Google abandons Windows
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Rowland McDonnell on 5 Jun 2010 11:48 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Richard Kettlewell <rjk(a)greenend.org.uk> wrote: > > > Ben Shimmin <bas(a)llamaselector.com> writes: > > > I think Rowland has a fair point. Engaging in endless and protracted > > > discussion on usenet with someone you know (and we all know) is two > > > sandwiches short of a picnic certainly suggests you have a problem -- > > > though it may only be so serious a one as having too much free time! > > > > I wish the lot of them would killfile each other and save the rest of us > > the noise. > > FWIW, I've killfiled those who only insult me and never give me any > useful information. > > I don't understand why they have to keep on insulting me if it's not > just because they take pleasure from mocking the afflicted. MacSoup's graphical thread display tells me that James Jolley has replied to this post. I've not downloaded the contents of his post in this case - but I think the fact that if you look, you'll see that James has let his obsession with me take control of him, and he's been posting piles of abuse today, replying to my posts despite the fact that I've been ignoring the contents of his. <shrug> Seems to me that I've got clear evidence of being hounded by at least one obsessive nutter who just can't stop hurling personal abuse around the place. But of course, the `community' has decided that that can't possibly be the case, and James is only behaving that way because I've reacted to him in a particular way. Except that I've basically been ignoring his posts - his behaviour's lunatic. But no-one is willing to accept my proposition that anyone here except me has a mental health problem. But... but just look at yourselves! Can you not see? 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: D.M. Procida on 5 Jun 2010 12:00 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > > > real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) wrote: > [snip] > > > So, Rowland suffers from some serious mental health issues, > > <sigh> Only just noticed this. I'm quite disappointed in you: > > They are *minor* mental health problems, as I keep on pointing out... OK, I'm not in the business of quantifying degrees of mental wellness. It doesn't make any difference to my question. Daniele
From: James Jolley on 5 Jun 2010 12:56 On 2010-06-05 16:48:14 +0100, real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) said: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > >> Richard Kettlewell <rjk(a)greenend.org.uk> wrote: >> >>> Ben Shimmin <bas(a)llamaselector.com> writes: >>>> I think Rowland has a fair point. Engaging in endless and protracted >>>> discussion on usenet with someone you know (and we all know) is two >>>> sandwiches short of a picnic certainly suggests you have a problem -- >>>> though it may only be so serious a one as having too much free time! >>> >>> I wish the lot of them would killfile each other and save the rest of us >>> the noise. >> >> FWIW, I've killfiled those who only insult me and never give me any >> useful information. >> >> I don't understand why they have to keep on insulting me if it's not >> just because they take pleasure from mocking the afflicted. > > MacSoup's graphical thread display tells me that James Jolley has > replied to this post. > > I've not downloaded the contents of his post in this case - but I think > the fact that if you look, you'll see that James has let his obsession > with me take control of him, and he's been posting piles of abuse today, > replying to my posts despite the fact that I've been ignoring the > contents of his. > > <shrug> > > Seems to me that I've got clear evidence of being hounded by at least > one obsessive nutter who just can't stop hurling personal abuse around > the place. > > But of course, the `community' has decided that that can't possibly be > the case, and James is only behaving that way because I've reacted to > him in a particular way. Except that I've basically been ignoring his > posts - his behaviour's lunatic. > > But no-one is willing to accept my proposition that anyone here except > me has a mental health problem. But... but just look at yourselves! > > Can you not see? > > Rowland. No.
From: Peter Ceresole on 5 Jun 2010 15:11 James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > Funny that, so speaking as a philosopher, it's reasonable to take digs > and smart arsed comments from people is it? McDonal seems to take pride > in whining about how ill he is, let him be ill off the internet then. He's ill. That's why he does it. What's ill is his brain, so no amount of reasoning can make any difference. Now imagine being locked into that situation. It must be terrifying- certainly horribly stressful and sad. So it's up to the people who *can* control their impulses to try to be kind to Rowland. I know he makes it almost impossible at times, but it's important. It's not a question of philosophy or of mental adequacy. Just plain kindness. -- Peter
From: James Jolley on 5 Jun 2010 16:02
On 2010-06-05 20:11:16 +0100, peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) said: > James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: > >> Funny that, so speaking as a philosopher, it's reasonable to take digs >> and smart arsed comments from people is it? McDonal seems to take pride >> in whining about how ill he is, let him be ill off the internet then. > > He's ill. That's why he does it. What's ill is his brain, so no amount > of reasoning can make any difference. Now imagine being locked into that > situation. It must be terrifying- certainly horribly stressful and sad. > So it's up to the people who *can* control their impulses to try to be > kind to Rowland. I know he makes it almost impossible at times, but it's > important. > > It's not a question of philosophy or of mental adequacy. Just plain > kindness. As you've said, he brings these reactions on himself though. I'd expect a punch or two in the face if I spoke to people as he does, yet people seem to accept this? Sorry but if this is how society works, perhaps we should have a licence for the internet? Dunno, it's all wrong somehow that people can carry on just as they want. |