An appropriate Monty Python skit
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: 2 Win 7 NGs.
Next: [UPDATE] Calibre v 0.7.12
From: wasbit on 2 Aug 2010 07:46 "Ron May" <mayron(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:i5gc561cir0nbpjl6v4q2tutaufie60fff(a)4ax.com... > "I'd like an argument, please." > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y&NR=1 > > It seems that Bear Bottoms and the various hummingsocks are playing this > group like a violin again. As in the above skit, any attempted exchange > with them is pointless. Their intended goal is not a debate on the merits > but rather creating disruption for the sake of disruption itself. Facts > aren't relevant. Being "right" or "wrong" doesn't matter. They're not > even slightly deterred when their comments are proven to be demonstrably > false. By their set of rules, they ignore any rebuttal on substance and > simply engage in misdirection by shifting the focus to a new (or > previously > refuted) point. When you take the troll bait, they win by default and > everyone else loses. It's a form of amusement for those otherwise > failures > whose real life sucks. Because they're ill equipped to make a > contribution > of their own to the community at large, they gain satisfaction by trying > to > tear down the efforts of others. In a way, they're not much different > from > the pathetic losers who prowl the streets in the middle of the night with > cans of spray paint and vandalize neighborhoods. Don't play their game. > > I understand the desire to "protect" casual and new readers from > misinformation, but there are better strategies than assisting the trolls > in their mission to create noise. I can think of a few examples: > > * Use good filters. Software capabilities vary widely in this area, but a > few hints that work for me are to filter posts where the "From" or > "Subject" fields contain "bottoms" or "hummin*" or "stubb*" or "frankli*" > (add your own from here). Filtering anonymous servers also helps. > > * If an uninformed reader responds to bad advice or misinformation from a > filtered author (rather than filtered subject) you'll see the response and > have a chance to set the record straight. For the sake of others, > however, > when replying, please consider a healthy snipping of the drivel. In your > response, say up front the reader should take it FWIW and you consider it > EOT for you. If someone else beats you to the punch, a simple "+1" to > "+n" > should be adequate. If you must, a short canned paragraph as to why the > source should be ignored is better than exchanging a dozen or more > pointless messages with the trolls/socks. > > * If you don't filter and can't resist the urge to reply, consider a "full > snip" rather than a "full quote" and a one-liner like "bearpoop" or > "hummingcrap", maybe followed by "EOD" or "EOT". That alone considerably > reduces the noise level. > > Anyway, I'm just throwing this out there as food for thought. People will > do what they will do and that's as it should be. > > (For anyone mildly curious, I haven't posted to this group in many months > but I have been lurking as regularly as time permits. I've had a lot of > irons in the fire over the past year or so, but still appreciate the > collective expertise of this group.) > > -- > Ron M. > Registered Linux User #511161 > http://counter.li.org/ Is the correct answer +1 - because I only answer in my spare time ?
From: Ron May on 2 Aug 2010 08:41 Ron May wrote this: >"I'd like an argument, please." Please don't mention the war! I didn't come out and say it in my original post but I'd like to see the ACF newsgroup moderated. There are plenty of Pricelessware supporters who would like to do that, including myself. Obviously we'd have to come up with a few wriggly reasons for blocking free speech but �Q� is a master at that sort of stuff. -- Ron M. Anonymous posters have reasons to hide their identities. I don't. Anything posted through sunsite/dotsrc in my name is a FORGERY, In ACF, I post only through x-privat.org or anonymous mail2news servers like dizum.com, reece.net. In other groups, only via the free-remailer.
From: za kAT on 2 Aug 2010 13:20 On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:46:24 +0100, wasbit wrote: > Is the correct answer +1 - because I only answer in my spare time ? Is this a 5 minute troll, or... -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - Sergeant Tech-Com, DN38416. Assigned to protect you. You've been targeted for denigration!
From: alvey on 2 Aug 2010 16:10 On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 05:23:33 -0500, Ron May wrote: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 18:17:43 +1000, alvey <alvey(a)play.com> wrote: > >> Personally I'd rather do something useful. > > Have at it! <g> Go away, or I shall taunt you a zecond time.
From: Omar© on 2 Aug 2010 19:44
Ron May wrote: > > "I'd like an argument, please." > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y&NR=1 > > It seems that Bear Bottoms and the various hummingsocks are playing this > group like a violin again. As in the above skit, any attempted exchange > with them is pointless. Their intended goal is not a debate on the merits > but rather creating disruption for the sake of disruption itself. Facts > aren't relevant. Being "right" or "wrong" doesn't matter. They're not > even slightly deterred when their comments are proven to be demonstrably > false. By their set of rules, they ignore any rebuttal on substance and > simply engage in misdirection by shifting the focus to a new (or previously > refuted) point. When you take the troll bait, they win by default and > everyone else loses. It's a form of amusement for those otherwise failures > whose real life sucks. Because they're ill equipped to make a contribution > of their own to the community at large, they gain satisfaction by trying to > tear down the efforts of others. In a way, they're not much different from > the pathetic losers who prowl the streets in the middle of the night with > cans of spray paint and vandalize neighborhoods. Don't play their game. > > I understand the desire to "protect" casual and new readers from > misinformation, but there are better strategies than assisting the trolls > in their mission to create noise. I can think of a few examples: > > * Use good filters. Software capabilities vary widely in this area, but a > few hints that work for me are to filter posts where the "From" or > "Subject" fields contain "bottoms" or "hummin*" or "stubb*" or "frankli*" > (add your own from here). Filtering anonymous servers also helps. > > * If an uninformed reader responds to bad advice or misinformation from a > filtered author (rather than filtered subject) you'll see the response and > have a chance to set the record straight. For the sake of others, however, > when replying, please consider a healthy snipping of the drivel. In your > response, say up front the reader should take it FWIW and you consider it > EOT for you. If someone else beats you to the punch, a simple "+1" to "+n" > should be adequate. If you must, a short canned paragraph as to why the > source should be ignored is better than exchanging a dozen or more > pointless messages with the trolls/socks. > > * If you don't filter and can't resist the urge to reply, consider a "full > snip" rather than a "full quote" and a one-liner like "bearpoop" or > "hummingcrap", maybe followed by "EOD" or "EOT". That alone considerably > reduces the noise level. > > Anyway, I'm just throwing this out there as food for thought. People will > do what they will do and that's as it should be. > > (For anyone mildly curious, I haven't posted to this group in many months > but I have been lurking as regularly as time permits. I've had a lot of > irons in the fire over the past year or so, but still appreciate the > collective expertise of this group.) > > -- > Ron M. > Registered Linux User #511161 > http://counter.li.org/ Amen -- Omar� When I am right, No one remembers When I am wrong, No one forgets. The best in Freeware http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/ |