et wrote: >you know Jon, you where in my filters, and I took you off last week when I >saw a reply to this post mentioning you were spam filtered. >Really "interesting" (maybe "fascinating" would be as proper, especially for >the folks down under to comprehend) to see you back. Welcome again, really. >May I request that we all refrain (as much as possible) from the "name >calling" and the sticks and stones stuff. I will try, I promise. >Anyway the link you provided is not a good link at this time. I get a timeout >for the server. and not having seen your original post I do not have any >other of the sited evidence, but please fell free to contact me off list to >update me with more info about this. >I generally & personally do not consider postings to a forum message board as >very much "evidence" of anything except that the message board exists, and >has people posting to it. what ever the "problems" exposed by the postings, >the fact that more than one post exists for it does not (IMHO) conclude an >unrepairable problem. >I would bet (heck I could be wrong I am only basing that on your posts) I >have a slight lead on you, as far as my understanding of how a hard drive >(and MBR, as part of the drive) works and is written to. Based on my >experience and understanding of hard drive operation, I would be nearly >shocked to have you prove my assumption incorrect. I would enjoy learning as >much as possible about this software that "*irretrievably" trashed the hard >drive. from MY experience, it would take a few minutes of hard drive >thrashing to *irretrievably loose the data, without letting the smoke out of >the circuit board on the hard drive. If you did let out the smoke, well then, >unless you have a way to put the smoke back into those little black smoke >holders it may have *irretrievably lost your data. >And (by the way) who are the "Nortons"? >My experience ain't "thirty years of clinical and industrial psychology" that >did not teach me how to keep from calling people; "baby", "Flame-babies", >"inescapable idiot", "fanatics", "Anti-social deviants", "egobound to the >degree that the anal pressure creates blindness", "anti-social people with >zero social skill", or "Cyber-Nazis", while still expecting assistace and >free training from them. It was my hope though, by showing you the names that >you have labeled folks you only know via e-mail, that it may help you see how >offensive your post might have sounded. >I do agree that it is very often possible to discern the intended audience >from the style of writing. I would caution that not every monosyllabic book >was written by a "non-PHD". Some very good childern's books have been written >by very educated people. > >I would also ask you to consider the reverse side of this statement, with the >consideration that my (and your) rights end where someone else's rights begin; > >>A simple example would be to go and say that you don't believe in the >>rights of the Cyber-Nazis currently dominating the so-called anti-spam >>movement, to tell YOU what you may or may not LEGALLY receive, in one of >>the lists out there. >> >I would suggest; "A simple example would be to go and say that you don't >believe in the rights of the Spammers currently dominating spam (or >commercial Internet, since I still miss the days before the WWW and .com) >movement, to tell ME what I must receive, and then to force me to waste my >bandwidth (that _I_ pay for) with Spam that is not just un-wanted, but is >deceitfully forced on me." as a possible other side of this argument. >one mans cluster fuck is another mans orgy. > >On Thursday 20 June 2002 08:25 pm, you wrote: > >>Hello folks, >>You know, it *IS* fascinating to read the comments of those few >>tunnel-visioned people on this list who continually make it difficult for >>people outside of their tiny worlds. >>I would love to take the candy/money off the baby - but my mother won't let >>me do those sort of things any more ........ :-) >> >I would have bet that after "Thirty years of clinical and industrial >psychology" your Mom no longer had control of your cash, I guess I learn new >stuff about you all the time. > >>For those many others on this list who are not egobound to the degree that >>the anal pressure creates blindness, please ignore the Flame-babies and >>READ my post : >>As always, I supply the evidence. >>I even gave the Site address and the Forum where it is fully admitted by >>the Company and some of the victims - one of whom contacted me and said >>that he, as a professional psychologist was questioning his own grip on >>reality after the experience ........... which was only matched by ferocity >>of rudeness he experienced when attempting to learn about Linux . >> >>I was able to assure him as a professional peer - my own background is >>thirty years of clinical and industrial psychology - that what he >>experienced was "normal" Internet behaviour. Sad, but true. >>The inescapable idiot percentage have great advantage out in the Cyberbog >>and all one can do is remember that they are a tiny, tiny percentage. The >>bulk of the good people out there are simply too afraid of them to say >>much. >> >>It is both my experience and opinion that the "Open Source" world is still >>dominated by anti-social people with zero social skills and it shows in >>their rage. >>A simple example would be to go and say that you don't believe in the >>rights of the Cyber-Nazis currently dominating the so-called anti-spam >>movement, to tell YOU what you may or may not LEGALLY receive, in one of >>the lists out there. >> >>Their intention is to somehow gain a little power. Simple. That is the >>motivation of all fanatics - to gain that power and then use it to inflict >>the pain on others that they feel. >> >>Well, there is my ever-increasing value $A 2 cents worth. Real people, >>ignore the Flamebabies -go investigate FOR YOURSELF. >>It will do two things: show you what sort of anti-social deviants ( meaning >>"not like most") are out here in the Cyberbog and help you see the dangers. >>If you have a Jetway Board especially, or have a similar program >>investigate! See the other posted note about Nortons ( Long avoided by the >>real pros in the Doze world) Here is the address again. Go read the forums >>there! >>http://www.gotogs.com >> >>Cheers! >>John Rigby >>NB: Who had no trouble installing other versions of Linux - just feels that >>they are all still immature for real use in my own *commercial* world >>activities. BUT I can see it all coming together. Lycoris and Lindows are >>on the track that I have been espousing in Linux for the last 100 >>years. K.I.S.S. >>If Mandrake took my advice of years ago and split into two factions, >>fanatic and user, Mandrake would/could own the arena. All it takes is a >>simple Golden Rule: No Black Screen! >>The Command prompt is no place for the other 99.9993% actual Users in the >>real world. >> >>With Best Wishes To All Those Struggling To Make A Difference, >> >>------------------------------- >>
Well, name-calling is one of the behaviors I would classify as "acting-out" ;-) In the internet world, there are no real controls on behavior from the other end of the line. I like the "ignore" button and the "delete" key for time-wasting chat remarks and for spam. I do not support the use of anti-spam software above the individual computer level, where it is the user's decision to employ it or not. Weak decision-making by system administrators to employ some "protection" of the users should be fully documented and disclosed before one purchases services from an ISP. Fortunately there are still enough ISPs around to compete for users and enough attorneys around to assist users who have a gripe that their ISP used anti-spam software _without_ notifying them thus causing stress, mental anguish, loss of business, pain and suffering. In the end it all comes to sysadmins and users. If the sysadmin is well-trained and thinks out his job, he can serve customers well and still spend half his workday playing Quake. If the user admits the reality that there is no Guardian for his integrity, privacy and well-being beyond himself and assumes the responsibility for protecting himself, then things are pretty nice as well. Lazy approaches by either spell disaster. This is not a no-cost service. Just as freedom requires effort, netizenship requires knowledge and responsibility. If someone wants to avoid those, there is always Palladium, soon to be revealed by Microsoft. Original article here: http://www.msnbc.com/news/770511.asp?cp1=1 Reasoned response here (perhaps with an overtone of fanaticism): http://www.theregus.com/content/4/25340.html My point? Well being on the internet is more like driving an auto than like playing a video game. You do have an obligation to beware of the idiocy of others if you wish to remain accident-free. No amount of programming is likely to be a substitute for reasoning in the internet universe for the forseeable future. It is a much more complicated universe than chess. But really this diatribe about "Net-Nazis" seems more like venting than the useful conveyance of information. Civileme
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
