Oddity with java.util.SortedMap
Captain Koloth
SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
know why it wasn't?
John B. Matthews
<bc043354-7d0b-4a28...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
Captain Koloth <kolo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't one prefer the
superinterface?
<code>
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.TreeMap;
/**
* @author John B. Matthews
*/
public class MapTest {
public static void main(String[] args) {
final Map<String, List<String>> map =
new HashMap<String, List<String>>();
List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>(
Arrays.asList("Alpha", "Beta", "Gamma"));
map.put("Ordinals", list);
list = new ArrayList<String>(
Arrays.asList("Aleph", "Beth", "Gimel"));
map.put("Cardinals", list);
list = new ArrayList<String>(
Arrays.asList("Alpher", "Bethe", "Gammow"));
map.put("Physicists", list);
list = new ArrayList<String>(
Arrays.asList("Actinomyces", "Bordetella", "Giardia"));
map.put("Pathogens", list);
printMap(map);
System.out.println();
final Map<String, List<String>> tm = new
TreeMap<String, List<String>>(map);
printMap(tm);
}
private static void printMap(Map<String, List<String>> map) {
for (Map.Entry entry : map.entrySet()) {
System.out.println(entry.getKey()
+ " " + entry.getValue());
}
}
}
</code>
<console>
Physicists [Alpher, Bethe, Gammow]
Ordinals [Alpha, Beta, Gamma]
Cardinals [Aleph, Beth, Gimel]
Pathogens [Actinomyces, Bordetella, Giardia]
Cardinals [Aleph, Beth, Gimel]
Ordinals [Alpha, Beta, Gamma]
Pathogens [Actinomyces, Bordetella, Giardia]
Physicists [Alpher, Bethe, Gammow]
</console>
--
John B. Matthews
trashgod at gmail dot com
http://home.roadrunner.com/~jbmatthews/
Captain Koloth
> In article
> <bc043354-7d0b-4a28-93a7-eb0be4050...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
> Captain Koloth <kolot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
> > SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
> > overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
> > know why it wasn't?
>
> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't one prefer the
> superinterface?
That depends. If you want to use SortedMap or SortedSet features that
are not general Map or Set features, then you don't want to type your
references as plain Map or Set.
Generally, you want to use the least specific type that will do the
job.
Not the least specific type, period, or else you'd have all your
references be of type Object.
And if all your references ARE of type Object, your coworkers and the
future maintenance programmers that have to deal with your code will
call you a petaQ, and rightly so!
John B. Matthews
<5288d7d5-494a-45b3...@l42g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Captain Koloth <kolo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 9:41 pm, "John B. Matthews" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bc043354-7d0b-4a28-93a7-eb0be4050...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
> > Captain Koloth <kolot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
> > > SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
> > > overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
> > > know why it wasn't?
> >
> > Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't one prefer the
> > superinterface?
>
> That depends. If you want to use SortedMap or SortedSet features that
> are not general Map or Set features, then you don't want to type your
> references as plain Map or Set.
TreeMap implements the SortedMap methods; TreeSet implements the
SortedSet methods. The two subinterfaces seem parallel. I don't
understand what benefit would accrue to mixing them.
> Generally, you want to use the least specific type that will do the
> job.
Agreed. It seems the authors have done that.
> Not the least specific type, period, or else you'd have all your
> references be of type Object. And if all your references ARE of type
> Object, your coworkers and the future maintenance programmers that
> have to deal with your code will call you a petaQ, and rightly so!
The word "Object" did not appear in my example, so perhaps I am safe.
How did you know my coworkers speak Klingon?
Tom Anderson
> In article
> <5288d7d5-494a-45b3...@l42g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> Captain Koloth <kolo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 27, 9:41 pm, "John B. Matthews" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <bc043354-7d0b-4a28-93a7-eb0be4050...@z1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Captain Koloth <kolot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
>>>> SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
>>>> overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
>>>> know why it wasn't?
>>>
>>> Perhaps I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't one prefer the
>>> superinterface?
>>
>> That depends. If you want to use SortedMap or SortedSet features that
>> are not general Map or Set features, then you don't want to type your
>> references as plain Map or Set.
>
> TreeMap implements the SortedMap methods; TreeSet implements the
> SortedSet methods. The two subinterfaces seem parallel. I don't
> understand what benefit would accrue to mixing them.
The point is that the key set of a SortedMap is sorted, so it could/should
be a SortedSet.
That said, i can't think of anything you could do with a SortedSet key set
that you can't do another way. If we have:
SortedMap<String, Object> map ;
Then:
map.keySet().first() ; // can't be done
map.firstKey() ; // can
map.keySet().headSet("Bolivia") ; // can't be done
map.headMap("Bolivia").keySet() ; // can
If you had some method that took a SortedSet, and you wanted to apply it
to the keys of a SortedMap, then you'd be stuffed, but that's the only
situation i can think of.
I would say it would be more elegant if the key set was a SortedSet,
though. It more completely describes the properties of the map.
tom
--
Would you like to remember more?
Lew
It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
SortedMap implementors are free to document that they return SortedSet for
those methods. The methods documented to return Set are free to return a
SortedSet should they choose, they just can't promise to do so in the return type.
It isn't nice to just go and change the definition of SortedMap's methods just
because now you can. Code has been developed in the field for a long time
with the old contract. Look at the grief caused from the few changes to old
contracts that Java 5 did make. Only when the need was great or the benefit
overwhelming did such changes occur.
This is an object lesson for API developers, comprising virtually all Java
coders. Once you commit an API to a contract, you're committed in perpetuity.
That's why things like implementing Serializable are such serious decisions,
and why one must prefer the widest appropriate declared type for variables and
method returns.
--
Lew
Captain Koloth
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
> > SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
> > overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
> > know why it wasn't?
>
> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
Nope. SortedSet extends Set, so any code that used the keySet or
entrySet from, say, a TreeMap would still work. Nowhere is there a
contract that what these return is *not sorted*, and I expect set
views of SortedMaps will in fact be sorted whatever the compile-time
type of the reference used to hold them.
One minor issue would be whether you would be allowed to change the
Comparator of the map through the returned set. But SortedSet only
specifies a method to retrieve the comparator, not to set it, so
that's moot unless the comparator is itself mutable in some way. I
expect a mutable comparator, with methods that change its sorting
behavior, breaks the Comparator contract anyway. Trees would have to
be completely rebuilt if the comparison changed, and comparators would
need to accept some kinds of Listeners, and all kinds of other chaos
would ensue if you wanted mutable comparators to work. If all the
classes assume comparators are immutable (at least with respect to
sort order semantics) already then this issue is indeed moot.
Tom Anderson
> On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
>>> SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
>>> overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
>>> know why it wasn't?
>>
>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
>
> Nope.
Yup.
You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
caller. But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
tom
--
This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.
Captain Koloth
> On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
> > On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >> Captain Koloth wrote:
> >>> The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
> >>> SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
> >>> overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
> >>> know why it wasn't?
>
> >> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
>
> > Nope.
>
> Yup.
Nope.
> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
> caller.
That IS the contract.
> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
sorted. You'd just need to implement first, last, subSet, tailSet, and
headSet, and you could make all of those (in presumably an anonymous
inner class of your map) punt to MySortedMap.this.firstKey(), lastKey
(), subMap(x,y).keySet(), tailMap(x).keySet(), and headMap(y).keySet
().
It would take all of five minutes.
Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
Lew
> On Nov 29, 2:21 pm,
Lew wrote:
>>>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> Nope.
>> Yup.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> Nope.
Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
>> caller.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> That IS the contract.
Only half of it. People who write code are just as important as those who use it.
>> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
>> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
>> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
>> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
>> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
But you thus show that you realize that there would be a need for change if
the contract changed. And you don't know how easy it would be to update it,
since the implementation to change will itself be used by other code, which
then will need to change, thus requiring unit tests, regression tests,
deployment to a zillion production sites, possible new bugs to fix, delays to
other more critical feature improvements or repair, and a whole lot of cost to
Java projects overall. That would be egregiously irresponsible of Sun absent
a compelling reason. Look how long the adoption of Java 5 is taking with its
compelling changes - many, many projects have yet to upgrade and it's already
in End-of-Life. You can't just go imposing costs on your customers willy-nilly.
