xkcd today- lovely.
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Unsupported Firefox...
Next: It's here (at last)
From: Peter Ceresole on 27 May 2010 16:46 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > But they are not as useful as all that because they are meant to be hard > to understand so as to prevent most people having the knowledge and > therefore power than they enable. This is just your paranoia speaking. There is no sign whatsoever of the conspiracy which you are putting forward. The worrying thing for others here is that you are destroying the group and the usefulness it might have. People who might read it for information read your nonsense and turn away, thinking the whole place is a joke. Please stop. -- Peter
From: Rowland McDonnell on 27 May 2010 17:02 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > But all you have to do is look at a modern technical manual of any sort > > and you will see signs of documentation being written in a fashion > > intended to baffle. > > No Rowland. No Peter. > It may baffle you, but you're not the intended readership. As has been > pointed out many times in this thread. But Peter, as I have pointed out many times in this thread: you are mistaken. It's a shame that you can't engage in rational argument, just insist on telling me I'm wrong and putting me down regardless of the facts. 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 27 May 2010 17:02 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > But you are proven wrong by reality: I am the target audience for RFCs, > > in part, and I have trouble with them. > > This is a joke, isn't it? No, Peter, it's not a joke. But you asking that question *is* an underhand sneaky way of belittling my opinions - pretty disgusting behaviour on your part. > In case it's not; you are not any part of the target audience for RFCs. But you are wrong. > You do not need to interpret them. So you claim, but you are wrong. I don't quite know how to deal with you just flatly asserting something that's just so obviously wrong - why are you so bull-headed? 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 27 May 2010 17:07 Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > But they are not as useful as all that because they are meant to be hard > > to understand so as to prevent most people having the knowledge and > > therefore power than they enable. > > This is just your paranoia speaking. There is no sign whatsoever of the > conspiracy which you are putting forward. But that's just your knee-jerk deriding and belittling of Rowland speaking. There is no sign of me proposing a conspiracy as you so insulting suggest, so please stop insulting me by suggesting that I have done so. > The worrying thing for others here is that you are destroying the group > and the usefulness it might have. People who might read it for > information read your nonsense and turn away, thinking the whole place > is a joke. Please stop. Peter, you need to fix your own behaviour before daring to criticise me. Do so - and stop being so bloody arrogant and insulting, realise that *YOUR* behaviour is disruptive, and solve the problem of *YOUR* behaviour. When and if you do so, you might then find that others will pay attention to your suggestions in that line. But I for one have no time for your sort of hypocrisy. oh yes, and you should tell the morbid sadistic freaks who love rattling my cage to make me howl that they should stop it - if you are indeed interested in the health of this newsgroup. But of course you're not, are you Peter? You do take pleasure from belittling me and insulting me - that's what it's all about, innit? Be honest for once, why don't you? 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: James Jolley on 27 May 2010 17:10
On 2010-05-27 21:46:18 +0100, peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) said: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > >> But all you have to do is look at a modern technical manual of any sort >> and you will see signs of documentation being written in a fashion >> intended to baffle. > > No Rowland. > > It may baffle you, but you're not the intended readership. As has been > pointed out many times in this thread. It's interesting that this subject of documentation comes up. For me, it's sometimes made more difficult to learn devices because either the ..PDF file isn't really accessible enough or there isn't any form of online documentation. I'd say to anyone, consider yourself lucky. Many visually impaired people don't have access to manuals at all. For instance, I set up my Router completely independently from its own web UI. Figuring out where the connections went wasn't difficult, hoping that the website UI was accessible though is concerning. Anyway, just wanted to add this in. |