http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html

Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
now says he feels it was not appropriate.

My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
the anti-Schildt cause.

I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length, he
did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.

This issue is not going away.

On Sun, 30 May 2010 20:15:31 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
>Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
>now says he feels it was not appropriate.

Ha, ha. 


>My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
>the anti-Schildt cause.

>I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
>the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
>email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length, he
>did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
>said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
>shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
>This issue is not going away.

Yes, you'll harass his mother, try to get his publisher to repudiate
him, call him a faggot and digital Maoist, anonymously vandalize his
page in Wikipedia. One thing you won't do is get published in Risks
again.

On May 31, 9:10=A0pm, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Har...@kfc.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 20:15:31 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
>
> <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> >Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> >now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> Ha, ha.

Knew you'd love it, given your emotional age, Bubba. Hope it made your
day. Pity, of course, that I was the one to publish the fact here.
Rather stole your thunder, I shouldn't wonder.
>
> >My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> >the anti-Schildt cause.
> >I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> >the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> >email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length, he
> >did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
> >said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> >shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> >This issue is not going away.
>
> Yes, you'll harass his mother, try to get his publisher to repudiate
> him, call him a faggot and digital Maoist, anonymously vandalize his
> page in Wikipedia. One thing you won't do is get published in Risks
> again.

I wouldn't do any of those things, and you know it.

Peter Seebach linked to his Mom on his blog, and I discovered that she
wants to deprive minority kids of schooling so that middle class kids
can get out of survey classes. I did not submit any comments to her
public site. Instead, I found what I consider to be an explanation of
Peter's bizarre lack of actual educational qualifications.

I don't think Peter Neumann will ever stoop to your level, in which
the only response is, in actuality, "fuck you, faggot", or metrical
verse.

I might consider him unwittingly complicit as was Zhou En-Lai in a
phenomenon of which he may be unaware; in my experience, computer
science people agree with Thatcher and think there's no such thing as
society.

I don't anonymously vandalize jack shit on wikipedia, and you know
this, faggot. Instead I sign my posts "Edward G. Nilges". When I sock
puppeted I did so on the recommendation of a wikipedia editor who was
vandalizing me. In actuality, many respected wikipedia editors appear
to use sock puppets, because deviance is the norm, jerk face.

I do not know and do not much care whether I appear in Risks again. I
will probably submit replies for moderation. I have requested a phone
conversation with Peter to clear up this new issue, since I think he's
not aware that to publish his retraction appears to me to be deeply
offensive, very discourteous, and extremely cowardly.

In article 
<73ffe6fb-1ef0-4b80-aff1-bf2727c54d28@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> in my experience, computer science people agree with Thatcher
> and think there's no such thing as society.

Except that she didn't say that.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:54:00 +0100, Tim Streater
<timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:

>In article 
><73ffe6fb-1ef0-4b80-aff1-bf2727c54d28@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> in my experience, computer science people agree with Thatcher
>> and think there's no such thing as society.
>
>Except that she didn't say that.

There are two separate verb phrases there.  Computer science
people agreeing with Thatcher and computer science people
thinking there's no such thing as society are separate claims.  


Richard Harter, cri@tiac.net
http://home.tiac.net/~cri, http://www.varinoma.com
It's not much to ask of the universe that it be fair;
it's not much to ask but it just doesn't happen.

In article <4c03dbfe.587396687@text.giganews.com>,
 cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) wrote:

> On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:54:00 +0100, Tim Streater
> <timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:
> 
> >In article 
> ><73ffe6fb-1ef0-4b80-aff1-bf2727c54d28@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> in my experience, computer science people agree with Thatcher
> >> and think there's no such thing as society.
> >
> >Except that she didn't say that.
> 
> There are two separate verb phrases there.  Computer science
> people agreeing with Thatcher and computer science people
> thinking there's no such thing as society are separate claims.  

She said "There's no such thing as Society, there's only communities of 
interest". Which is actually what you find, when you look around.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 1, 12:11=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article <4c03dbfe.587396...@text.giganews.com>,
> =A0c...@tiac.net (Richard Harter) wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 31 May 2010 15:54:00 +0100, Tim Streater
> > <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>
> > >In article
> > ><73ffe6fb-1ef0-4b80-aff1-bf2727c54...@s1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > >spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >> in my experience, computer science people agree with Thatcher
> > >> and think there's no such thing as society.
>
> > >Except that she didn't say that.
>
> > There are two separate verb phrases there. =A0Computer science
> > people agreeing with Thatcher and computer science people
> > thinking there's no such thing as society are separate claims. =A0
>
> She said "There's no such thing as Society, there's only communities of
> interest". Which is actually what you find, when you look around.
>
> --
> Tim
>
> "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines impose=
d,
> nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" =A0-- =A0Bill of Rights 1689

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher

"They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no
such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there
are families. And no government can do anything except through people,
and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after
ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got
the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations."

Which was completely bonkers. There is such a thing as society. The
Greater London Council organized the Marathon of 1983 which I
completed. It was real...until Thatcher destroyed it. Also, we're
supposed to love our neighbor as ourselves, not after we're finished
eating.

However, computer nerds love this kind of shit, in my experience. It
justifies their lack of social skills when young, and utter lack of
decency later.

On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> now says he feels it was not appropriate.

thanks for the excellent news!!

Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based on
this mistake.

> My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> the anti-Schildt cause.

or people opposed to ranting lunacy... (BTW I wasn't one of them)


> I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length,

it *was* very long

> he
> did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
> said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.

well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
a point. I don't agree that you have a point, but the general
principle that private individulas might suffer from bad things on the
internet is fine. You do realise you are doing Schildt no favours by
constantly banging on about this?


> This issue is not going away.

pity poor schildt.

On May 30, 11:15=A0pm, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> the anti-Schildt cause.
>
> I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length, he
> did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
> said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> This issue is not going away.

Who is Schildt? What is Shibboleths?

On 2010-05-31, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Harlan@kfc.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 20:15:31 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
><spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html

>>Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
>>now says he feels it was not appropriate.

> Ha, ha. 

I don't see anything particularly funny here.  Amusing, perhaps.

>>My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
>>the anti-Schildt cause.

Nilges, habitually spamming people and threatening to bombard them with
emailed demands, assumes other people do the same.

I don't really care either way about Schildt, though, so the fact that it
would never even have crossed my mind to complain about that post is probably
irrelevant.  It struck me as, perhaps tenuously, related to a real risk
that users of computers face.  It was also an excellent illustration of
the problems inherent in accepting reputation claims from an internet source.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 2010-06-01, iC and iC++ <mahdert@gmail.com> wrote:
> Who is Schildt?

Schildt is a writer who has written a great number of books on C; those I
have examined have been of poor quality, both in terms of egregious mistakes
and in terms of significant omissions.

> What is Shibboleths?

There was a point in the distant past where there existed people who might
want to infiltrate another tribe's territory.  Their languages were different
enough that the infiltrators could not pronounce certain phonemes correctly,
not having grown up with them, and asking someone to say "shibboleth" (well,
the word we now transliterate that way) was a reliable way to detect such
infiltrators.

The term is now generally used to refer to an arbitrary test for community
membership.  Nilges often asserts that Schildt's errors are merely violations
of shibboleths, rather than genuine errors.  However, a quick spin through
a compiler shows that this is incorrect, and Schildt's errors really are
serious errors in both his code and his explanations of C.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On Jun 2, 6:02=A0am, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2010-06-01, iC and iC++ <mahd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Who is Schildt?
>
> Schildt is a writer who has written a great number of books on C; those I

and other topics.

> have examined have been of poor quality, both in terms of egregious mista=
kes
> and in terms of significant omissions.

You haven't adequately reviewed them nor have you the professional
standing in the absence of academic work to make this judgement, even
if it is true. Please stop: you look like a rather malicious fool.
>
> > What is Shibboleths?
>
> There was a point in the distant past where there existed people who migh=
t
> want to infiltrate another tribe's territory. =A0Their languages were dif=
ferent
> enough that the infiltrators could not pronounce certain phonemes correct=
ly,
> not having grown up with them, and asking someone to say "shibboleth" (we=
ll,
> the word we now transliterate that way) was a reliable way to detect such
> infiltrators.
>
> The term is now generally used to refer to an arbitrary test for communit=
y
> membership. =A0Nilges often asserts that Schildt's errors are merely viol=
ations
> of shibboleths, rather than genuine errors. =A0However, a quick spin thro=
ugh
> a compiler shows that this is incorrect, and Schildt's errors really are
> serious errors in both his code and his explanations of C.
>
We've shown you're wrong. You want C to adhere strictly to the
standards of Linux insofar as you know them, but it massively predated
Linux.

People use Schildt effectively because learning is interactive in such
a way that the mistakes of a good teacher are more instructive than
the truths of a bad teacher. You et al. concede that Schildt is a
clear writer, and this means he contributes to understanding. Although
his books aren't great, I'd rather read him than your garbage on C.
> -s
> --
> Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. =A0Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@see=
bs.nethttp://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny picturesht=
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On Jun 1, 10:59=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> thanks for the excellent news!!
>
> Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
> post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based on
> this mistake.

I am corresponding with Neumann with my concerns as we write. You
know, he rejects unanswered 97% of Risks submissions and messages, yet
I've had about 30 pieces published, so I don't think I've been
ranting. Maybe that sound is you?

He feels he needs to be fair to the many people who, unaccustomed to
anything but the most overspecialized and narrow material on the job,
think the post was off topic...not computer-related, despite the fact
that you kinda need a computer to destroy a person's reputation
through wikipedia.