> sorted. You'd just need to implement first, last, subSet, tailSet, and
> headSet, and you could make all of those (in presumably an anonymous
> inner class of your map) punt to MySortedMap.this.firstKey(), lastKey
> (), subMap(x,y).keySet(), tailMap(x).keySet(), and headMap(y).keySet
> ().
>
> It would take all of five minutes.
Not so.
> Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
At the time the contract was written, there weren't any. Having written the
contract, Java must not assume that continues to pertain. There could be
thousands of such implementations by now.
--
Lew
Tom Anderson
> On Nov 29, 2:21 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>>>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>>>>> The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
>>>>> SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
>>>>> overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
>>>>> know why it wasn't?
>>>>
>>>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>
>> Yup.
>
> Nope.
Yup.
>> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
>> caller.
>
> That IS the contract.
What? No. That's not even a meaningful thing to say. A contract binds two
parties, thus you can think about it from two sides.
>> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
>> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
>> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
>> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
>> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> Why? It would be very easy to update it,
Perhaps. But you would have to update it - changing the definition of
SortedMap in this way would break existing correct code. That's not
something an API designer can do without a very, very good reason.
tom
--
Scheme is simple and elegant *if you're a computer*.
Arne Vajhøj
> On Nov 29, 2:21 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>>>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>>>>> The return types for keySet and entrySet are just Set, rather than
>>>>> SortedSet. This could have been changed when Java 5 began to allow
>>>>> overrides/implementations with covariant return types. Does anybody
>>>>> know why it wasn't?
>>>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
>>> Nope.
>> Yup.
>
> Nope.
>
>> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
>> caller.
>
> That IS the contract.
No.
>> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
>> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
>> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
>> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
>> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
> sorted.
"change breaking contract" means "other code need to be changed
due to this change"
So "very easy to update" means the contract is broken.
> It would take all of five minutes.
That is for hobby programming projects.
Elsewhere you don't make changes in 5 minutes and then
that is it.
> Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
I am sure a few exists.
Jakarta Collections is one example.
Arne
Mike Schilling
And that's leaving out the case where "you" don't have the source code
to change, just a 3rd-party jar which now throws Errors (not even
Exceptions) when the "missing" methods are called.
Lew
>> ... your coworkers and the future maintenance programmers that
>> have to deal with your code will call you a petaQ, and rightly so!
John B. Matthews wrote:
> How did you know my coworkers speak Klingon?
Huh, I thought that meant 10^15 Q, which would confer an awful lot of
godlike powers in Star Trek terms, or very, very narrow frequency
discrimination in radio terms.
--
Lew
John B. Matthews
<8441bd8c-e72a-4cb2...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
Interesting. Or perhaps a very high power Q-switched laser, which
intrigues the Klingons immensely. I had though briefly of pulmonary
perfusion (dQ/dt), but relativistic effects preclude rates in this
range.
Captain Koloth
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > That IS the contract.
>
> Only half of it.
Nearly all of it, given it's rarely custom-subclasses.
> People who write code are just as important as those who use it.
That does not make sense. Both clients and subclassers are "people who
write code".
> >> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
> >> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
> >> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
> >> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
> >> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> > Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
>
> But you thus show that you realize that there would be a need for change if
> the contract changed.
Qagh Sopbe'. Entirely beside the point, given how little change.
> And you don't know how easy it would be to update it,
> since the implementation to change will itself be used by other code, which
> then will need to change
QoH! It won't, since changing the implementation keySet return type to
SortedSet won't force change on clients of that code, and it's
unlikely for the implementation to be itself subclassed, and even more
unlikely for such a subclass to be overriding the superclass
implementation of keySet.
> thus requiring unit tests, regression tests,
> deployment to a zillion production sites, possible new bugs to fix, delays to
> other more critical feature improvements or repair, and a whole lot of cost to
> Java projects overall.
Tojo'Qa'! What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
> > sorted. You'd just need to implement first, last, subSet, tailSet, and
> > headSet, and you could make all of those (in presumably an anonymous
> > inner class of your map) punt to MySortedMap.this.firstKey(), lastKey
> > (), subMap(x,y).keySet(), tailMap(x).keySet(), and headMap(y).keySet
> > ().
>
> > It would take all of five minutes.
>
> [calls me a liar]
Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
If anyone here is a lying petaQ ... well, let's just say that it is
not I!
> > Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
>
> At the time the contract was written, there weren't any. Having written the
> contract, Java must not assume that continues to pertain. There could be
> thousands of such implementations by now.
VeQ! There are probably only a handful, if that.
Captain Koloth
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 2:21 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
> >>> On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >>>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
>
> >>> Nope.
>
> >> Yup.
>
> > Nope.
>
> Yup.
No. You dare to call me a liar, petaQ?
> >> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
> >> caller.
>
> > That IS the contract.
>
> What? No.
Yes.
> That's not even a meaningful thing to say.
It is more meaningful than anything you've said by far, yIntagh.
> A contract binds two parties, thus you can think about it from two sides.
But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
> >> If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
> >> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
> >> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
> >> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> > Why? It would be very easy to update it,
>
> Perhaps. But you would have to update it - changing the definition of
> SortedMap in this way would break existing correct code.
Very little of it, and in ways that would take all of five minutes to
fix.
Captain Koloth
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 2:21 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> >> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of the
> >> caller.
>
> > That IS the contract.
>
> No.
You dare to accuse me in public of lying, petaQ?
QoH! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
> >> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
> >> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
> >> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
> >> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
> >> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> > Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
> > sorted.
>
> other code need to be changed due to this change
What a tu'HomIraH remark! It only restates what was already said,
while sounding like it comes from a yIntagh with a fractured skull!
> So "very easy to update" means
"no biggie", qoH!
> > It would take all of five minutes.
>
> That is for hobby programming projects.
>
> Elsewhere you don't make changes in 5 minutes and then
> that is it.
You certainly can if you're just adding firstKey, lastKey, tailSet,
headSet, and subSet to a Set on which you aren't currently even
calling those methods.
> > Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
>
> I am sure a few exists.
A few. And how many already return a SortedSet, just without the
return type being declared as such? Those can be subtracted. The only
change they need is to change the return type! A one minute change!
Captain Koloth
wrote:
> Tom Anderson wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
> >> On Nov 29, 2:21 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 29 Nov 2008, Captain Koloth wrote:
> >>>> On Nov 28, 7:33 pm, Lew <l...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> >>>>> It would have broken the contract established for earlier code.
> >>>> Nope.
> >>> Yup.
> >> Nope.
> > Yup.
Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
towards a Klingon!
> >>> You're only thinking about the contract from the point of view of
> >>> the caller.
>
> >> That IS the contract.
>
> > What? No. That's not even a meaningful thing to say. A contract
> > binds two parties, thus you can think about it from two sides.
The side that wants the change, and the side that would have to deal
with the change. I think we can safely concern ourselves with only the
latter.
> >>> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
> >>> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4
> >>> that returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was
> >>> perfectly legal at that point, i would take a very dim view of a
> >>> change to the definition of SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
>
> >> Why? It would be very easy to update it,
>
> > Perhaps. But you would have to update it - changing the definition
> > of SortedMap in this way would break existing correct code. That's not
> > something an API designer can do without a very, very good reason.
>
> And that's leaving out the case where "you" don't have the source code
> to change, just a 3rd-party jar which now throws Errors (not even
> Exceptions) when the "missing" methods are called.
How common is this with SortedMap implementations? The only one I know
of would probably be updated very soon. And only a qoH would update
one before updating the other.
Lew
>>> That IS the contract.
Lew wrote:
>> Only half of it.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> Nearly all of it, given it's rarely custom-subclasses.
Evidence of rarity? Java took the prudent approach, given the known
existence of subclasses and the presumption, since the API is there to
be used, that it might have been.
Lew wrote:
>> People who write code are just as important as those who use it.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> That does not make sense. Both clients and subclassers are "people who
> write code".
It makes sense, as your statement evidences. For clarity s/code/the
API/ in my assertion.
Tom Anderson said, and Captain Koloth forgot to attribute to him:
>>>> But the contract also exists for the SortedMap implementer, and it
>>>> defines what he's allowed to do. If i wrote a SortedMap under 1.4 that
>>>> returned a key set that wasn't a SortedSet, which was perfectly legal at
>>>> that point, i would take a very dim view of a change to the definition of
>>>> SortedMap in 1.5 that made it illegal.
Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> Why? It would be very easy to update it, since the backing Map is
Lew wrote:
>> But you thus show that you realize that there would be a need for change if
>> the contract changed.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> Qagh Sopbe'. Entirely beside the point, given how little change.
I have already shown how it isn't necessarily a "little change".
You should do something about that phlegm. Why are you spouting
random nonsense amidst your comments?
Lew wrote:
>> And you don't know how easy it would be to update it,
>> since the implementation to change will itself be used by other code, which
>> then will need to change
Captain Koloth wrote:
> QoH!
WTF?
What is this stupid nonsense?
> It won't, since changing the implementation keySet return type to
> SortedSet won't force change on clients of that code, and it's
> unlikely for the implementation to be itself subclassed, and even more
You have completely disregarded the points made before, that there are
already known subclasses in wide use, thus it's not only likely but
certain to have been subclassed. You have made a statistical
assertion with absolutely no basis. Where are your facts?
> unlikely for such a subclass to be overriding the superclass
> implementation of keySet.
Evidence oh-so-conveniently omitted.
Lew wrote:
>> thus requiring unit tests, regression tests,
>> deployment to a zillion production sites, possible new bugs to fix, delays to
>> other more critical feature improvements or repair, and a whole lot of cost to
>> Java projects overall.
Captain Koloth wrote:
> Tojo'Qa'! What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
You've never worked on a large-scale project, have you?
It's *the* argument, as practiced in real life by real projects. The
slippery slope is the one you espouse, to make people change without
regard for their costs. I know from the jobs on which I work that
these are real concerns, as voiced by the software architects and
project managers, that affect how real budgets are spent, and real
work planned. Far from being "ridiculous", it's founded on real-world
experience, unlike what you've been saying. And speak English, not
gobbledygook.
"Captain Koloth" wrote:
>>> sorted. You'd just need to implement first, last, subSet, tailSet, and
>>> headSet, and you could make all of those (in presumably an anonymous
>>> inner class of your map) punt to MySortedMap.this.firstKey(), lastKey
>>> (), subMap(x,y).keySet(), tailMap(x).keySet(), and headMap(y).keySet
>>> ().
>>> It would take all of five minutes.
Lew did not write:
>> [calls me a liar]
I didn't call you a liar, just wrong, Paul.
> Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
More nonsense. What is wrong with you?
> If anyone here is a lying petaQ ... well, let's just say that it is
> not I!
Not a liar, just mistaken.
>>> Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
Lew wrote:
>> At the time the contract was written, there weren't any. Having written the
>> contract, Java must not assume that continues to pertain. There could be
>> thousands of such implementations by now.
Paul averred:
> VeQ! There are probably only a handful, if that.
"Probably"? "Only a handful"? The one example already cited is in
wide use. How do you know how many implementations there are? Where
is your hard evidence?
Java's authors cannot make such assumptions.
--
Lew
Lew
> Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
> towards a Klingon!
You seem to think that you've said something real, here. Anyway, your
complete unwillingness to engage in a real dialog earns you yet
another *plonk*, Paul.
Buh-bye, now. Buh-bye.
And quit the dishonesty of posting under other names to get around our
killfiles.
Joshua, we need better filters.
--
Lew
Captain Koloth
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > Nearly all of it, given it's rarely custom-subclasses.
>
More tu'HomIraH insults! You dishonor this place with your very
presence, petaQ.
> >> People who write code are just as important as those who use it.
> > That does not make sense. Both clients and subclassers are "people who
> > write code".
>
> It makes sense
VeQ!
> Tom Anderson said, and Captain Koloth forgot
BIjatlh 'e' yImev, you dishonorable Romulan taHqeq! I did no such
thing. You are the one who's been mangling attributions.
> >> But you thus show that you realize that there would be a need for change if
> >> the contract changed.
> > Qagh Sopbe'. Entirely beside the point, given how little change.
>
> I have already shown how it isn't necessarily a "little change".
YIDoghQo'. I have already shown that you were wrong.
> You should do something about that phlegm. Why are you spouting
> random nonsense amidst your comments?
YIntagh petaQ! You dare call the Klingon language "nonsense"? You
would be wise to stay away from Qo'noS. You would not utter three
words there before someone ran you through with a bat'leth! Hab SoSlI'
Quch!
> > QoH!
>
> WTF?
QI'yaH!
> What is this [insults deleted]
BIjatlh 'e' yImev, petaQ!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > It won't, since changing the implementation keySet return type to
> > SortedSet won't force change on clients of that code, and it's
> > unlikely for the implementation to be itself subclassed, and even more
>
> You have completely disregarded the points made before
I have not. We are now discussing changing a particular
implementation, not the interface, to return SortedSet.
> [suggests that I might have been dishonest]
YIHarQo'! nepwI' ghaH!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > unlikely for such a subclass to be overriding the superclass
> > implementation of keySet.
>
> [suggests that I might have been dishonest]
PetaQ! Qab jIH naghIl! (Face me if you dare!) Otherwise, naDevvo'
yIghoS.
> > Tojo'Qa'! What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
>
> You've never worked on a large-scale project, have you?
Of course I have, Romulan slime. Why do you ask?
> I know from the jobs on which I work that
> these are real concerns, as voiced by the software architects and
> project managers, that affect how real budgets are spent, and
what a load of veQ.
> it's founded on real-world experience, unlike what you've been saying.
Romulan cur! Again, you dare to accuse me of lying? QoH! Charghbej
vIt!
> And speak English, not gobbledygook.
Nuqjatlh??
Gobbledygook??!
TlhIngan maH!
I speak the language of honor, while you speak like a Federation
petaQ!
> >> [calls me a liar]
>
> [insults deleted], Paul.
My name is Koloth, petaQ!
Qab jIH naghIl, cowardly taHqeq! BItu Hpa' bIHeghjaja!
> > Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
>
> More nonsense.
I said, "when you insult a Klingon's honor, prepare for trouble". You
did not heed the warning, yIntagh. Bljeghbe'chug vaj blHegh, petaQ!
> > If anyone here is a lying petaQ ... well, let's just say that it is
> > not I!
>
> [insults deleted]
QI'yaH!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >> At the time the contract was written, there weren't any. Having written the
> >> contract, Java must not assume that continues to pertain. There could be
> >> thousands of such implementations by now.
>
> Paul averred:
>
> > VeQ! There are probably only a handful, if that.
No, he did not. I wrote that, you dishonorable Romulan taHqeq.
> "Probably"? "Only a handful"? [more false accusations of
> dishonesty]
The only dishonorable one here is you, petaQ. You are a coward who
hides behind a computer screen and insults the honor of true warriors!
Do'Ha'! But, I suppose, rot yittmey ghom Hoch ...
To all jaghpu' who dare dishonor me in public, I have only this to
say: charghbej vIt!
Oh, and toDwI'maj qoSyItIvqu'!
Captain Koloth
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
> > towards a Klingon!
>
> You seem to think that you've said something real, here.
I have. BIpIvHa'law' ... and it's something in your head.
> Anyway, your complete unwillingness to engage in a real dialog
I have tried. You are unwilling to discuss anything without insulting
your opponent and repeating yourself while ignoring the points that
your opponent has raised. You are a dishonorable petaQ. Worse, you are
a Qa'Hom and you do not even know it!
Qagh Sopbe'. I have no time for unimportant little things like you.
> And quit the dishonesty
You are the one being dishonorable, petaQ.
Arne Vajhøj
> On Nov 30, 10:56 am, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>> A contract binds two parties, thus you can think about it from two sides.
>
> But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
> changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
And the ones writing classes that implement the interface does
not necessarily want the change.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
Your theories about software development could really revolutionize
the industry:
estimate = KLOC * average line length / typing speed
Or maybe you should just stop posting until you have tried
working on a software project.
Arne
fenc...@gmail.com
> > But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
> > changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
>
> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
> the ones writing classes that implement the interface does
> not necessarily want the change.
Fortunately it is a trivial change.
Lew
> More tu'HomIraH insults! You dishonor this place with your very
> presence, petaQ.
> VeQ!
> BIjatlh 'e' yImev, you dishonorable Romulan taHqeq! I did no such
> thing. You are the one who's been mangling attributions.
>>> Qagh Sopbe'.
> YIDoghQo'. I have already shown that you were wrong.
> YIntagh petaQ! You dare call the Klingon language "nonsense"? You
Absolutely, particularly as spat by you.
