any of
>>>>> the arguments which were discussed.
>>>
>>>> It was your /reaction/ after Blinky merely mentioned your
>>>> processor which convinced me of your (relative)
>>>> stupidity. He just asked if you were the guy using an old
>>>> Pentium, and you responded with a flame about penis
>>>> sizes.
>>>
>>> I agree it was very juvenile (and we already know I'm
>>> stupid). But it's a common phrase to use when people
>>> insist something is better when it isn't necessarily so at
>>> all.
>>
>> If Blinky had insisted on such a thing, or indeed even
>> implied it, that might explain your reaction to his
>> question. Since he didn't, it doesn't.
>
> Allow me to quote from the post in question:
Sure. I'll leave your reposting of it so that you can read it again
as well.
>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>
>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>> retarded.
>>
>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>> Pentium?
>
> To you, that does not imply he is criticising my "antique and
> obsolete" hardware?
Of course it doesn't imply that. This is the third time I've told
you that it doesn't. Feel free to claim again that it does, but I'm
not going for four.
> He did it again in a later post referring to my "download
> problems" post (although it is not about "download problems") in
> the 24hrhelpdesk group.
Did what again? Asked if you were using an old Pentium with 64 MB
RAM?
> You can look it up yourself,
No, thanks.
> I'm getting tired of this.
You're free to stop at any time. HTH.
Mike Yetto
> ...you are now beginning to sound as stupid as he is.
What value of 'he' are you using?
Mike "perhaps 'thanatoid'" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
Never allow family to stand in the way of opportunity.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #6.
Mike Yetto
> So I'm glad we finally 'agree' that a "calculator" can have
> non-numerical output. *That* was all I/'we' was/were saying.
This will be well accepted by those calculators falling under the
third definition.
I.E. "3. a person who calculates or computes."
They aren't all illiterate.
Mike "having no letters" Yetto
Mike Yetto
> For some reason a lot of people seem to believe that
> whatever they happen to think are automatically facts and not
> JUST OPINIONS.
Well that may be my opinion, but since my opinions are fact...
Mike "smiley available for the humor impaired" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
When in doubt, lie.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #266.
Mike Yetto
when thanatoid wrote...
>> * Blinky the Shark wrote in news.software.readers:
>>> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:28:57 +0000, SINNER wrote:
>>
>>>> You missed the point. How I am not sure. I will try and
>>>> make this simple for you, Your hardware is far from
>>>> normal. Telling someone they are not computer savvy
>>>> because YOUR hardware cant handle it is borderline
>>>> retarded.
>>
>>> Is this they guy running with 64MB of RAM and a 1995-era
>>> Pentium?
>
> To you, that does not imply he is criticising my "antique and
> obsolete" hardware?
>
>
In my opinion the inference of criticism is yours. The implication
is that your evaluation of another person's knowledge is based on
your experience with outdated hardware.
Mike "look up" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
You can't buy fate.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #236.
raincoater
You wrote:
> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
> > For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto, Q,
> > and SCPO:
> >
> > Thank you for you kind comments.
> >
> > I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> > disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> > over. Very strange.
>
> We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts.
Anyway, we
> decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
TINW ;0)
Yours, Raincoater
Blinky the Shark
TINY
Robert Singers
> For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto, Q,
> and SCPO:
>
> Thank you for you kind comments.
>
> I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> over. Very strange.
>
> Please excuse the global reply, but I'm sure you will
> recognize your words.
Dear big baby, you asked for people to give their opinion so stop whining
when it's something you don't like. You big fucking tool.
--
rob singers
pull finger to reply
Foemina Erit Ruina Tua
Blinky the Shark
> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea thanatoid said
[blather, snipped]
> Dear big baby, you asked for people to give their opinion so stop
> whining when it's something you don't like. You big fucking tool.
As versus a big fucking tool, which isn't a bad thing to have. ;)
fLameDogg
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:59:43 +1300, Robert Singers wrote:
>
>> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea thanatoid said
>
> [blather, snipped]
>
>> Dear big baby, you asked for people to give their opinion so stop
>> whining when it's something you don't like. You big fucking tool.
>
> As versus a big fucking tool, which isn't a bad thing to have. ;)
Tool vs. tool--is that anything like Spy vs. Spy?
http://www.leedberg.com/mad/spies/spies.html
--
fD
"Is it just me, or does the flying spaghetti monster seem like a tastier
version of Cthulhu?" --Trail Mix, Fark forum
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
> news:pan.2006.02.26....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
>
>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:59:43 +1300, Robert Singers wrote:
>>
>>> Between saving the world and having a spot of tea thanatoid said
>>
>> [blather, snipped]
>>
>>> Dear big baby, you asked for people to give their opinion so stop
>>> whining when it's something you don't like. You big fucking tool.
>>
>> As versus a big fucking tool, which isn't a bad thing to have. ;)
>
> Tool vs. tool--is that anything like Spy vs. Spy?
>
> http://www.leedberg.com/mad/spies/spies.html
Without even looking: -... -.-- .--. .-. --- .... .. .-
fLameDogg
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:02:24 +0000, fLameDogg wrote:
<snip>
>> Tool vs. tool--is that anything like Spy vs. Spy?
>>
>> http://www.leedberg.com/mad/spies/spies.html
>
> Without even looking: -... -.-- .--. .-. --- .... .. .-
I did not even know that :O)
All it needs is ...
--
fD
Blinky the Shark
It appeared on every strip, I think.
> All it needs is ...
Oops. Yeah, that. Silly shark.
raincoater
You wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 05:14:04 -0800, raincoater wrote:
>
> > Hello, Frank Slootweg !
> > You wrote:
> >
> >> thanatoid <wai...@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
> >> > For Ponder, Mr. Singer. Mr. Slootweg, Blinky, Mr. Yetto,
Q,
> >> > and SCPO:
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for you kind comments.
> >> >
> >> > I wonder, is reading posts like SINNER's a communicable
> >> > disease? While he has finally stopped, you guys have taken
> >> > over. Very strange.
> >>
> >> We have not taken over, we have responded to your posts.
> > Anyway, we
> >> decide when we do (not) post, no-one else.
> >
> > TINW ;0)
>
> TINY
There most certainly is! I read and enjoy Mr. Yetto's comments on
a regular basis.
Yours, Rain(unless I mistake your meaning)Coater
Blinky the Shark
I was partly joking. I hate the TINW stuff; it denies community,
and this is a community. When the community is denied, no one is
responsible to the community. When no one is responsible to the
community the community becomes a shit-hole. But on a more basic
level, "we" does exist in the sense of "each of us that
collectively comprise the group". Note "each", there. And Frank
is correct -- we (each of us) do decide when and what we (each of
us) post, each of us, individually, in the group.
--
Blinky
Kill-filing all posts from Google Groups
Details: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
raincoater
Blin...er...Mr. Shark-I was just crackin' wise...no offense
intended. I guess my smiley wasn't emotive enough. :o(
Yours, Raincoater