I have written him, saying that the problem is this "focus", this over-
specialization, we learn in school, in a dysfunctional educational
system, and in consequence, merely lively prose and research out of
scale with the minimally acceptable is usually considered off topic.

I have said he may publish my email in Risks 26.07 and 26.08.

"Focus" shouldn't mean "ignoring basic decency and respect for
others". But it usually does, doesn't it?
>
> > My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> > the anti-Schildt cause.
>
> or people opposed to ranting lunacy... (BTW I wasn't one of them)
>
> > I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> > the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> > email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length,
>
> it *was* very long
>
> > he
> > did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
> > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
> a point. I don't agree that you have a point, but the general
> principle that private individulas might suffer from bad things on the
> internet is fine. You do realise you are doing Schildt no favours by
> constantly banging on about this?
>
> > This issue is not going away.
>
> pity poor schildt.

In article 
<ae3d0cbf-e224-4952-8357-3a0ae8e9286a@r5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> People use Schildt effectively because learning is interactive in such
> a way that the mistakes of a good teacher are more instructive than
> the truths of a bad teacher.

Oh, good attempt at spin, Spinny! Well done - you should go far.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On 2010-06-02, Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article 
><ae3d0cbf-e224-4952-8357-3a0ae8e9286a@r5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>  spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> People use Schildt effectively because learning is interactive in such
>> a way that the mistakes of a good teacher are more instructive than
>> the truths of a bad teacher.

> Oh, good attempt at spin, Spinny! Well done - you should go far.

It's a nice effort, but it's totally untrue.

1.  There's actually not much supporting the theory that Schildt is a
"good teacher".  His books seem very approachable, but we've got no
examples on the record of people who have demonstrated themselves to
be good programmers, and who ascribe their success to learning from
Schildt.  We do have a number of good programmers who ascribe difficulties
they struggled to overcome to Schildt, and a number of bad programmers
who think they learned a lot from Schildt.
2.  What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher can
point them out and explain why they are mistakes.  This usually
requires an interactive environment.  It also requires a willingness to
admit that they were mistakes.
3.  It is at best irrelevant, because examples have been offered of books
which are both accurate and good at teaching.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 01 Jun 2010 21:59:30 GMT, Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> wrote:

>On 2010-05-31, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Harlan@kfc.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 May 2010 20:15:31 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
>><spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
>>>Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
>>>now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
>> Ha, ha. 
>
>I don't see anything particularly funny here.  Amusing, perhaps.

An expression of Schadenfreude, (as expressed by Nelson in the
Simpsons).
 
It's hilarious in the context that Nilges has been talking up his
"Article about Herb Schildt accepted at comp.risks" as a validation of
his thesis:

On Sun, 9 May 2010 04:47:44 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.06.html#subj12
>This shall shortly also be on the Digest, to where people may respond
>to it. However, responses are competently moderated.

He can't follow his instinct to call Neumann a digital Maoist mobster
or whatever after that, but give him a few weeks and when he realises
Neumann won't relent, he'll be abusing Neumann as roundly as he does
you, me, Jimmy Wales, and anyone else who fails to fall in line, or
worse, contradicts him.









>>>My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
>>>the anti-Schildt cause.
>
>Nilges, habitually spamming people and threatening to bombard them with
>emailed demands, assumes other people do the same.
>
>I don't really care either way about Schildt, though, so the fact that it
>would never even have crossed my mind to complain about that post is probably
>irrelevant.  It struck me as, perhaps tenuously, related to a real risk
>that users of computers face.  It was also an excellent illustration of
>the problems inherent in accepting reputation claims from an internet source.
>
>-s

On Jun 2, 2:27=A0pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2010-06-02, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> ><ae3d0cbf-e224-4952-8357-3a0ae8e92...@r5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > =A0spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> People use Schildt effectively because learning is interactive in such
> >> a way that the mistakes of a good teacher are more instructive than
> >> the truths of a bad teacher.
> > Oh, good attempt at spin, Spinny! Well done - you should go far.
>
> It's a nice effort, but it's totally untrue.
>
> 1. =A0There's actually not much supporting the theory that Schildt is a
> "good teacher". =A0His books seem very approachable, but we've got no
> examples on the record of people who have demonstrated themselves to

Who's we? How many Microsoft programmers do you know that can stand
you?

> be good programmers, and who ascribe their success to learning from
> Schildt. =A0We do have a number of good programmers who ascribe difficult=
ies
> they struggled to overcome to Schildt, and a number of bad programmers
> who think they learned a lot from Schildt.

You're not a good programmer. You make incredibly stupid mistakes,
such as off by one in a strlen when you had "all the time in the
world" to test and review before you posted it. You claimed that a
tool replaced %p when it replaced &*. You use fallthrough in switch.
You declare preprocessor variables and then not use them in 50% of
cases. You fail to initialize variables.

Your error rate is incredibly high. It was 100% in the strlen and we
can find far more errors in your code than you have found in Schildt.



> 2. =A0What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher can
> point them out and explain why they are mistakes. =A0This usually
> requires an interactive environment. =A0It also requires a willingness to
> admit that they were mistakes.

There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake for the SAME
reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth and is
constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free of
bugs". Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs you
point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.

> 3. =A0It is at best irrelevant, because examples have been offered of boo=
ks
> which are both accurate and good at teaching.
>
> -s
> --
> Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. =A0Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@see=
bs.nethttp://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny picturesht=
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

In article 
<d3a189c5-4aea-426c-8fe3-6d9e92ecf0a8@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 2, 2:27�pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:

> > 2. �What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher can
> > point them out and explain why they are mistakes. �This usually
> > requires an interactive environment. �It also requires a willingness to
> > admit that they were mistakes.
> 
> There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake for the SAME
> reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
> That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth and is
> constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free of
> bugs". Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs you
> point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.

Was this reply to Seebs typed by a human or some of those 
monkeys-at-keyboards whose output will eventually include the works of 
the world's finest authors?

Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've 
seen in a coon's age!

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On 2 June, 05:07, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 10:59=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> > On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> > > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> > thanks for the excellent news!!
>
> > Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
> > post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based on
> > this mistake.
>
> I am corresponding with Neumann with my concerns as we write. You
> know, he rejects unanswered 97% of Risks submissions and messages,

I'm amazed! Are those genuine submissions are does he get spammed?

> yet
> I've had about 30 pieces published, so I don't think I've been
> ranting. Maybe that sound is you?

I didn't say your other RISKS posts were rants. I said that one was.
You'll be pleased to hear you've had 29 more posts accepted to RISKS
than I.

> He feels he needs to be fair to the many people who, unaccustomed to
> anything but the most overspecialized and narrow material on the job,
> think the post was off topic...not computer-related, despite the fact
> that you kinda need a computer to destroy a person's reputation
> through wikipedia.

he said that or you "read between the lines"?  I'd say destroying a
reputation on Wikipedia (I'm not agreeing that this is so in this
case) is indeed computer related.


> I have written him, saying that the problem is this "focus", this over-
> specialization, we learn in school, in a dysfunctional educational
> system, and in consequence, merely lively prose and research out of
> scale with the minimally acceptable is usually considered off topic.
>
> I have said he may publish my email in Risks 26.07 and 26.08.
>
> "Focus" shouldn't mean "ignoring basic decency and respect for
> others". But it usually does, doesn't it?

no not necessarily.


<snip>

On 2010-06-02, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Harlan@kfc.com> wrote:
> An expression of Schadenfreude, (as expressed by Nelson in the
> Simpsons).

Oh!  I didn't see the <nelson>...</nelson> tags.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 2010-06-02, Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article 
><d3a189c5-4aea-426c-8fe3-6d9e92ecf0a8@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>  spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 2, 2:27�pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
>> > 2. �What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher can
>> > point them out and explain why they are mistakes. �This usually
>> > requires an interactive environment. �It also requires a willingness to
>> > admit that they were mistakes.

>> There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake

Amusingly, this is his dodge to get around a criticism of a previous post
in which he insisted that there were in fact mistakes.

>> for the SAME
>> reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
>> That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth

That is to say:  Nilges is completely obsessed with whether people like
him, and since caring whether things are technically correct would make
him look bad, he has to reject it.

>> and is
>> constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free of
>> bugs".

I would say that useful usually implies reliable, and something which is
reliable and safe is probably "free of bugs" in a practical sense.

>> Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs you
>> point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.

This is an interesting allegation, but not particularly true; many of the
things pointed out in Schildt's code happen pretty much constantly in the
real world.

> Was this reply to Seebs typed by a human or some of those 
> monkeys-at-keyboards whose output will eventually include the works of 
> the world's finest authors?

> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've 
> seen in a coon's age!

It's not really a non-sequitur, except in the usual way that his impressive
NPD makes him completely immune to the concept of truth as a statement about
the world rather than a statement about his personal importance.

He's claimed that Schildt's books aren't bad.  He tried the tactic of
claiming that, because Schildt is a good teacher, the mistakes are
instructive.  When I said something that made him not feel like this
argument was winning, he immediately switched to a set of "beliefs" (I
use the term loosely) under which it was irrelevant.