> would be wise to stay away from Qo'noS. You would not utter three
> words there before someone ran you through with a bat'leth! Hab SoSlI'
> Quch!
>>> QoH!
> QI'yaH!
> BIjatlh 'e' yImev, petaQ!
>
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
A dead giveaway.
>> [suggests that I might have been dishonest]
Nonsense, I did no such thing.
> YIHarQo'! nepwI' ghaH!
> PetaQ! Qab jIH naghIl! (Face me if you dare!) Otherwise, naDevvo'
> yIghoS.
>
>>> Tojo'Qa'! What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
>> You've never worked on a large-scale project, have you?
>
> Of course I have, Romulan slime. Why do you ask?
Because you show such startling ignorance.
I take it back. It's not startling at all.
> ... veQ.
Lew:
>> it's founded on real-world experience, unlike what you've been saying.
Paul:
> Romulan cur! Again, you dare to accuse me of lying? QoH! Charghbej
> vIt!
Not of lying, just ignorance and error. Your slip into hebephrenic nonsense
is a clear indicator that you prefer the fantasy world to the real world.
> Nuqjatlh??
>
> Gobbledygook??!
>
> TlhIngan maH!
>
> I speak the language of honor, while you speak like a Federation
> petaQ!
> My name is Koloth, petaQ!
>
> Qab jIH naghIl, cowardly taHqeq! BItu Hpa' bIHeghjaja!
>
>>> Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
Lew:
>> More nonsense.
Paul:
> I said, "when you insult a Klingon's honor, prepare for trouble". You
> did not heed the warning, yIntagh. Bljeghbe'chug vaj blHegh, petaQ!
> QI'yaH!
>>> VeQ! There are probably only a handful, if that.
>
> No, he did not. I wrote that, you dishonorable Romulan taHqeq.
>
>> "Probably"? "Only a handful"? [more false accusations of
>> dishonesty]
Again, not dishonesty, error.
> The only dishonorable one here is you, petaQ. You are a coward who
> hides behind a computer screen and insults the honor of true warriors!
> Do'Ha'! But, I suppose, rot yittmey ghom Hoch ...
Haha. "True warrior". Haha.
> To all jaghpu' who dare dishonor me in public, I have only this to
> say: charghbej vIt!
>
> Oh, and toDwI'maj qoSyItIvqu'!
You are aware that Klingons are fictional, are you not?
--
Lew
fenc...@gmail.com
> >>> Also, how common are third-party implementations of SortedMap, really?
> >> I am sure a few exists.
>
> > A few. And how many already return a SortedSet, just without the
> > return type being declared as such? Those can be subtracted. The only
> > change they need is to change the return type! A one minute change!
>
Fuck you.
Lew
> Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
> towards a Klingon!
Syllogism:
Klingons are fictional creatures.
You are not fictional.
Therefore, you are not a Klingon.
It's called logic, Paul.
--
Lew
Lew
Paul, Paul, Paul. When will you learn that your stupid aliases don't work?
Re-plonk, "petaQ".
--
Lew
fenc...@gmail.com
> > YIntagh petaQ! You dare call the Klingon language "nonsense"? You
>
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> > all true.
>
> A dead giveaway.
You say that as if it were evidence of a crime. But the only ones
engaged in dishonorable behavior here are you and Arne.
> >> [suggests that I might have been dishonest]
>
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar. You clearly lied when you claimed you'd killfiled
Koloth.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >>> Tojo'Qa'! What a ridiculous slippery slope argument.
> >> You've never worked on a large-scale project, have you?
>
> > Of course I have, Romulan slime. Why do you ask?
>
> Because you [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> I take it back. [implied insult deleted]
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > ... veQ.
> >> it's founded on real-world experience, unlike what you've been saying.
>
> Paul:
No. Nobody has posted to this thread using that name.
> > Romulan cur! Again, you dare to accuse me of lying? QoH! Charghbej
> > vIt!
>
> [numerous vicious insults deleted]
No, you're the stupid one and the crazy one. (And you have no sense of
humor -- a common trait, in my experience, of psychopathic people.)
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >>> Grrr! TlhIngan quv DatIchDI' Seng yIghuH!
> >> More nonsense.
> > I said, "when you insult a Klingon's honor, prepare for trouble". You
> > did not heed the warning, yIntagh. Bljeghbe'chug vaj blHegh, petaQ!
> > QI'yaH!
> Paul:
No, no, no! My name is Jerry.
> >> "Probably"? "Only a handful"? [more false accusations of
> >> dishonesty]
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > The only dishonorable one here is you, petaQ. You are a coward who
> > hides behind a computer screen and insults the honor of true warriors!
> > Do'Ha'! But, I suppose, rot yittmey ghom Hoch ...
>
> [implied insult deleted]
No, you're the coward.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > To all jaghpu' who dare dishonor me in public, I have only this to
> > say: charghbej vIt!
>
> > Oh, and toDwI'maj qoSyItIvqu'!
>
> [implied insult deleted]
Lew
fenc...@gmail.com
> Captain Koloth wrote:
> > Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
> > towards a Klingon!
>
My name is Jerry.
fenc...@gmail.com
> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
INTERVAL FIRST.
> >> the ones writing classes that implement the interface does
> >> not necessarily want the change.
>
> > Fortunately it is a trivial change.
>
> Paul, Paul, Paul.
Nobody here has that name, idiot.
> When will you learn that [vicious insults deleted]
Never, because you're lying.
You're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [insult deleted]
You dare to insult me in Klingon?
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
And it seems you were lying about having killfiled fencore1, too.
I wonder how many more lies I'll catch you in before this day is out,
psychopathic stalker?
fenc...@gmail.com
about having killfiled fencore1:
> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Fuck you.
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the crazy one.
Arne Vajhøj
True.
But we have strong empirical evidence that logic
does not have any impact on him.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> fenc...@gmail.com wrote:
>> ...
>
> Paul, Paul, Paul. When will you learn that your stupid aliases don't work?
Learning is not his force.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
That must have been one of his other identities.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 8:23 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
>>> towards a Klingon!
>> [insults deleted], Paul
>
> My name is Jerry.
You stated that earlier.
And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
was Paul.
It is obvious that you were lying in at least one of the posts.
Since there exist a Paul with your specific social problems, then
we choose to believe that Paul is your name.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 8:24 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip]
>
> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
> INTERVAL FIRST.
How well did that type of ordering work the previous times
you tried it ?
And what can you learn from that ?
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 7:59 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>> But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
>>> changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
>> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
>
> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
Yes.
But we are not talking about modifying a class in java.util - we
are talking about changing an interface in java.util used by
classes outside Java API.
>> the ones writing classes that implement the interface does
>> not necessarily want the change.
>
> Fortunately it is a trivial change.
See previous post about software development.
Arne
fenc...@gmail.com
> Lew wrote:
[snip]
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > [implied insults deleted], Paul
My name is Jerry.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> True.
False. See above.
> But we have strong empirical evidence that [insult
fenc...@gmail.com
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > Paul, Paul, Paul.
There's nobody here with that name.
> > When will you learn that [insult deleted]
Never, since it's not true.
Lew is the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that Lew has said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
fenc...@gmail.com
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Fuck you.
>
> > [insult deleted]
No, Lew is the crazy one.
None of the nasty things that Lew has said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [implied insult deleted]
fenc...@gmail.com
DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
> > My name is Jerry.
>
> You stated that earlier.
Yes, I did. Why are you incorrectly ignoring that?
> And then you [lies deleted]
No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
but I did not.
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> Since there exist a Paul with [insults both me and Paul]
You're the crazy one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> we choose to believe that Paul is your name.
And I suppose "we" (nice touch, by the way, using the royal "we",
Arne) choose to believe that Napoleon is yours?
Please check yourself into the nearest laughing academy before it's
too late.
fenc...@gmail.com
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
> > INTERVAL FIRST.
>
> [insults and threats deleted]
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
I don't respond well to threats.
fenc...@gmail.com
> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
> > On Dec 1, 7:59 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> >>> But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
> >>> changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
> >> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
>
> > When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
> > maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
>
> Yes.
Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
> But [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >> the ones writing classes that implement the interface does
> >> not necessarily want the change.
>
> > Fortunately it is a trivial change.
>
> See previous [insult]
Why? It's pointless, since in reality none of the nasty things that
Arne Vajhøj
>> Lew wrote:
>> > When will you learn that When will you learn that your stupid aliases don't work?
