Current rows etc
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 2 Jul 2010 20:51 Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > Sak Wathanasin <sw(a)nan.co.uk> wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > > And if you're wondering why people are only saying these things to you > > > and not RM, it's because we've given up on him. > > > > Not exactly, Sak - you see, you gave up on me when you got in a strop > > over me insisting that `synchronous communication' meant `with a clock > > signal', and you've had me in your killfile ever since. > > > > Which is something that I always found bizarre, because `synchronous > > communication' does mean `with a clock signal'. > > I am guessing somewhere in there you meant to add a 'nt' or a 'out'? Erm, what? Of course not. Asynchronous is without a clock signal; synchronous is with a clock signal. When talking comms, that is. <shrug> Why did you think that I meant to write the opposite of what I did write? Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 2 Jul 2010 21:12 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > >> > >>> And if you're wondering why people are only saying these things to you > >>> and not RM, it's because we've given up on him. It's up to you: you > >>> can join Chris Holland > >> > >>Whatever happened to him? On second thoughts, don't answer. I'm quite > >>happy not knowing. > > > > Still around, but soundly ignored it seems. I was just browsing > > through my killfile and saw that my filter for him was tripped just > > recently. > > I think that was just one of Rowland's trolls using the name, not the same > guy at all. <cough> I know what you mean, but really: they're not mine, honest. If they *WERE* mine, I'd've sent them all back to the factory to be broken down into spares for repairs. I wouldn't know if it's the fake or the real Chris Holland - either way, it's just a killfile entry as far as I'm concerned, if you see what I mean. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Steve Firth on 2 Jul 2010 21:13 Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote: > > > > So basically we're back to you making a claim but being unable or > > > unwilling to back it up. > > > > Unwilling yes. > > Which sadly still Indeed it's sadly still leaving you in the "fool who adjusts posts to meet his bizarre agenda" category. You're a sad man.
From: Woody on 3 Jul 2010 18:41 Ian Piper <ianpiper(a)mac.com> wrote: > On 2010-07-02 10:55:19 +0100, Jaimie Vandenbergh > <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> said: > > >> Some of them yes. There are, however, a few who openly admit to me > >> being some sort of trolll. Ian Piper it appears being one of them. > > > > That may well be because they've killfiled Rowland (plus all the idiot > > little hanger-on doodz), so your intemperate and sweary responses are > > now the worst language in the group that they see. > > Actually I kill-filed "James Jolley" a long time ago - along with every > manifestation of the egregious Chris Holland - so I only see posts from > this individual when people reply to them. > > Newsgroup etiquette 101, by the way: if someone slags you off, that is > not a mandate for you to return the favour. You may not like what they > say, but it doesn't become truth just because they say it, and you > don't restore any celestial balance by handing out abuse in return for > abuse. Instead you usually just kick off a flame war. What is > guaranteed to happen, though, is that you will irritate people who have > kill-filed the original troll, because they will read *your* posting > and see the quoted troll-speak. Don't you use auto-kill then? I don't have anyone killfiled at the moment (too many machines, I would need it on a server level but i don't have my own news server any more), but when I had CH and his other killfiled I always had autokill, which kills the original and any replies to it, as these things never recover. -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Ian Piper on 3 Jul 2010 20:34
On 2010-07-03 23:41:07 +0100, usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk (Woody) said: > Ian Piper <ianpiper(a)mac.com> wrote: > > Don't you use auto-kill then? I don't have anyone killfiled at the > moment (too many machines, I would need it on a server level but i don't > have my own news server any more), but when I had CH and his other > killfiled I always had autokill, which kills the original and any > replies to it, as these things never recover. I don't know how to do auto-kill with Unison. Is it capable of doing that? Ian. -- Ian Piper Author of "Learn Xcode Tools for Mac OS X and iPhone Development", Apress, December 2009 Learn more here: http://learnxcodebook.com/� --� |