The sole goal here is for him to experience the "win" of feeling as though,
for each thing someone has said that he dislikes, he has said something
which, if it were true, would make them wrong.  He is not in a place to
comprehend the notion that it matters that his defenses are mutually
exclusive.  There's no semantic content here; there's no underlying set of
beliefs about whether any given program is buggy or not, or what that
would imply.  There's only a general assertion that other people are wrong.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On Jun 1, 9:07=A0pm, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 10:59=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> > > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> > thanks for the excellent news!!
>
> > Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
> > post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based on
> > this mistake.
>
> I am corresponding with Neumann with my concerns as we write. You
> know, he rejects unanswered 97% of Risks submissions and messages, yet
> I've had about 30 pieces published, so I don't think I've been
> ranting. Maybe that sound is you?
>
> He feels he needs to be fair to the many people who, unaccustomed to
> anything but the most overspecialized and narrow material on the job,
> think the post was off topic...not computer-related, despite the fact
> that you kinda need a computer to destroy a person's reputation
> through wikipedia.
>
> I have written him, saying that the problem is this "focus", this over-
> specialization, we learn in school, in a dysfunctional educational
> system, and in consequence, merely lively prose and research out of
> scale with the minimally acceptable is usually considered off topic.
>
> I have said he may publish my email in Risks 26.07 and 26.08.
>
> "Focus" shouldn't mean "ignoring basic decency and respect for
> others". But it usually does, doesn't it?
>
>
>
>
>
> > > My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> > > the anti-Schildt cause.
>
> > or people opposed to ranting lunacy... (BTW I wasn't one of them)
>
> > > I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> > > the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> > > email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length,
>
> > it *was* very long
>
> > > he
> > > did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. =
I
> > > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based o=
n
> > > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> > well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
> > a point. I don't agree that you have a point, but the general
> > principle that private individulas might suffer from bad things on the
> > internet is fine. You do realise you are doing Schildt no favours by
> > constantly banging on about this?
>
> > > This issue is not going away.
>


What is so special about Risks?

On Jun 1, 7:59=A0am, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

<random snippage>

> > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of

Does anyone else find it ironic (or even true) that simply knowing the
_meaning_ of the word "shibboleth" is probably a, well, shibboleth
identifying readers of clc?  =3D)

I know _I_ didn't know the word until coming here. Hmmm, dare I say
that
I may have actually learned something from you-know-who?

Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> writes:
> On Jun 1, 9:07 pm, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[65 lines deleted]
>
>
> What is so special about Risks?

Chad, please don't feed the troll.  If you must respond, please don't
quote the entire article.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Chad wrote:
<snip>
> 
> What is so special about Risks?

It's a moderated group. Therefore, in theory at least, you have to be 
able to write in a medium other than crayon to stand a fighting chance 
of having your articles approved. In practice, however, one or two 
crayon masterpieces do get through, to the eternal delight of their 
authors and the chagrin of the moderator and his readership.

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

crisgoogle wrote:
> On Jun 1, 7:59 am, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 31 May, 04:15, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> <random snippage>
> 
>>> said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
>>> shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>> well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
> 
> Does anyone else find it ironic (or even true) that simply knowing the
> _meaning_ of the word "shibboleth" is probably a, well, shibboleth
> identifying readers of clc?  =)

No, it isn't. I knew the meaning of "shibboleth" in the 1970s, before 
comp.lang.c (or its precursor) even existed.

> I know _I_ didn't know the word until coming here. Hmmm, dare I say
> that
> I may have actually learned something from you-know-who?

Only because you weren't paying attention in school RE lessons. :-)

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

On Jun 3, 12:13=A0am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Chad wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > What is so special about Risks?
>
> It's a moderated group. Therefore, in theory at least, you have to be
> able to write in a medium other than crayon to stand a fighting chance
> of having your articles approved. In practice, however, one or two
> crayon masterpieces do get through, to the eternal delight of their
> authors and the chagrin of the moderator and his readership.

Sorry...your rather snide implication is wrong. Neumann accepts 3% of
posts submitted (he has told me this today, in an email exchange on
his apology for posting my Schildt article). He has accepted 100% of
my submissions since I started submitting: cf.
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/php/risks/search.php?query=3Dnilges: don't
count the replies to me: there are about 30 posts from me, either new
articles or replies.

I have asked Peter to reconsider the apology, informing him that the
large number of protests was probably cybernetic mob action. He may or
may not. There may or may not be a discussion of the facts in the
Schildt article, or a meta-discussion of the role narrowness of focus
plays in keeping techies in line.

The article was long, because I need to argue for a novel case: that
ordinary working people who accomplish far more than you slobs need to
be protected against mob actions such as CTCN.
>
> --
> Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
> Email: -http://www. +rjh@
> "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
> Sig line vacant - apply within

On Jun 2, 11:50=A0pm, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> Chad <cdal...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Jun 1, 9:07=A0pm,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [65 lines deleted]
>
> > What is so special about Risks?
>
> Chad, please don't feed the troll. =A0If you must respond, please don't
> quote the entire article.

"Please don't recognize the (Jew, Negro, Arab, Asian, troll)".

"The passengers [of United Flight 93 on Sep 11] were heroes. The
passengers [of Turkish vessel Mavi Marmora, who defended women and
children below decks] were just animals."

"Don't feed the troll."

"You [philosophy professor Douglas Giles] are instructed hereby not to
use the word 'Zionism' or to discuss 'Zionism' in your class in World
Religions. The Palestinians are animals." - Chair of department,
Roosevelt University, Chicago, 2006

"Don't feed the troll."

"'Look! A negro!'" - Franz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth

"Don't feed the troll."

"He who is reluctant to recognize me opposes me." - Franz Fanon
>
> --
> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org =A0<http://www.ghoti.net/~=
kst>
> Nokia
> "We must do something. =A0This is something. =A0Therefore, we must do thi=
s."
> =A0 =A0 -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

On Jun 2, 11:43=A0pm, crisgoogle <crisgoo...@telus.net> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 7:59=A0am, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 31 May, 04:15,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> <random snippage>
>
> > > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based o=
n
> > > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> > well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
>
> Does anyone else find it ironic (or even true) that simply knowing the
> _meaning_ of the word "shibboleth" is probably a, well, shibboleth
> identifying readers of clc? =A0=3D)
>
> I know _I_ didn't know the word until coming here. Hmmm, dare I say
> that
> I may have actually learned something from you-know-who?

I was the first to use the word. Prior to 1987, I understood it,
rather vaguely, to mean an accepted belief or catchphrase of vaguely
Hebrew origin.

In 1987, I was demonstrating how to use the then-new Macintosh
Hypercard to Bill Howarth, a professor in Princeton's English
department. I was a programmer in Princeton's info centers.

I suggested to Professor Howarth that the teacher could use simple
scrolling and text animation in class to demonstrate how a poem should
be read.

I used Dylan Thomas' poem "A Refusal to Mourn the Death, by Fire, of a
Child in London":

Never until the mankind making
Bird beast and flower
Fathering and all humbling darkness
Tells with silence the last light breaking
And the still hour
Is come of the sea tumbling in harness

And I must enter again the round
Zion of the water bead
And the synagogue of the ear of corn...

Howarth explained that Thomas was thinking of the shibboleths, the
catch-phrases that we use in the face of tragedy, that the
"shibboleth" was the way you pronounced "ear of corn" in ancient
Israel, then, as now, a tribal friend or foe kind of place (tragically
so in view of the slaughter of activists by commandos last Monday).

I now use Visual Basic to teach poetry. I vastly prefer this to
sitting in Hooters listening to computer programmers, but perhaps
being nostalgic I come here.

On Jun 2, 11:14=A0pm, Chad <cdal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 9:07=A0pm,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 10:59=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On 31 May, 04:15,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > > > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. =
He
> > > > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> > > thanks for the excellent news!!
>
> > > Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
> > > post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based o=
n
> > > this mistake.
>
> > I am corresponding with Neumann with my concerns as we write. You
> > know, he rejects unanswered 97% of Risks submissions and messages, yet
> > I've had about 30 pieces published, so I don't think I've been
> > ranting. Maybe that sound is you?
>
> > He feels he needs to be fair to the many people who, unaccustomed to
> > anything but the most overspecialized and narrow material on the job,
> > think the post was off topic...not computer-related, despite the fact
> > that you kinda need a computer to destroy a person's reputation
> > through wikipedia.
>
> > I have written him, saying that the problem is this "focus", this over-
> > specialization, we learn in school, in a dysfunctional educational
> > system, and in consequence, merely lively prose and research out of
> > scale with the minimally acceptable is usually considered off topic.
>
> > I have said he may publish my email in Risks 26.07 and 26.08.
>
> > "Focus" shouldn't mean "ignoring basic decency and respect for
> > others". But it usually does, doesn't it?
>
> > > > My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> > > > the anti-Schildt cause.
>
> > > or people opposed to ranting lunacy... (BTW I wasn't one of them)
>
> > > > I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> > > > the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> > > > email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length,
>
> > > it *was* very long
>
> > > > he
> > > > did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate=
.. I
> > > > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based=
 on
> > > > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> > > well take the shibboleth word out and you *might* have a smidgeion of
> > > a point. I don't agree that you have a point, but the general
> > > principle that private individulas might suffer from bad things on th=
e
> > > internet is fine. You do realise you are doing Schildt no favours by
> > > constantly banging on about this?
>
> > > > This issue is not going away.
>
> What is so special about Risks?

Peter Neumann, unlike Peter Seebach (the moderator of
comp.lang.c.moderated) diligently reviews all posts that pass a spam
filter. He then accepts for publication 3% of all posts that pass.

In other words: comp.risks is free of the toxic garbage we see here.

On Jun 2, 10:10=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On 2 June, 05:07,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 1, 10:59=A0pm, Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com>
> > > On 31 May, 04:15,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > > > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. =
He
> > > > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> > > thanks for the excellent news!!
>
> > > Even you must have thought your derranged rant was an odd thing to
> > > post on RISKS. I was considering ceasing to read RISKS simply based o=
n
> > > this mistake.
>
> > I am corresponding with Neumann with my concerns as we write. You
> > know, he rejects unanswered 97% of Risks submissions and messages,
>
> I'm amazed! Are those genuine submissions are does he get spammed?