> Never, since it's not true.
Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 8:38 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip]
>
> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
I will decide when I post
>>> My name is Jerry.
>> You stated that earlier.
>
> Yes, I did. Why are you incorrectly ignoring that?
>
>> And then you And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
>> was Paul.
>
> No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
> but I did not.
Well - the post came from your PC ...
>> It is obvious that you were lying in at least one of the posts.
>
> No, you're the liar.
No - it is obvious that you can not both be Jerry and Paul.
Arne
fenc...@gmail.com
NO!!!
YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF ATTACK POSTS PER DAY. THEN YOU
MUST WAIT 24 HOURS. SITTING AT YOUR COMPUTER OBSESSIVELY HITTING
"REFRESH" AND POSTING MORE AND MORE ATTACK POSTS IS A SIGN OF AN
UNSTABLE MIND. IF YOU CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT OBSESSIVE STALKING BEHAVIOR,
THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
> >> Lew wrote:
[snip]
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> [misquotes me]
NO! Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest!
> > Never, since it's not true.
>
> Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
It is true that I use multiple names, though not for any dishonest
purpose.
However, the insults that were also in Lew's post were NOT true.
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 8:39 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 8:24 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
I decide what I want to post.
>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
>>> INTERVAL FIRST.
>> How well did that type of ordering work the previous times
>> you tried it ?
>>
>> And what can you learn from that ?
>
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
>
> I don't respond well to threats.
If you consider those questions a threat, then I don't think what
you are smoking is legal in Canada.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 8:41 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip]
>
> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
No.
>>> On Dec 1, 7:59 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>>> But we only need to worry about the side on the receiving end of the
>>>>> changes. We can assume the side that WANTS the change is fine with it.
>>>> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
>>> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
>>> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
>> Yes.
>>
>> But we are not talking about modifying a class in java.util - we
>> are talking about changing an interface in java.util used by
>> classes outside Java API.
>
> Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
Your answer does not make any sense.
Arne
fenc...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!
YOU SHUT UP NOW!
STOP OBSESSIVELY REFRESHING THE HEADER LIST TO ATTACK MY POSTS AS SOON
AS I MAKE THEM. YOU MUST ALLOW A DECENT INTERVAL OF TIME. OTHERWISE I
WILL BE STUCK UNABLE TO FINISH MY WORK FOR THE DAY. THAT WOULD BE
UNFAIR.
> > DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
Get the fuck off the Internet. Go to bed, Arne. I'm sure it's past
your curfew. Your mommy and daddy are going to be very mad at you if
they catch you up this late still posting on Usenet. Especially
posting the vicious lies, off-topic dreck, and other nonsense that you
tend to post when you post on Usenet.
> >> And then you And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
> >> was Paul.
>
> > No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
> > but I did not.
>
> Well - [more lies deleted]
No, you are lying.
> [misquotes me and calls me a liar]
NO! Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest!
You're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > No, you're the liar.
>
> No - it is obvious that you can not both be Jerry and Paul.
I'm glad you're starting to see reason.
I'm just Jerry.
Now log off and get some sleep!
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:16 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
>
Oh - yes.
> YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF ATTACK POSTS PER DAY. THEN YOU
> MUST WAIT 24 HOURS.
That is not how usenet works.
Try and see if your local library has a "usenet for dummies"
book that can describe the basic usage of usenet for you.
> SITTING AT YOUR COMPUTER OBSESSIVELY HITTING
> "REFRESH" AND POSTING MORE AND MORE ATTACK POSTS IS A SIGN OF AN
> UNSTABLE MIND. IF YOU CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT OBSESSIVE STALKING BEHAVIOR,
> THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
> MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
Feel free to do so anytime.
>>> Never, since it's not true.
>> Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
>
> It is true that I use multiple names, though not for any dishonest
> purpose.
Ah - then it is true.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! AM I EVER GOING TO GET SOME PEACE???
LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE, YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MADMAN!!!
> > NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
> >>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
> >>> INTERVAL FIRST.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> > all true.
>
> > I don't respond well to threats.
>
> [false accusation of illegal activity deleted]
No, you're the criminal!
Arne Vajhøj
>
Oh - yes.
> YOU SHUT UP NOW!
No.
> STOP OBSESSIVELY REFRESHING THE HEADER LIST TO ATTACK MY POSTS AS SOON
> AS I MAKE THEM. YOU MUST ALLOW A DECENT INTERVAL OF TIME. OTHERWISE I
> WILL BE STUCK UNABLE TO FINISH MY WORK FOR THE DAY. THAT WOULD BE
> UNFAIR.
No one is forcing you to reply to this group or even read this group.
>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
>> I will decide when I post
>
> I don't respond well to threats.
Very interesting stuff you smoke.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
NO!!!
YOU WILL SHUT UP NOW, OR ELSE!!
> > DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
> [misquotes me and calls me a liar]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
YOU'RE THE LIAR!
NONE OF THE NASTY THINGS THAT YOU HAVE SAID OR IMPLIED ABOUT ME ARE AT
ALL TRUE.
> >>> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
> >>> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
> >> Yes.
> > Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
>
> Your answer does not make any sense.
It does when it is quoted as I actually wrote it, rather than
deliberately and dishonestly misquoted by you, fuckhead.
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:18 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>> And then you And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
>>>> was Paul.
>>> No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
>>> but I did not.
>
It sure did.
Do you want me to post the headers again ?
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!!!!
YOU MUST LOG OFF NOW AND GO TO BED. IT IS PAST YOUR BEDTIME, LITTLE
CUR!
> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 9:16 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> >> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
>
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> Oh - yes.
I never denied using aliases, you dishonest little turd. It only looks
that way when you "cleverly" misquote me.
> > YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF ATTACK POSTS PER DAY. THEN YOU
> > MUST WAIT 24 HOURS.
>
> [insults and implied threats deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
I don't respond well to threats.
> Try and see if [rest of insults deleted]
More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
God?
Go away, fuckhead.
You're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
> > MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
>
> [implied insult deleted]
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >>> Never, since it's not true.
> >> Oh - it is true that you use aliases.
>
> > It is true that I use multiple names, though not for any dishonest
> > purpose.
>
> Ah - then it is true.
I never denied it. I denied:
* Any implication that I was using them for dishonest purposes.
* Lew's insult in the same post where this subject arose.
Now go fuck yourself!
Arne Vajhøj
>
>
> LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE, YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MADMAN!!!
I assume you read this group voluntarily, so you must
like it.
>>> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
>> I decide what I want to post.
>
> I don't respond well to threats.
Well that was actually not a threat.
>>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
>>>> INTERVAL FIRST.
>>>How well did that type of ordering work the previous times
>>>you tried it ?
>>>
>>>And what can you learn from that ?
>>> I don't respond well to threats.
>> If you consider those questions a threat, then I don't think what
>> you are smoking is legal in Canada.
>
> No, you're the criminal!
Either you are smoking something or your understanding of English
is absolutely horrible.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
FOR YOURS.
YOU MAY POST AGAIN ON WEDNESDAY. WHEN YOU DO, YOU MAY LOAD NEW HEADERS
ONCE, AND RESPOND TO THE POSTS THAT ALREADY EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT
YOU DID SO. THEN YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY BEFORE YOU MAY REFRESH
THE VIEW OF THE NEWSGROUP AGAIN, OR AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE PERMITTED
TO RESPOND TO POSTS THAT DID NOT EXIST YET.
THESE RULES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, TO ALLOW THEM TO
SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME ON OTHER ACTIVITIES.
YOU WILL ADHERE TO THEM OR YOU WILL FACE THE CONSEQUENCES.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > NO!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats. Particularly not threats to continue
dishonestly misquoting me!
> > YOU SHUT UP NOW!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
> > STOP OBSESSIVELY REFRESHING THE HEADER LIST TO ATTACK MY POSTS AS SOON
> > AS I MAKE THEM. YOU MUST ALLOW A DECENT INTERVAL OF TIME. OTHERWISE I
> > WILL BE STUCK UNABLE TO FINISH MY WORK FOR THE DAY. THAT WOULD BE
> > UNFAIR.
>
> No one is forcing you to reply to this group or even read this group.
You are. By posting attack posts, you leave me with only two options:
Do so, or let the ever-growing quantities of your hate propaganda
fester there unchallenged, influencing people without any
counterbalance.