They are submissions that have passed an automated spam filter.
>
> > yet
> > I've had about 30 pieces published, so I don't think I've been
> > ranting. Maybe that sound is you?
>
> I didn't say your other RISKS posts were rants. I said that one was.

Fair enough. However, read it again.

Dennis Miller was a rather unfunny Saturday Night Live comedian. He is
now rich and Republican. He introduced the hip meme that ANY criticism
of the way things are is a useless rant, which turns "satire" onto
itself. SNL does this because any REAL criticism of ACTUAL power
(independent of the tweedledee and tweedledum major parties and the
personal tics of their candidates) angers sponsors.

> You'll be pleased to hear you've had 29 more posts accepted to RISKS
> than I.

Tickled pink.

It's about 30. Go to http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/php/risks/search.php?query=3D=
Nilges.
Discount the approximately seven that are replies to me.


>
> > He feels he needs to be fair to the many people who, unaccustomed to
> > anything but the most overspecialized and narrow material on the job,
> > think the post was off topic...not computer-related, despite the fact
> > that you kinda need a computer to destroy a person's reputation
> > through wikipedia.
>
> he said that or you "read between the lines"? =A0I'd say destroying a
> reputation on Wikipedia (I'm not agreeing that this is so in this
> case) is indeed computer related.

Submit to risks stating your belief and the reasons why, by all
means.

>
> > I have written him, saying that the problem is this "focus", this over-
> > specialization, we learn in school, in a dysfunctional educational
> > system, and in consequence, merely lively prose and research out of
> > scale with the minimally acceptable is usually considered off topic.
>
> > I have said he may publish my email in Risks 26.07 and 26.08.
>
> > "Focus" shouldn't mean "ignoring basic decency and respect for
> > others". But it usually does, doesn't it?
>
> no not necessarily.

"The executioners face is always well hid" - Bob Dylan
>
> <snip>

On Jun 2, 8:45=A0pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <d3a189c5-4aea-426c-8fe3-6d9e92ecf...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> =A0spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 2, 2:27=A0pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> > > 2. =A0What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher=
 can
> > > point them out and explain why they are mistakes. =A0This usually
> > > requires an interactive environment. =A0It also requires a willingnes=
s to
> > > admit that they were mistakes.
>
> > There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake for the SAME
> > reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
> > That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth and is
> > constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free of
> > bugs". Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs you
> > point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.
>
> Was this reply to Seebs typed by a human or some of those
> monkeys-at-keyboards whose output will eventually include the works of
> the world's finest authors?

No. It's merely the case that you were carefully educated to be unable
to either read or write a sentence of a high complexity, so as to make
you a safe worker bee.
>
> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
> seen in a coon's age!

You're also a fucking racist asshole.

>
> --
> Tim
>
> "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines impose=
d,
> nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" =A0-- =A0Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 1:49=A0am, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 11:50=A0pm, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>
> > Chad <cdal...@gmail.com> writes:
> > > On Jun 1, 9:07=A0pm,spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > [65 lines deleted]
>
> > > What is so special about Risks?
>
> > Chad, please don't feed the troll. =A0If you must respond, please don't
> > quote the entire article.
>
> "Please don't recognize the (Jew, Negro, Arab, Asian, troll)".
>
> "The passengers [of United Flight 93 on Sep 11] were heroes. The
> passengers [of Turkish vessel Mavi Marmora, who defended women and
> children below decks] were just animals."

Note: the Mavi Marmara (not Marmora) was the lead vessel in the Gaza
humanitarian mission. Last Monday, (31 May 2010) it was boarded by
Israeli commandos (trained killers) who used the fact that about 20
Palestinians tried to protect the activists, women and children below
decks with clubs and deck chairs. Between 14 and 20 activists were
killed in cold blood. The Turkish government has withdrawn its
ambassador to Israel. Turkey and Ireland, who have nationals on a new
relief mission on board the "Rachel Corrie", are considering
accompanying the RC with warships as it approaches the Gaza coast this
week.

In a moral sense, this is relevant to clc.
>
> "Don't feed the troll."
>
> "You [philosophy professor Douglas Giles] are instructed hereby not to
> use the word 'Zionism' or to discuss 'Zionism' in your class in World
> Religions. The Palestinians are animals." - Chair of department,
> Roosevelt University, Chicago, 2006
>
> "Don't feed the troll."
>
> "'Look! A negro!'" - Franz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth
>
> "Don't feed the troll."
>
> "He who is reluctant to recognize me opposes me." - Franz Fanon
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org =A0<http://www.ghoti.net=
/~kst>
> > Nokia
> > "We must do something. =A0This is something. =A0Therefore, we must do t=
his."
> > =A0 =A0 -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

In article 
<4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37c94@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 2, 8:45�pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <d3a189c5-4aea-426c-8fe3-6d9e92ecf...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > �spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 2, 2:27�pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> > > > 2. �What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the teacher can
> > > > point them out and explain why they are mistakes. �This usually
> > > > requires an interactive environment. �It also requires a willingness to
> > > > admit that they were mistakes.
> >
> > > There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake for the SAME
> > > reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
> > > That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth and is
> > > constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free of
> > > bugs". Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs you
> > > point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.
> >
> > Was this reply to Seebs typed by a human or some of those
> > monkeys-at-keyboards whose output will eventually include the works of
> > the world's finest authors?
> 
> No. It's merely the case that you were carefully educated to be unable
> to either read or write a sentence of a high complexity, so as to make
> you a safe worker bee.

Ah, content-free then. I thought as much.

> >
> > Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
> > seen in a coon's age!
> 
> You're also a fucking racist asshole.

You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn 
something (again), O ignorant lout.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Tim Streater wrote:
> In article 
> <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37c94@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
>  spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 2, 8:45 pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:

<snip>

>>> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
>>> seen in a coon's age!
>> You're also a fucking racist asshole.
> 
> You might learn something (again), O ignorant lout.

Are you a betting man, by any chance?

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

In article <T7qdnTY0yIy9JZvRnZ2dnUVZ7sMAAAAA@bt.com>,
 Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:

> Tim Streater wrote:
> > In article 
> > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37c94@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> >  spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Jun 2, 8:45 pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >>> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
> >>> seen in a coon's age!
> >> You're also a fucking racist asshole.
> > 
> > You might learn something (again), O ignorant lout.
> 
> Are you a betting man, by any chance?

I agree it's long odds.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 1, 1:12=A0pm, "iC and iC++" <mahd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 11:15=A0pm, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.07.html
>
> > Peter Neumann has apologized for publishing my article on Schildt. He
> > now says he feels it was not appropriate.
>
> > My guess is that he was spammed by protests from people invested in
> > the anti-Schildt cause.
>
> > I have sent a private email to Neumann, requesting a retraction "of
> > the retraction" based on the fact that while he sent me a private
> > email saying it would be published in 26.06 because of its length, he
> > did not make any negative comments as to whether it was appropriate. I
> > said that people like Schildt have a right not to be attacked based on
> > shibboleths, by ignorant individuals without standing.
>
> > This issue is not going away.
>
> Who is Schildt? - Hide quoted text -

Herb Schildt is a somewhat notorious author of a number of popular but
*deeply* flawed books on C and C++. Most of these works are marked
"Not Recommended" by the Association of C and C++ Users
(www.accu.org), and a number of other reviewers (including Peter
Seebach and Clive Feather) have pointed out some of the errors on
their own websites.  I had a copy of the 1st edition of "C: The
Complete Reference" back when I was in college (1986-89 timeframe)
that eventually wound up in the trash; many of the examples wouldn't
compile, and the ones that did had numerous runtime errors.  It didn't
help that he explained basic concepts incorrectly and confused DOS-
specific extensions with the core library.  The current (4th) edition
still has problems.

Despite this, Schildt is held up as an authority on C programming.  Go
figure.

> What is Shibboleths?

As is being used here, a shibboleth is a cultural feature that
identifies you as part of a group, usually in the form of a word or
phrase, although it could be something like a secret handshake or
other specific ritual.

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:57:10 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> Does anyone else find it ironic (or even true) that simply knowing the
>> _meaning_ of the word "shibboleth" is probably a, well, shibboleth
>> identifying readers of clc? �=)
>>
>> I know _I_ didn't know the word until coming here. Hmmm, dare I say
>> that
>> I may have actually learned something from you-know-who?
>
>I was the first to use the word. Prior to 1987, I understood it,
>rather vaguely, to mean an accepted belief or catchphrase of vaguely
>Hebrew origin.

You were "first to use that word"?

"Vaguely Hebrew origin"?

On the one hand, you assert you invented a word from the Old
Testament, that anyone who went to Sunday School or read a Gideon
Bible on a slow night should be familiar with, on the other you aren't
sure if it's Hebrew. Seems you are conflicted between your pretensions
to scholarship and the hatred of Israel that you randomly inject into
posts  here.

===============
Judges 12 
The Gileadites captured the fords of the Jordan leading to Ephraim,
and whenever a survivor of Ephraim said, "Let me cross over," the men
of Gilead asked him, "Are you an Ephraimite?" If he replied, "No,"
they said, "All right, say 'Shibboleth.' " He said, "Sibboleth,"
because he could not pronounce the word correctly, they seized him and
killed him at the fords of the Jordan. Forty-two thousand Ephraimites
were killed at that time.
==============

On Jun 3, 3:23=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> =A0spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 2, 8:45=A0pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <d3a189c5-4aea-426c-8fe3-6d9e92ecf...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > =A0spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 2, 2:27=A0pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> > > > > 2. =A0What makes a good teacher's mistakes useful is that the tea=
cher can
> > > > > point them out and explain why they are mistakes. =A0This usually
> > > > > requires an interactive environment. =A0It also requires a willin=
gness to
> > > > > admit that they were mistakes.
>
> > > > There is of course no such thing as an absolute mistake for the SAM=
E
> > > > reason "all code has bugs" (your code has far more than the usual).
> > > > That is: the correctness of any program is a social truth and is
> > > > constituted in whether it is useful and safe, not that it is "free =
of
> > > > bugs". Your code is useless and unsafe, whereas most of the bugs yo=
u
> > > > point out in Schildt are under circumstances that rarely occur.
>
> > > Was this reply to Seebs typed by a human or some of those
> > > monkeys-at-keyboards whose output will eventually include the works o=
f
> > > the world's finest authors?
>
> > No. It's merely the case that you were carefully educated to be unable
> > to either read or write a sentence of a high complexity, so as to make
> > you a safe worker bee.
>
> Ah, content-free then. I thought as much.
>
>
>
> > > Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I=
've
> > > seen in a coon's age!
>
> > You're also a fucking racist asshole.
>
> You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn
> something (again), O ignorant lout.

No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used it
because I told you.

Any time, any place, scumbag.
>
> --
> Tim
>
> "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines impose=
d,
> nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" =A0-- =A0Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 8:27=A0am, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Har...@kfc.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:57:10 -0700 (PDT),spinoza1111
>
> <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Does anyone else find it ironic (or even true) that simply knowing the
> >> _meaning_ of the word "shibboleth" is probably a, well, shibboleth
> >> identifying readers of clc? =A0=3D)
>
> >> I know _I_ didn't know the word until coming here. Hmmm, dare I say
> >> that
> >> I may have actually learned something from you-know-who?
>
> >I was the first to use the word. Prior to 1987, I understood it,
> >rather vaguely, to mean an accepted belief or catchphrase of vaguely
> >Hebrew origin.
>
> You were "first to use that word"?
>
> "Vaguely Hebrew origin"?
>
> On the one hand, you assert you invented a word from the Old
> Testament, that anyone who went to Sunday School or read a Gideon
> Bible on a slow night should be familiar with, on the other you aren't
> sure if it's Hebrew. Seems you are conflicted between your pretensions
> to scholarship and the hatred of Israel that you randomly inject into
> posts =A0here.
>
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> Judges 12
> The Gileadites captured the fords of the Jordan leading to Ephraim,
> and whenever a survivor of Ephraim said, "Let me cross over," the men
> of Gilead asked him, "Are you an Ephraimite?" If he replied, "No,"
> they said, "All right, say 'Shibboleth.' " He said, "Sibboleth,"
> because he could not pronounce the word correctly, they seized him and
> killed him at the fords of the Jordan. Forty-two thousand Ephraimites
> were killed at that time.
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

Guess I didn't read my bible enough. We Catholics prefer not to. Most
translations are garbage and like the British constitution, the Bible
is collection of incoherent documents.

Like the story of Onan the wanker, the story of the Shibboleth is
unedifying, and directly responsible for the murder of activists last
Monday on the Mavi Marmara.

Instead, I determined the MODERN meaning of "Shibboleth" from art
books long before my talk with professor Howarth.

Of course, Reading Rainbow, your reading comprehension again fails. I
meant, of course, that I was the first to use it in this newsgroup,
probably.

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:41:35 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:


>Guess I didn't read my bible enough. We Catholics prefer not to. Most
>translations are garbage and like the British constitution, the Bible
>is collection of incoherent documents.
>
>Like the story of Onan the wanker, the story of the Shibboleth is
>unedifying, and directly responsible for the murder of activists last
>Monday on the Mavi Marmara.
>
>Instead, I determined the MODERN meaning of "Shibboleth" from art
>books long before my talk with professor Howarth.

How odd that you so aggressively profess ignorance of this, when
otherwise you assert familiarity with classic literature. 

I guess Seebach was right, you really do just automatically choose the
opposite position of your enemies, regardless if it makes any sense,
in this case you are trying to distinguish yourself from Heathfield,
who you have abused for his religious beliefs.  


>Of course, Reading Rainbow, your reading comprehension again fails. I
>meant, of course, that I was the first to use it in this newsgroup,
>probably.

What you "meant" isn't what you said.

You may indeed be the first person to use that word in this newsgroup.
Well, big deal. 
But more interesting, I tried to do some research on word use in
Usenet.

Though Google has truly fucked up its search interface to the point
one can hardly trust it, it did find in Aug 3 1992:

>From what I've seen of his posts, if Ed Nilges said 
>George Bush was a liar--that is to say, if he made an empirically 
>verifiable statement about Bush's mendacity--I'd have to re-register 
>as a Republican. 
>
>Well, I wouldn't really go *that* far, but you get my point.  The Duke of 
>Nilgewater is probably your best advertisement.

Now that must make you feel proud.  While bullschildt is forgotten
except by a few scholars, we're all familiar with Nilgewater after
over 20 years of hard trolling.
 

spinoza1111 wrote:
> On Jun 3, 3:23 am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>> In article
>> <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
>>  spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 2, 8:45 pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:

<snip>

>>
>>>> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
>>>> seen in a coon's age!
>>> You're also a fucking racist asshole.
>> You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn
>> something (again), O ignorant lout.
> 
> No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur.

Tim, that's a fiver you owe me. He didn't learn nuffin.

<snip>

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

In article 
<ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636eae@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 3, 3:23�am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,

> > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn
> > something (again), O ignorant lout.
> 
> No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used it
> because I told you.

I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it would 
be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referred 
to while I was in the US.

We're not interested in your childish posturing here; go and learn 
something.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

In article <1ZSdnY6s5KhC-JrRnZ2dnUVZ8vWdnZ2d@bt.com>,
 Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:

> spinoza1111 wrote:
> > On Jun 3, 3:23 am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> >>  spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Jun 2, 8:45 pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >>
> >>>> Spinny's burblings here are the best example of a non-sequitur that I've
> >>>> seen in a coon's age!
> >>> You're also a fucking racist asshole.
> >> You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn
> >> something (again), O ignorant lout.
> > 
> > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur.
> 
> Tim, that's a fiver you owe me. He didn't learn nuffin.

Ah, knickers!

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Colonel Harlan Sanders wrote:

<snip>

> Though Google has truly fucked up its search interface to the point
> one can hardly trust it, it did find in Aug 3 1992:
> 
>>From what I've seen of his posts, if Ed Nilges said 
>> George Bush was a liar--that is to say, if he made an empirically 
>> verifiable statement about Bush's mendacity--I'd have to re-register 
>> as a Republican. 
>>
>> Well, I wouldn't really go *that* far, but you get my point.  The Duke of 
>> Nilgewater is probably your best advertisement.
> 
> Now that must make you feel proud.  While bullschildt is forgotten
> except by a few scholars, we're all familiar with Nilgewater after
> over 20 years of hard trolling.

I must confess I didn't realise the term went back as far as 1992.

The thread is interesting in historical terms, in that it demonstrates 
that Nilges had well and truly flipped *long* before my first encounter 
with him in c.2000. (Wish I'd known.)

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

On Jun 3, 4:22=A0pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636...@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>
> =A0spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 3, 3:23=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> > > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might lea=
rn
> > > something (again), O ignorant lout.
>
> > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> > sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used it
> > because I told you.
>
> I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it would

I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
of a bitch. You didn't.

> be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referred
> to while I was in the US.
>
> We're not interested in your childish posturing here; go and learn
> something.

Make me.
>
> --
> Tim
>
> "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines impose=
d,
> nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" =A0-- =A0Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 3:52=A0pm, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Har...@kfc.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:41:35 -0700 (PDT),spinoza1111
>
> <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Guess I didn't read my bible enough. We Catholics prefer not to. Most
> >translations are garbage and like the British constitution, the Bible
> >is collection of incoherent documents.
>
> >Like the story of Onan the wanker, the story of the Shibboleth is
> >unedifying, and directly responsible for the murder of activists last
> >Monday on the Mavi Marmara.
>
> >Instead, I determined the MODERN meaning of "Shibboleth" from art
> >books long before my talk with professor Howarth.
>
> How odd that you so aggressively profess ignorance of this, when
> otherwise you assert familiarity with classic literature.
>
> I guess Seebach was right, you really do just automatically choose the
> opposite position of your enemies, regardless if it makes any sense,
> in this case you are trying to distinguish yourself from Heathfield,
> who you have abused for his religious beliefs. =A0
>
> >Of course, Reading Rainbow, your reading comprehension again fails. I
> >meant, of course, that I was the first to use it in this newsgroup,
> >probably.
>
> What you "meant" isn't what you said.
>
> You may indeed be the first person to use that word in this newsgroup.
> Well, big deal.
> But more interesting, I tried to do some research on word use in
> Usenet.
>
> Though Google has truly fucked up its search interface to the point
> one can hardly trust it, it did find in Aug 3 1992:
>
> >From what I've seen of his posts, if Ed Nilges said
> >George Bush was a liar--that is to say, if he made an empirically
> >verifiable statement about Bush's mendacity--I'd have to re-register
> >as a Republican.
>
> >Well, I wouldn't really go *that* far, but you get my point. =A0The Duke=
 of
> >Nilgewater is probably your best advertisement.
>
> Now that must make you feel proud. =A0While bullschildt is forgotten
> except by a few scholars, we're all familiar with Nilgewater after
> over 20 years of hard trolling.