The latter is quite clearly not an option.
> >>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > I don't respond well to threats.
>
> [false accusation of criminal activity deleted]
No, you're the criminal!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!! YOU SHUT UP NOW!!!
> >>>> And then you And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
> >>>> was Paul.
> >>> No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
> >>> but I did not.
> [misquotes me and lies about me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > No, you are lying.
>
> [calls me a liar]
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:22 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
> NO!!!
>
> YOU WILL SHUT UP NOW, OR ELSE!!
Or else you can not do anything.
>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
>> No.
>
> I don't respond well to threats.
Weird.
How can anyone consider "No." a threat ??
>>>>>> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
>>>>> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
>>>>> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> But we are not talking about modifying a class in java.util - we
>>>> are talking about changing an interface in java.util used by
>>>> classes outside Java API.
>>>
>>> Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
>>
>>Your answer does not make any sense.
> NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN!
You wrote all the stupid things I quoted your for.
Your attempts to avoid taking responsibility for it just failed.
>>>>> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
>>>>> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
>>>> Yes.
>>> Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
>> Your answer does not make any sense.
>
> It does when it is quoted as I actually wrote it, rather than
> deliberately and dishonestly misquoted by you, fuckhead.
You wrote all the stupid things I quoted your for.
Your attempts to avoid taking responsibility for it just failed.
Arne
John W Kennedy
> On Dec 1, 8:23 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> Captain Koloth wrote:
>>> Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
>>> towards a Klingon!
>
> My name is Jerry.
I thought it was "Koloth".
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
Hmmmm.... So, "You are not fictional," is an insult in your estimation.
You evidently suffer from an interesting and, I believe, unique
manifestation of the Cotard delusion.
The difficulty, of course, is that this makes you singularly vulnerable
to Descarte's axiom in its contrapositive restatement: if you do not
exist, you do not think.
As Lewis Carroll so wisely remarked of the New Belfry at Christ Church,
Oxford, as seen in perspective view, "Would that it /were/ at the point
of vanishing!"
--
John W. Kennedy
"The bright critics assembled in this volume will doubtless show, in
their sophisticated and ingenious new ways, that, just as /Pooh/ is
suffused with humanism, our humanism itself, at this late date, has
become full of /Pooh./"
-- Frederick Crews. "Postmodern Pooh", Preface
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!! YOU MUST SHUT UP NOW!!!
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! AM I EVER GOING TO GET SOME PEACE???
>
> > LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE, YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MADMAN!!!
>
> [insult deleted]
Liar. None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me
are at all true.
> >>> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > I don't respond well to threats.
>
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >>>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I DO, CYBER-STALKER. WAIT A DECENT
> >>>> INTERVAL FIRST.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> >>> I don't respond well to threats.
> [misquotes me yet again]
STOP MISQUOTING ME, COCKSUCKER!
> > No, you're the criminal!
>
> [insults deleted]
No, you're the criminal and the stupid one.
Arne Vajhøj
> NO!!! YOU SHUT UP NOW!!!
Nope.
>>>>>> And then you And then you a few hours later posted stating that your name
>>>>>> was Paul.
>>>>> No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
>>>>> but I did not.
>>>> Well - the post came from your PC ...
>>>No, you are lying.
>> It sure did.
>> Do you want me to post the headers again ?
>
> NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN!
You wrote it.
And since you want me to post the headers:
From: hzerg...@gmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Possible bug in Calendar
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:45:24 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 62
...
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1226886324 23312 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2008
01:45:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 01:45:24 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=74.14.135.55;
posting-account=9b4y5AoAAABB0A6ytVwF5nrqRqHBIvMx
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.0.4)
Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
From: Paul Derbyshire <pgd...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Possible bug in Calendar
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 23:54:27 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 105
...
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1226908467 10221 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2008
07:54:27 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 07:54:27 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: d42g2000prb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=74.14.135.55;
posting-account=24calwoAAADLjmit6NUVsnOVd4FDVSaX
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.0.4)
Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
From: Jerry Gerrone <scuz...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Possible bug in Calendar
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 04:10:17 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 334
...
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.14.135.55
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1226923817 3784 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2008
12:10:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:10:17 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=74.14.135.55;
posting-account=6GRyxAoAAAAhauNvbG9PFjCexzy4eSSu
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.0.4)
Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:34 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> NO!!! YOU MUST SHUT UP NOW!!!
Nope.
>>> JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! AM I EVER GOING TO GET SOME PEACE???
>>> LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE, YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MADMAN!!!
>> I assume you read this group voluntarily, so you must
>> like it.
>
> Liar.
Interesting.
Do you think I am lying about assuming that you read this group
voluntarily or are you trying to tell me that you are not reading
this group voluntarily.
The first is wrong.
If the second is the case, then please supply your address, then we
will be happy to send the police to free you from whoever is forcing
you to read this group.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > NO!!!
>
> > YOU WILL SHUT UP NOW, OR ELSE!!
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the impotent one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >>> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST. WAIT AT LEAST 24 HOURS FIRST.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > I don't respond well to threats.
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the weird one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> >>>>>> Those maintaining Java specs has to consider both sides.
> >>>>> When we're talking about modifying a class in java.util, "those
> >>>>> maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!
> >>>> Yes.
> >>> Which means they only need to consider the OTHER side.
> >>Your answer does not make any sense.
It does, when it is not misquoted, intentionally and dishonestly, as
it was by you three times.
> > NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN!
>
> You wrote all the [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
I wrote something that you "creatively" quoted so as to make it LOOK
stupid. But what I actually wrote is not.
Someone said "those maintaining Java specs has to consider both
sides".
I said "when we're talking about modifying a class in java.util,
"those maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!"
You said "yes".
And I responded to that with "which means they only need to consider
the OTHER side".
This makes perfect sense -- except when intentionally misquoted, with
material dishonestly added above my last line that was NOT above my
last line in my original post with that line.
> Your attempts [vicious insult deleted]
No, YOU are the failure. Your attempts to misquote me are
transparently dishonest, and easily seen to be such by anyone viewing
Google's archives, you stupid piece of shit!!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > It does when it is quoted as I actually wrote it, rather than
> > deliberately and dishonestly misquoted by you, fuckhead.
>
> You wrote all the [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
I wrote something that you "creatively" quoted so as to make it LOOK
stupid. But what I actually wrote is not.
Someone said "those maintaining Java specs has to consider both
sides".
I said "when we're talking about modifying a class in java.util,
"those maintaining Java specs" ARE one side!"
You said "yes".
And I responded to that with "which means they only need to consider
the OTHER side".
This makes perfect sense -- except when intentionally misquoted, with
material dishonestly added above my last line that was NOT above my
last line in my original post with that line.
> Your attempts [vicious insult deleted]
No, YOU are the failure. Your attempts to misquote me are
transparently dishonest, and easily seen to be such by anyone viewing
Google's archives, you stupid piece of shit!!
nebul...@gmail.com
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > My name is Jerry.
>
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> > all true.
>
> [vicious insult deleted]
No, you're the crazy one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> The difficulty, of course, is that [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [rest of nonsense deleted]
None of the nasty things that any of you have ever said or implied
Arne Vajhøj
> NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
> TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
> IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
> FOR YOURS.
>
> YOU MAY POST AGAIN ON WEDNESDAY. WHEN YOU DO, YOU MAY LOAD NEW HEADERS
> ONCE, AND RESPOND TO THE POSTS THAT ALREADY EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT
> YOU DID SO. THEN YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY BEFORE YOU MAY REFRESH
> THE VIEW OF THE NEWSGROUP AGAIN, OR AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE PERMITTED
> TO RESPOND TO POSTS THAT DID NOT EXIST YET.
Sorry.
That is not how usenet works.
You really should get that "Usenet for dummies" book-
> THESE RULES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, TO ALLOW THEM TO
> SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME ON OTHER ACTIVITIES.
>
> YOU WILL ADHERE TO THEM OR YOU WILL FACE THE CONSEQUENCES.
Which are absolutely none.
>>> STOP OBSESSIVELY REFRESHING THE HEADER LIST TO ATTACK MY POSTS AS SOON
>>> AS I MAKE THEM. YOU MUST ALLOW A DECENT INTERVAL OF TIME. OTHERWISE I
>>> WILL BE STUCK UNABLE TO FINISH MY WORK FOR THE DAY. THAT WOULD BE
>>> UNFAIR.
>> No one is forcing you to reply to this group or even read this group.
>
> You are. By posting attack posts, you leave me with only two options:
> Do so, or let the ever-growing quantities of your hate propaganda
> fester there unchallenged, influencing people without any
> counterbalance.
>
> The latter is quite clearly not an option.
It is not me forcing you.
It is your delusions that are forcing you.
You should do something about them.
Arne
Lew
> More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
> God?
I did. The job was getting tedious.
> Go away, f*ckhead.
Stop cussin'.
>>> THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
>>> MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
Let's see, do you mean local in Canada, or local in Denmark?
Make sure you shown them the entire record of the conversations, which are
carried on in public.
> Now go f*ck yourself!
Lead by example. Arne's posts were not insulting, but yours certainly are.
--
Lew
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!! YOU SHUT UP!!! IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER ACTIVITY NOW,
YOU FREAKING MORON!
> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 9:30 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> > NO!!! YOU SHUT UP NOW!!!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
> >>>>> No, I never did anything of the sort. Somebody else might have done,
> >>>>> but I did not.
> [misquotes me and lies about me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> >>>No, you are lying.
> [misquotes me and calls me a liar]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
You're the liar!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN!
>
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar!
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> And since you want me to
Another lie.
> [misquotes me and other people]
STOP MISQUOTING PEOPLE, COCKSUCKER! NOBODY IS FOOLED! EVERYONE CAN SEE
THAT NONE OF THAT WAS IN THE POST TO WHICH YOU ARE REPLYING!
Arne Vajhøj
>> book that can describe the basic usage of usenet for you.
>
You really would benefit from such a book.
It would allow you to get rid of such weird misunderstandings
that you can tell others when to post and when not.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!!
Jesus Christ, how do I get rid of this fuckhead so I can get on with
my day???
> > NO!!! YOU MUST SHUT UP NOW!!!
>
> [threat deleted]
I don't respond well to threats.
> >>> JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! AM I EVER GOING TO GET SOME PEACE???
> >>> LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE, YOU PSYCHOPATHIC MADMAN!!!
> [misquotes and insults me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
You're the crazy one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > Liar.
>
> [implied insults deleted]
No, you're the crazy one.
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
NO!!!
Someone tell me how to shut this piece of shit up so I can get some
frigging rest for one frigging night!!!
> > NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
> > TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
> > IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
> > FOR YOURS.
>
> > YOU MAY POST AGAIN ON WEDNESDAY. WHEN YOU DO, YOU MAY LOAD NEW HEADERS
> > ONCE, AND RESPOND TO THE POSTS THAT ALREADY EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT
> > YOU DID SO. THEN YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY BEFORE YOU MAY REFRESH
> > THE VIEW OF THE NEWSGROUP AGAIN, OR AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE PERMITTED
> > TO RESPOND TO POSTS THAT DID NOT EXIST YET.
>
> [threats and insults deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
I don't respond well to threats.
> > THESE RULES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, TO ALLOW THEM TO
> > SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME ON OTHER ACTIVITIES.
>
> > YOU WILL ADHERE TO THEM OR YOU WILL FACE THE CONSEQUENCES.
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the impotent one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> >> No one is forcing you to reply to this group or even read this group.
>
> > You are. By posting attack posts, you leave me with only two options:
> > Do so, or let the ever-growing quantities of your hate propaganda
> > fester there unchallenged, influencing people without any
> > counterbalance.
>
> > The latter is quite clearly not an option.
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the crazy one.
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:47 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> Jesus Christ, how do I get rid of this fuckhead so I can get on with
> my day???
Have you considered just closing your browser ?
>>> NO!!! YOU MUST SHUT UP NOW!!!
>> Nope.
>
> I don't respond well to threats.
That was actually not a threat.
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
> > More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
What I say in response to Arne is no skin off your nose.
> > God?
>
> [stupid nonsense deleted]
>
> > Go away, f*ckhead.
>
> [orders I don't have to obey deleted]
>
> >>> THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
> >>> MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
>
> Let's see, do you mean local in Canada, or local in Denmark?
I mean local to wherever Arne is. His psychopathic stalking behavior
probably implies that he may pose a physical threat to people there,
but it is unlikely that he poses a physical threat to people anywhere
else in the world.
> > Now go f*ck yourself!
>
> [more orders deleted] Arne's posts were not insulting
That is a blatant lie. He has called me all manner of names in just
the past hour, up to and including falsely accusing me of various
illegal activities.
Arne Vajhøj
> NO!!! YOU SHUT UP!!! IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER ACTIVITY NOW,
> YOU FREAKING MORON!
Do you need instructions about how to close your browser ??
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
SHUT UP.
> [misquotes me]
NO! DO NOT MISQUOTE ME AGAIN! Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. THAT IS INCORRECT. STOP BEING DISHONEST!
> > More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness.
>
> [insults deleted]
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:51 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
>> I did. The job was getting tedious.
>
>
> What I say in response to Arne is no skin off your nose.
You posted to a public news group and thereby made it available
to all internet users in the world.
Arne
Arne Vajhøj
> On Dec 1, 9:50 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>> NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
>>> TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
>>> IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
>>> FOR YOURS.
>>> YOU MAY POST AGAIN ON WEDNESDAY. WHEN YOU DO, YOU MAY LOAD NEW HEADERS
>>> ONCE, AND RESPOND TO THE POSTS THAT ALREADY EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT
>>> YOU DID SO. THEN YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY BEFORE YOU MAY REFRESH
>>> THE VIEW OF THE NEWSGROUP AGAIN, OR AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE PERMITTED
>>> TO RESPOND TO POSTS THAT DID NOT EXIST YET.
>>
>> That is not how usenet works.
>>
If you think you can tell people to stop to post to usenet, then you
have confessed to being stupid.
Arne
Lew
>
>> On Dec 1, 9:51 pm,
>>>> More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
>>>> God?
Lew wrote:
>>> I did. The job was getting tedious.
nebul...@gmail.com wrote:
>> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
I have been meaning to ask, not that I'll see the response now that you're
replonked, but what exactly *is* a "feedback loop"?
>> What I say in response to Arne is no skin off your nose.
Actually, it is. You have been offensive, crude, insulting, obscene and
obnoxious. Also dreadfully off topic.
Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> You posted to a public news group and thereby made it available
> to all internet users in the world.
You're doing a great job, Arne. See if you could do something about that
world peace thing, though.
--
Lew
Joshua Cranmer
> NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
> TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
> IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
> FOR YOURS.
Don't foist your inability to keep up as a result of other people.
> THESE RULES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, TO ALLOW THEM TO
> SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME ON OTHER ACTIVITIES.
How many people have already killed this thread in their newsreader?
Looks like all but a few.
Notice how no one else is complaining about rapid posting rates.
--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
Joshua Cranmer
> "REFRESH" AND POSTING MORE AND MORE ATTACK POSTS IS A SIGN OF AN
> UNSTABLE MIND. IF YOU CONTINUE TO EXHIBIT OBSESSIVE STALKING BEHAVIOR,
> THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES WILL BE CONTACTED ANONYMOUSLY TO REPORT THAT YOU
> MAY POSE A DANGER TO OTHERS.
Why would someone be hitting refresh? Oh right, they're using GG.
By the way, aren't you hitting refresh just as frequently?
In any case, I'm guessing he has his newsreader set to download new
newsgroup headers on a... looks like a 5 minute interval? I'm still at
10 minutes, myself.
/me runs off to get some good debugging on why the newsgroup didn't
boldify itself.
Joshua Cranmer
> nebul...@gmail.com wrote:
>> More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
>> God?
>
> I did. The job was getting tedious.
I suppose you skipped the "dying" part. Well, perhaps you're responding
from the afterlife, but I always thought the latency there was a bitch.
Excuse me, I need to go for my interview with the god of Technology now
for the spot of Coordinator of Revival of Dead Technologies. Do you
think you could be a reference?
Arne Vajhøj
> How many people have already killed this thread in their newsreader?
All the smart people !
:-)
Arne
nebul...@gmail.com
[snip]
SHUT UP!
> > Jesus Christ, how do I get rid of this fuckhead so I can get on with
> > my day???
>
> Have you considered just closing your browser ?