This is not the case. Schildt has published, successfully, several
books, including four editions of CTCR. We will NOT see another
edition of Heatfield's book on C. But every time Schildt gets a new
book on Amazon, it is spammed by cybernetic mobs that were activated
by Seebach's infantile tirade.

I know, by means which are not of your goddamn business, that Schildt
and his family have been seriously offended and wounded by this.

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 04:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I know, by means which are not of your goddamn business, that Schildt
> and his family have been seriously offended and wounded by this.

Perhaps he shouldn't have churned out books with such broad and obvious
errors that lead the people who read them to be bad and puzzled
programmers, then?

Two of the worst professional programmers I know learnt C from Schildt.

B.

On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 03:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> of a bitch. You didn't.

Just a minute, "coon" is racist, but "limey" isn't?  Or are you just
being ironic for comedic effect?  What about "yank" ?

B.

Rob Kendrick wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 03:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
> spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
>> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
>> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
>> of a bitch. You didn't.
> 
> Just a minute, "coon" is racist, but "limey" isn't?

Actually, in the context "coon" isn't even remotely racist (a fact that 
Nilges has yet to discover, but which - when he eventually does - he 
will claim he knew all along).

I wouldn't personally consider "Limey" to be any more racist than 
"Yank". I'm perfectly happy to call Yanks Yanks, and perfectly happy for 
them to call me a Limey if they want. They know who I mean, and I know 
who they mean, and neither term seems to me to be particularly offensive 
(any more than "coon" is, in the context in which it was used in this 
thread).

<snip>

-- 
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line vacant - apply within

In article <jvednRBXjIuFCJrRnZ2dnUVZ8tmdnZ2d@bt.com>,
 Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:

> Rob Kendrick wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 03:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
> > spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> >> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
> >> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> >> of a bitch. You didn't.
> > 
> > Just a minute, "coon" is racist, but "limey" isn't?
> 
> Actually, in the context "coon" isn't even remotely racist (a fact that 
> Nilges has yet to discover, but which - when he eventually does - he 
> will claim he knew all along).
> 
> I wouldn't personally consider "Limey" to be any more racist than 
> "Yank". I'm perfectly happy to call Yanks Yanks, and perfectly happy for 
> them to call me a Limey if they want. They know who I mean, and I know 
> who they mean, and neither term seems to me to be particularly offensive 
> (any more than "coon" is, in the context in which it was used in this 
> thread).

A nice summary - but one that'll turn out to be too hard for Spinny, 
fascist bully that he is, to comprehend.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 2:22=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636...@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>
> =A0spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 3, 3:23=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> > > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might lea=
rn
> > > something (again), O ignorant lout.
>
> > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> > sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used it
> > because I told you.
>
> I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it would
> be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referred
> to while I was in the US.

I am in the U.S., so maybe I can help.  The term "coon" is one of
many, many terms used as a racial epithet for blacks.  Many of these
terms (e.g. "spook") have other, inoffensive uses.  When someone uses
the term "coon" in the States, he is much more likely to be talking
about a smallish quadrupedal mammal than making a slur against a
human.  The phrase "coon's age" particularly is a non-racial term, no
more insulting than "sweat like a pig", which is not directed at
police.  The word "coon", and the term "coon's age" are both more
likely to be heard in Southern, and/or rural places, and may just
cause puzzlement in urban America.  FWIW, people who have self respect
not only avoid using racial slurs, they also avoid being insulted by
them.  I've had ethnic (and other) insults thrown at me, and mostly
found them laughable.  They expose the degradation of the racist; they
don't degrade the target.  Mr. Nilges seems to be attempting to defend
those who don't need defense from something that is not an offense.
He seems to be generous with his vitriol, but niggardly with his
understanding.
HTH

In article 
<28f1efbe-e331-4eee-b94d-2a71c1df7715@x27g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
 spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Jun 3, 4:22�pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636...@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > �spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 3, 3:23�am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might learn
> > > > something (again), O ignorant lout.
> >
> > > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> > > sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used it
> > > because I told you.
> >
> > I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it would
> 
> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> of a bitch. You didn't.

And I won't. And it isn't. And no amount of ranting assertion on your 
part will change that.
> 
> > be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referred
> > to while I was in the US.
> >
> > We're not interested in your childish posturing here; go and learn
> > something.
> 
> Make me.

As I said: childish.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 5:42=A0am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Rob Kendrick wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 03:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
> > spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> >> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
> >> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> >> of a bitch. You didn't.

The idea that black programmers would be intimidated by seeing the
phrase "coon's age" is ludicrous.  Blacks hear a lot worse than that
without running scared.  Your claim is insulting and racist.  OTOH,
maybe the odd "Limey son of a bitch" may be sensitive enough for your
hate speech to drive him away---I don't know just how delicate they
are.

> > Just a minute, "coon" is racist, but "limey" isn't?
>
> Actually, in the context "coon" isn't even remotely racist (a fact that
> Nilges has yet to discover, but which - when he eventually does - he
> will claim he knew all along).

I think you err on the side of unreasonable expectations.

> I wouldn't personally consider "Limey" to be any more racist than
> "Yank". I'm perfectly happy to call Yanks Yanks, and perfectly happy for
> them to call me a Limey if they want. They know who I mean, and I know
> who they mean, and neither term seems to me to be particularly offensive
> (any more than "coon" is, in the context in which it was used in this
> thread).
>
> <snip>

Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.  "Hey, your country's
history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem.  That shows
what an idiot *you* are!"  Since both Merry Old and The Colonies are
multiracial, it would be more of a nationalist insult anyway, not a
racial one.  "Yankee" is even funnier.  To most of the world, a Yankee
is anyone from the U.S.A. (the one in the Western hemisphere).  To
someone in the U.S., a Yankee is anyone from the States that were in
the Union during the War of Northern Aggression.  To a Northerner, a
Yankee is someone from the Northeastern states.  Etc., to the point
that in some little town in VT (?) a Yankee is Joe, the guy in that
green house.  Calling a black Southerner "Yankee" is more likely to
get a rise out of him than calling him "coon", though neither is
likely to make him run away like a frightened rabbit.
(FTR, I'm what is referred to as a "Damned Yankee", a grievous insult
delivered by genteel Southerners with a smile, and generally no bad
feelings)

On Jun 3, 10:11=A0pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 2:22=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636...@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > =A0spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 3, 3:23=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might l=
earn
> > > > something (again), O ignorant lout.
>
> > > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> > > sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used i=
t
> > > because I told you.
>
> > I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it would
> > be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referred
> > to while I was in the US.
>
> I am in the U.S., so maybe I can help. =A0The term "coon" is one of
> many, many terms used as a racial epithet for blacks. =A0Many of these
> terms (e.g. "spook") have other, inoffensive uses. =A0When someone uses
> the term "coon" in the States, he is much more likely to be talking
> about a smallish quadrupedal mammal than making a slur against a
> human. =A0The phrase "coon's age" particularly is a non-racial term, no
> more insulting than "sweat like a pig", which is not directed at
> police. =A0The word "coon", and the term "coon's age" are both more
> likely to be heard in Southern, and/or rural places, and may just
> cause puzzlement in urban America. =A0FWIW, people who have self respect
> not only avoid using racial slurs, they also avoid being insulted by
> them. =A0I've had ethnic (and other) insults thrown at me, and mostly
> found them laughable. =A0They expose the degradation of the racist; they
> don't degrade the target. =A0Mr. Nilges seems to be attempting to defend
> those who don't need defense from something that is not an offense.
> He seems to be generous with his vitriol, but niggardly with his
> understanding.
> HTH

Sure, as the gang leader of your own self, you cultivate a false inner
hardness. Tell me something I don't know. It allows you to act like a
shithead.

On Jun 3, 10:25=A0pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 5:42=A0am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Rob Kendrick wrote:
> > > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 03:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
> > >spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >> I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> > >> wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate o=
r
> > >> offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> > >> of a bitch. You didn't.
>
> The idea that black programmers would be intimidated by seeing the
> phrase "coon's age" is ludicrous. =A0Blacks hear a lot worse than that
> without running scared. =A0Your claim is insulting and racist. =A0OTOH,
> maybe the odd "Limey son of a bitch" may be sensitive enough for your
> hate speech to drive him away---I don't know just how delicate they
> are.

The hate speech started when Heathfield and Seebach, years ago,
started labeling people incompetent based on their own incompetence.
This was a knowing and serious injury to reputation.

Neither are capable of diligent programming and neither are more than
low-level technicians. They are here because they'd be laughed or
moderated out of quality groups.

Smarting with the hurt of being in Seebach's case shut out of actual
programming or even bug fixing (as opposed to reporting), and in
Heathfield's case being a glorified temp, they have for years taken
their Fascist hostility out on competent people here, including
Schildt, Navia, myself, and developers posting at some risk from
mainland China.

To use the prissy language of the lower middle class to label a person
incompetent with the deliberate intention of damaging a career is the
real hate speech.

>
> > > Just a minute, "coon" is racist, but "limey" isn't?
>
> > Actually, in the context "coon" isn't even remotely racist (a fact that
> > Nilges has yet to discover, but which - when he eventually does - he
> > will claim he knew all along).
>
> I think you err on the side of unreasonable expectations.
>
> > I wouldn't personally consider "Limey" to be any more racist than
> > "Yank". I'm perfectly happy to call Yanks Yanks, and perfectly happy fo=
r
> > them to call me a Limey if they want. They know who I mean, and I know
> > who they mean, and neither term seems to me to be particularly offensiv=
e
> > (any more than "coon" is, in the context in which it was used in this
> > thread).
>
> > <snip>
>
> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult. =A0"Hey, your country's
> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem. =A0That shows

Rather exceptional in view of the fact of brutality for centuries that
erupted into mutiny in 1790, and the Israeli-like boarding of the
ships of my country in search of fresh meat in 1805.


> what an idiot *you* are!" =A0Since both Merry Old and The Colonies are
> multiracial, it would be more of a nationalist insult anyway, not a
> racial one. =A0"Yankee" is even funnier. =A0To most of the world, a Yanke=
e
> is anyone from the U.S.A. (the one in the Western hemisphere). =A0To
> someone in the U.S., a Yankee is anyone from the States that were in
> the Union during the War of Northern Aggression. =A0To a Northerner, a
> Yankee is someone from the Northeastern states. =A0Etc., to the point
> that in some little town in VT (?) a Yankee is Joe, the guy in that
> green house. =A0Calling a black Southerner "Yankee" is more likely to
> get a rise out of him than calling him "coon", though neither is
> likely to make him run away like a frightened rabbit.
> (FTR, I'm what is referred to as a "Damned Yankee", a grievous insult
> delivered by genteel Southerners with a smile, and generally no bad
> feelings)

In article 
<ffe0eb94-aece-473a-bdae-158d1b648b9c@f13g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
 BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.  "Hey, your country's
> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem.  That shows
> what an idiot *you* are!"  Since both Merry Old and The Colonies are
> multiracial, it would be more of a nationalist insult anyway, not a
> racial one.  "Yankee" is even funnier.  To most of the world, a Yankee
> is anyone from the U.S.A. (the one in the Western hemisphere).  To
> someone in the U.S., a Yankee is anyone from the States that were in
> the Union during the War of Northern Aggression.  To a Northerner, a
> Yankee is someone from the Northeastern states.  Etc., to the point
> that in some little town in VT (?) a Yankee is Joe, the guy in that
> green house.  Calling a black Southerner "Yankee" is more likely to
> get a rise out of him than calling him "coon", though neither is
> likely to make him run away like a frightened rabbit.
> (FTR, I'm what is referred to as a "Damned Yankee", a grievous insult
> delivered by genteel Southerners with a smile, and generally no bad
> feelings)

Well I didn't expect this much attention to the issue although I'll 
happily confess that my second use of the phrase was calculated to wind 
Spinny up. But then, as I've noted before, it's like going to Bedlam and 
poking the inmates with sticks.

Your notes about "Yankee" above, expanding my knowledge (thanks), remind 
me of the moment in IIRC "Flash for Freedom" where Flashman's companion, 
in  a bar in mid-19thC Houston, calls a local "A damned Yankee 
pipsqueak". Flashman leaves in a hurry to avoid the ensuing brawl.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

On Jun 3, 5:25=A0pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.
>
Racial epithets are seldom inherently insulting. They are just
contractions of regular words used to describe the race, or words
meaning "foreigner", or fairly harmless references to diet. However
some racial groups are socially stigmatised, and any reference to them
at all, except in the context of promoting that groups' political
interests, risks falling foul of hair-trigger sensitivities.

On Jun 3, 9:22=A0am, Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mcle...@btinternet.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 3, 5:25=A0pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> > avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.
>
> Racial epithets are seldom inherently insulting. They are just
> contractions of regular words used to describe the race, or words
> meaning "foreigner", or fairly harmless references to diet. However
> some racial groups are socially stigmatised, and any reference to them
> at all, except in the context of promoting that groups' political
> interests, risks falling foul of hair-trigger sensitivities.

Well said.  I would add that the hair-trigger sensitivities seem to be
more prevalent among those looking for trouble in the first place
(often not actually members of the referenced target group) than among
the rank-and-file of the target group.  People choose to be offended
by these terms, or more typically choose to assume others are
offended.

On Jun 3, 9:21=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <ffe0eb94-aece-473a-bdae-158d1b648...@f13g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> =A0BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>
>
> > Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> > avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult. =A0"Hey, your country's
> > history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem. =A0That show=
s
> > what an idiot *you* are!" =A0Since both Merry Old and The Colonies are
> > multiracial, it would be more of a nationalist insult anyway, not a
> > racial one. =A0"Yankee" is even funnier. =A0To most of the world, a Yan=
kee
> > is anyone from the U.S.A. (the one in the Western hemisphere). =A0To
> > someone in the U.S., a Yankee is anyone from the States that were in
> > the Union during the War of Northern Aggression. =A0To a Northerner, a
> > Yankee is someone from the Northeastern states. =A0Etc., to the point
> > that in some little town in VT (?) a Yankee is Joe, the guy in that
> > green house. =A0Calling a black Southerner "Yankee" is more likely to
> > get a rise out of him than calling him "coon", though neither is
> > likely to make him run away like a frightened rabbit.
> > (FTR, I'm what is referred to as a "Damned Yankee", a grievous insult
> > delivered by genteel Southerners with a smile, and generally no bad
> > feelings)
>
> Well I didn't expect this much attention to the issue although I'll
> happily confess that my second use of the phrase was calculated to wind
> Spinny up. But then, as I've noted before, it's like going to Bedlam and
> poking the inmates with sticks.

I'm guilty of that behavior at times, but have many times resisted the
urge to respond directly to him.  I've discarded more of such than
I've posted, though sometimes I still backslide.

> Your notes about "Yankee" above, expanding my knowledge (thanks), remind
> me of the moment in IIRC "Flash for Freedom" where Flashman's companion,
> in =A0a bar in mid-19thC Houston, calls a local "A damned Yankee
> pipsqueak". Flashman leaves in a hurry to avoid the ensuing brawl.

FTR, that "local" may have been a "damned Yankee" indeed.  That term
is reserved for Yankees who not only visit the Glorious South, but
have the outrageous audacity to *move in*!  The worst of the worst of
these, such as my all-time favorite person, go one step further and
marry a Southern belle and take her out of God's Country.  The only
excuse for this is that while damaging the South by stealing away one
of her flowers, the miscreant is improving the South by removing
himself.

On 2010-06-03, Colonel Harlan Sanders <Harlan@kfc.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:41:35 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
><spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Guess I didn't read my bible enough. We Catholics prefer not to. Most
>>translations are garbage and like the British constitution, the Bible
>>is collection of incoherent documents.

> I guess Seebach was right, you really do just automatically choose the
> opposite position of your enemies, regardless if it makes any sense,
> in this case you are trying to distinguish yourself from Heathfield,
> who you have abused for his religious beliefs.  

More fundamentally, the above is obviously trolling.  No one claims
Catholics prefer not to read the Bible except in the hopes of starting a
flame war.

> Now that must make you feel proud.  While bullschildt is forgotten
> except by a few scholars, we're all familiar with Nilgewater after
> over 20 years of hard trolling.

I suspect the term will eventually become more broadly used, because
it's such an evocative description of purely reactive madness.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 2010-06-03, Rob Kendrick <nntp@rjek.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 04:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
> spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I know, by means which are not of your goddamn business, that Schildt
>> and his family have been seriously offended and wounded by this.

> Perhaps he shouldn't have churned out books with such broad and obvious
> errors that lead the people who read them to be bad and puzzled
> programmers, then?

More importantly, if he really found it "wounding", why the hell did he
fix exactly one of two identical copies of a claim, that being the one
listed in the 3e edition of C:TCN?  He clearly *knew* that his book was
full of errors.  Why was he unwilling to put even the most basic effort
into fixing them?

That said, I do not have any evidence supporting the theory that Nilges
has any information at all about Schildt or his family.  Nilges is a habitual
liar; Schildt is an adult human.  It seems more likely that Nilges is lying
than that Schildt is "seriously offended and wounded" by easily verified
criticisms of something he clearly doesn't care to put effort into.

It is also unclear what "this" is.  Nilges is sufficiently non-rational that
if he got outraged letters from Schildt demanding that Nilges shut the fuck
up and stop making him look so bad, he'd just file it under "Schildt is
indeed upset, this means I should push harder."

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 2010-06-03, Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> Tim, that's a fiver you owe me. He didn't learn nuffin.

Heh.  I'd point out that he's hardly the first person to notice the
homonym there -- it was used as part of some witty repartee in the big
screen remake of Wild Wild West.  But the mere fact that it was a sly
dig proves that the phrase itself is NOT a usage of the racist slur.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 2010-06-03, BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.  "Hey, your country's
> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem.  That shows
> what an idiot *you* are!"

I think you'll find that "demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem"
is, to Nilges, a deadly insult.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> writes:
> On 2010-06-03, BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
>> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult.  "Hey, your country's
>> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem.  That shows
>> what an idiot *you* are!"
>
> I think you'll find that "demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem"
> is, to Nilges, a deadly insult.

Seebs, please consider whether even a reasonably witty comment like
yours above actually improves the signal-to-noise ratio.  Thank you.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

On Jun 3, 10:59=A0am, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> writes:
> > On 2010-06-03, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus to
> >> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult. =A0"Hey, your country's
> >> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem. =A0That sho=
ws
> >> what an idiot *you* are!"
>
> > I think you'll find that "demonstrates an intelligent response to a pro=
blem"
> > is, to Nilges, a deadly insult.
>
> Seebs, please consider whether even a reasonably witty comment like
> yours above actually improves the signal-to-noise ratio. =A0Thank you.

As this entire thread is clearly "noise" in the clc informational
sense, I think it does no harm.  For those not interested in
flamewars, gossip, etc., I recommend skipping any thread with
"Schildt", "Dweebach", etc. in the subject line.  FWIW, it made me
laugh.  Maybe if a loon spends enough time raging in an ot thread, he
has less time to corrupt more signal-based threads.