You idiot, that doesn't get rid of you. You'd still be there telling
other people all about how awful I supposedly am -- but I wouldn't be
there putting a monkey wrench into your vile scheme!
> >>> NO!!! YOU MUST SHUT UP NOW!!!
> [misquotes me]
Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest.
> > I don't respond well to threats.
>
> [calls me a liar]
No, you're the liar.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
nebul...@gmail.com
> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
> > NO!!! YOU SHUT UP!!! IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER ACTIVITY NOW,
> > YOU FREAKING MORON!
>
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
bbo...@gmail.com
> >>> More of your trademarked "try and X" rudeness. Who died and made you
Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest.
> > NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
>
> > What I say in response to Arne is no skin off your nose.
>
> [nothing important or relevant]
Fuck off! When I want your opinion, Arne, I'll give it to you.
bbo...@gmail.com
> >>> NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
> >>> TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
> >>> IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
> >>> FOR YOURS.
> >>> YOU MAY POST AGAIN ON WEDNESDAY. WHEN YOU DO, YOU MAY LOAD NEW HEADERS
> >>> ONCE, AND RESPOND TO THE POSTS THAT ALREADY EXISTED AT THE TIME THAT
> >>> YOU DID SO. THEN YOU MUST WAIT UNTIL THURSDAY BEFORE YOU MAY REFRESH
> >>> THE VIEW OF THE NEWSGROUP AGAIN, OR AT LEAST UNTIL YOU ARE PERMITTED
> >>> TO RESPOND TO POSTS THAT DID NOT EXIST YET.
Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest.
You're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > No, you're the stupid one.
>
> [insult deleted]
No, you're the stupid one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
bbo...@gmail.com
> *is* a "feedback loop"?
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
Feedback loops were explained recently in another thread.
> >> What I say in response to Arne is no skin off your nose.
>
> Actually, it is.
No, it is not.
> You have been [vicious insults deleted]
No, Arne has. And you have, albeit to a considerably lesser extent.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> [misquotes me]
Do not misquote me again. Your post contained supposed "quoted
material" that did not occur in the post that you followed up to nor
summarize material that did. That is incorrect. Stop being dishonest.
> You're doing a great job, Arne.
Do not encourage that little turd.
> See if you could do something about that world peace thing, though.
He can start by stopping making war himself, against me or anyone
else, and being generally more polite. Not to mention more on-topic.
bbo...@gmail.com
> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
> > NO!!! YOU WILL STOP THIS NOW AND ALLOW ME TO CONTINUE WITH MY OTHER
> > TASKS. YOU ARE ONLY PERMITTED ONE ROUND OF REPLIES PER 24 HOURS. THIS
> > IS TO ALLOW YOUR OPPONENT TIME FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE, AND YOU TIME
> > FOR YOURS.
>
No, you're the slow one.
None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
all true.
> > THESE RULES ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PARTICIPANTS, TO ALLOW THEM TO
> > SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME ON OTHER ACTIVITIES.
>
> [implied insults deleted]
No! None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me
are at all true.
bbo...@gmail.com
> By the way, aren't you hitting refresh just as frequently?
I'm the one under attack, you moron! I not only have a right to, I
actually HAVE to, just to defend myself!
> In any case, I'm guessing he has his newsreader set to download new
> newsgroup headers on a... looks like a 5 minute interval? I'm still at
> 10 minutes, myself.
That is incorrect. Neither of you should be having it auto-refresh at
all. (Quite clearly, having it do so leads to trouble!)
bbo...@gmail.com
> Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> > How many people have already killed this thread in their newsreader?
>
Mike Schilling
> On Dec 1, 8:38 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
> [snip]
>
> DO NOT POST IMMEDIATELY AFTER I POST! WAIT 24 HOURS FIRST!
>
>>> My name is Jerry.
>>
>> You stated that earlier.
>
> Yes, I did. Why are you incorrectly ignoring that?
OK, Jerry. I understand that you say you're not Paul. We all agree
that you're Twisted, though, right? Given that you sound exactly like
him and share gmail addresses with him, that seems pretty clear.
Mike Schilling
> On Dec 1, 9:50 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> NO!!!
>
> Someone tell me how to shut this piece of shit up so I can get some
> frigging rest for one frigging night!!!
Easy, really. Go to your newsreader's menuitem for "unsubscribe" and
click it.
John W Kennedy
> On Dec 1, 9:40 pm, John W Kennedy <jwke...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> fenco...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 8:23 pm, Lew <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>>>>Captain Koloth wrote:
>>>>> Nope, and only a yIntagh repeats the dishonorable insults of a taHqeq
>>>>> towards a Klingon!
>>>> Syllogism:
>>>> Klingons are fictional creatures.
>>>> You are not fictional.
>>>> Therefore, you are not a Klingon.
>>>> It's called logic, Paul.
>>>My name is Jerry.
>> I thought it was "Koloth".
> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
That seems a rather ill-judged position on your part. If you're going to
tell lies, I would think that you would like to be reminded of them, so
that you can keep your subsequent lies consistent. So far you've already
accidentally let it slip that "Jerry", "nebulous99", "Captain Koloth",
and "fencore1" are all the same person, to wit, you, Paul.
> No, you're the liar.
But if you are not "Koloth", why are you answering messages addressed to
him?
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
Are you ashamed of being "Captain Koloth"? The first step is to admit
that you have a problem, you know.
>>> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
>>> all true.
>> Hmmmm.... So, "You are not fictional," is an insult in your estimation.
>> You evidently suffer from an interesting and, I believe, unique
>> manifestation of the Cotard delusion.
> No, you're the crazy one.
But I'm not the one claiming to be a fictional character.
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
It seems that you are unhappy with either the idea of being real or
being fictional. You know, I once wrote a short-short story involving
someone whom I described as a Professor of Abnormal Ontology. I'm sure
he would have loved you. If /he/ had existed, of course.
>> The difficulty, of course, is that this makes you singularly vulnerable
>> to Descarte's axiom in its contrapositive restatement: if you do not
>> exist, you do not think.
> No, you're the stupid one.
Since the apodosis depends on the protasis, you seem once again to be
arguing based on the assumption of your own non-existence. Don't keep
something like half a billion Buddhists waiting -- is Nirvana all it's
cracked up to be? What is the answer to Hamlet's great question? Did
Sartre get it, or was he full of merde?
> None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at
> all true.
But I've done nothing but point out what you are implying about yourself.
>> As Lewis Carroll so wisely remarked of the New Belfry at Christ Church,
>> Oxford, as seen in perspective view, "Would that it /were/ at the point
>> of vanishing!"
> None of the nasty things that any of you have ever said or implied
> about me are at all true.
But in purple, you're stunning!
--
John W. Kennedy
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and
Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes.
The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being
corrected."
-- G. K. Chesterton
fenc...@gmail.com
wrote:
NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
> > Someone tell me how to shut this piece of shit up so I can get some
> > frigging rest for one frigging night!!!
>
> Easy, really. Go to your newsreader's menuitem for "unsubscribe" and
> click it.
Your pathetic efforts to trick me are futile. Obviously that would not
stop Arne from continuing to tell other people dangerously incorrect
things about me. Indeed, it would leave him to do so unopposed,
precisely the opposite of the correct outcome.
You really should try harder not to fall into the trap of believing
your own propaganda, particularly the part of it that asserts my IQ to
be in the sub-basement somewhere. It results in you severely
underestimating me.
Meanwhile, I continue to inform people that none of the nasty things
Mike Schilling
> On Dec 2, 2:35 am, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 9:50 pm, Arne Vajhøj <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> NO FEEDBACK LOOPS!
>
>>> Someone tell me how to shut this piece of shit up so I can get some
>>> frigging rest for one frigging night!!!
>>
>> Easy, really. Go to your newsreader's menuitem for "unsubscribe" and
>> click it.
>
> Your pathetic efforts to trick me are futile. Obviously that would not
> stop Arne from continuing to tell other people dangerously incorrect
> things about me.
Your goal was to get some rest. If suspecting that someone, somewhere in
the world might be criticizing you stops you from sleeping, there's not much
anyone can do to help you.
Joshua Cranmer
> Your pathetic efforts to trick me are futile. Obviously that would not
> stop Arne from continuing to tell other people dangerously incorrect
> things about me. Indeed, it would leave him to do so unopposed,
> precisely the opposite of the correct outcome.
Out of curiosity, have you ever heard of the spotlight effect, Twisted?