On Jun 3, 7:12=A0am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <28f1efbe-e331-4eee-b94d-2a71c1df7...@x27g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> =A0spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 3, 4:22 pm, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <ce7b62b6-aaf2-497a-8517-581861636...@g39g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > spinoza1111<spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jun 3, 3:23 am, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <4be409ae-e27a-4084-a551-ccd0e6b37...@11g2000prv.googlegroups.com=
>,
> > > > > You could try checking the etymology of the expression. You might=
 learn
> > > > > something (again), O ignorant lout.
>
> > > > No need, racist. "Coon" in America is a racist slur. If you're some
> > > > sort of Limey sod, then you knew this after the first time you used=
 it
> > > > because I told you.
>
> > > I'm not in America, shit-for-brains. In any case, if anything, it wou=
ld
>
> > I already told you the first time you used it that it was racist,
> > wanker. At that point you needed to stop since it would intimidate or
> > offend African Americans coming here to learn about C, you Limey son
> > of a bitch. You didn't.
>
> And I won't. And it isn't. And no amount of ranting assertion on your
> part will change that.
>
>
>
> > > be a British racist slur on Africans. I never heard it used or referr=
ed
> > > to while I was in the US.
>
> > > We're not interested in your childish posturing here; go and learn
> > > something.
>
> > Make me.
>
> As I said: childish.

Your behavior is no less childish, "Tim Streater."  Arguing with
Spinoza is obviously fruitless, and getting your last word in for
everyone to see contributes nothing.

On 2010-06-03, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
> Seebs, please consider whether even a reasonably witty comment like
> yours above actually improves the signal-to-noise ratio.  Thank you.

Probably not.  However, I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatter
which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-noise ratio, can
nonetheless improve the sense of community which tends to lead people to
act in ways which improve the signal-to-noise ratio.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> ... I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatter
> which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-
> noise ratio, can nonetheless improve the sense of
> community...

The same way test pattern and elevator music substitute
when services are down.

--
Peter

On 2010-06-04, Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> wrote:
> Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
>> ... I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatter
>> which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-
>> noise ratio, can nonetheless improve the sense of
>> community...

> The same way test pattern and elevator music substitute
> when services are down.

Not really.  For the most part, humans tend to view themselves at least
partially in terms of memberships of groups.  Some people are dominated
by this; look at Kenny's obsession with "regs".  Very few people, though,
don't have at least some sense of "I know these people and ought to act
in ways compatible with their well-being".  In general, a community which
rejects any kind of personal chatter will be unhealthy, because people
won't view themselves as personally engaged with the community, and they
won't have any particular desire to support the community or its members.

In short, for an interactive discussion medium, the most effective way to
have a healthy culture in which people can communicate effectively and keep
the community's discussions topical, is to allow certain *kinds* of
digressions or chatter, because they form what is essentially a carrier for
the signal.  Take away the carrier, and you lose the signal.

-s
-- 
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On 3 June, 12:35, Rob Kendrick <n...@rjek.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 04:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
> spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I know, by means which are not of your <mild expletive> business, that Schildt
> > and his family have been seriously offended and wounded by this.
>
> Perhaps he shouldn't have churned out books with such broad and obvious
> errors that lead the people who read them to be bad and puzzled
> programmers, then?

perhaps if he'd accepted criticism with good grace early in the
proceedings he'd have avoided this.  I really don't see his problem.
He gets to keep the money.

> Two of the worst professional programmers I know learnt C from Schildt.

On 3 June, 16:21, Tim Streater <timstrea...@waitrose.com> wrote:
> In article
> <ffe0eb94-aece-473a-bdae-158d1b648...@f13g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,

<snip>

>> To most of the world, a Yankee
> > is anyone from the U.S.A. (the one in the Western hemisphere). =A0To
> > someone in the U.S., a Yankee is anyone from the States that were in
> > the Union during the War of Northern Aggression. =A0To a Northerner, a
> > Yankee is someone from the Northeastern states. =A0Etc., to the point
> > that in some little town in VT (?) a Yankee is Joe, the guy in that
> > green house. =A0Calling a black Southerner "Yankee" is more likely to
> > get a rise out of him than calling him "coon", though neither is
> > likely to make him run away like a frightened rabbit.
> > (FTR, I'm what is referred to as a "Damned Yankee", a grievous insult
> > delivered by genteel Southerners with a smile, and generally no bad
> > feelings)

<snip>

> Your notes about "Yankee" above, expanding my knowledge (thanks), remind
> me of the moment in IIRC "Flash for Freedom" where Flashman's companion,
> in =A0a bar in mid-19thC Houston, calls a local "A damned Yankee
> pipsqueak". Flashman leaves in a hurry to avoid the ensuing brawl.

I recall a cartoon of Jimmy Carter visiting somewhere (Isreal?) where
the walls were daubed with "Yankee Go Home" and Jimmy Carter wailing
"it's the "yankee" that hurts!"

On Jun 3, 8:41=A0pm, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2010-06-03, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>
> > Seebs, please consider whether even a reasonably witty comment like
> > yours above actually improves the signal-to-noise ratio. =A0Thank you.
>
> Probably not. =A0However, I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatte=
r
> which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-noise ratio, can
> nonetheless improve the sense of community which tends to lead people to
> act in ways which improve the signal-to-noise ratio.

And you have to leave room for people to have different personalities
as well.  Keith seems pretty melancholic to me; analyzing the faults
of post content that if heeded would likely improve the quality of
content generated on clc.  To some people, it appears as if he's the
local forum sheriff.  Others might simply take it as a friendly
suggestion.

.... carefully takes time to delete the signature ;-)

On Jun 4, 12:41=A0am, Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2010-06-03, Rob Kendrick <n...@rjek.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 04:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
> > spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> I know, by means which are not of your goddamn business, that Schildt
> >> and his family have been seriously offended and wounded by this.
> > Perhaps he shouldn't have churned out books with such broad and obvious
> > errors that lead the people who read them to be bad and puzzled
> > programmers, then?
>
> More importantly, if he really found it "wounding", why the hell did he
> fix exactly one of two identical copies of a claim, that being the one
> listed in the 3e edition of C:TCN? =A0He clearly *knew* that his book was
> full of errors. =A0Why was he unwilling to put even the most basic effort
> into fixing them?

He did, jerk face. He published four editions, each of which was a lot
of work (you are not capable of this work, it's clear from your
pathetic code). You have admitted that many of the issues you pointed
out after he knew about them were fixed.

>
> That said, I do not have any evidence supporting the theory that Nilges
> has any information at all about Schildt or his family. =A0Nilges is a ha=
bitual
> liar; Schildt is an adult human. =A0It seems more likely that Nilges is l=
ying
> than that Schildt is "seriously offended and wounded" by easily verified
> criticisms of something he clearly doesn't care to put effort into.

You keep claiming this. It's because I've got the facts on you. Peter,
I recently resolved a similar case of online bullying at work and I
will resolve this case, not in your favor.


>
> It is also unclear what "this" is. =A0Nilges is sufficiently non-rational=
 that
> if he got outraged letters from Schildt demanding that Nilges shut the fu=
ck
> up and stop making him look so bad, he'd just file it under "Schildt is
> indeed upset, this means I should push harder."

The actual facts are none of your business and wildly at variance with
what you're claiming. I am not at liberty to describe them.
>
> -s
> --
> Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. =A0Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@see=
bs.nethttp://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny picturesht=
tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!

On Jun 4, 3:35=A0am, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 10:59=A0am, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>
> > Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> writes:
> > > On 2010-06-03, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> Since "Limey" comes from the habit of English sailors eating citrus =
to
> > >> avoid scurvy, it's hardly an effective insult. =A0"Hey, your country=
's
> > >> history demonstrates an intelligent response to a problem. =A0That s=
hows
> > >> what an idiot *you* are!"
>
> > > I think you'll find that "demonstrates an intelligent response to a p=
roblem"
> > > is, to Nilges, a deadly insult.
>
> > Seebs, please consider whether even a reasonably witty comment like
> > yours above actually improves the signal-to-noise ratio. =A0Thank you.
>
> As this entire thread is clearly "noise" in the clc informational
> sense, I think it does no harm. =A0For those not interested in
> flamewars, gossip, etc., I recommend skipping any thread with
> "Schildt", "Dweebach", etc. in the subject line. =A0FWIW, it made me
> laugh. =A0Maybe if a loon spends enough time raging in an ot thread, he
> has less time to corrupt more signal-based threads.

People who are, like most of the regs here, systematically and by
design incompetent at highly factored corporate jobs are anhedonic and
for this reason unable to find the humor in almost any situation save
the primitive insult.

Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> wrote:

> Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> > ... I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatter
> > which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-
> > noise ratio, can nonetheless improve the sense of
> > community...
> 
> The same way test pattern and elevator music substitute
> when services are down.

Worse. Elevator music does not get in the way of the services being
resumed.

Richard

On Jun 9, 4:32=A0am, ralt...@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) wrote:
> Peter Nilsson <ai...@acay.com.au> wrote:
> > Seebs <usenet-nos...@seebs.net> wrote:
> > > ... I think in some cases, a bit of friendly chatter
> > > which does not in and of itself improve the signal-to-
> > > noise ratio, can nonetheless improve the sense of
> > > community...
>
> > The same way test pattern and elevator music substitute
> > when services are down.
>
> Worse. Elevator music does not get in the way of the services being
> resumed.
>
> Richard

You suck, Richard Bos.