Thursday, October 29, 2020

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 14 updates in 5 topics

Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Oct 29 08:30PM

Surely it must be obvious to everyone by now that olcott is either a troll (so stop feeding it) or batshit crazy (so arguing is pointless).
 
Please just stop replying to his posts.
 
/Flibble
 
--
¬
Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>: Oct 29 07:39PM +0100

For gods sacke stop cross posting on 4 newsgroups.
 
Especially comp.lang.prolog doesn't make much sense.
 
RAM/RASP is probably best housed on comp.theory.
 
olcott schrieb:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com>: Oct 29 01:43PM -0500

On 10/29/2020 1:39 PM, Mostowski Collapse wrote:
> For gods sacke stop cross posting on 4 newsgroups.
 
> Especially comp.lang.prolog doesn't make much sense.
 
> RAM/RASP is probably best housed on comp.theory.
 
Yes I agree yet this is the final culmination of my life's work and I
have stage III cancer so I have to take some shortcuts.
 
 
--
Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott
 
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>: Oct 29 08:49PM +0100

Hey guys, I never use side channels and usenet
at the same time. So this is my response to KT:
 
------------ cut here ----------------------
 
There is nevertheless a point in using usenet.
Because now you use side channels and covert
 
communication, which makes results non
reproducible or implausible.
 
Keith Thompson schrieb:
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>: Oct 29 01:09PM -0700


> Keith Thompson schrieb:
>> There was no point in posting my message on the newsgroup when it was
>> directed only at you.
[snip]
 
I sent you an email message. I did not intend it to be public. You
chose to quote and reply to it publicly, something I didn't ask you to
do and would have preferred that you hadn't.
 
Your response to olcott's inappropriate cross-posting has simply made
the situation worse. Please drop this.
 
PLONK.
 
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Frederick Gotham <cauldwell.thomas@gmail.com>: Oct 29 12:47PM -0700

On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 1:18:36 PM UTC, Frederick Gotham wrote:
 
> > Why not go all the way?
 
> No point because DOS 6.22 doesn't have "findstr" which I need for extracting the Microsoft exectuable file from my fat binary. If I can come up with another clever way of extracting the Microsoft binary that doesn't involve 'findstr', then yeah it would be worth putting a 16-Bit DOS version in there too.
 
 
 
Nevermind my last post... I'll have this working for DOS 6.22 as well by the end of November by using this technique:
 
http://www.massmind.org/techref/dos/binbat.htm
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com>: Oct 29 01:38PM -0500

On 10/29/2020 1:20 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
> an obsessive and probably (given your total disregard of everyone else)
> narcissistic disorder. Why you want to display yourself in this way is
> anyone's guess: probably you just cannot stop yourself.
 
This is the culmination of my life's work and I currently have have no
other reasonable alternatives than cross-posting to less relevant
groups. This is the first phase of review. As soon as this phase
completes I will be seeking reviews outside of USENET.
 
If I had a PhD in computer science and had extensive experience
publishing to academic journals I would not have to be concerned that my
work would be rejected out-of-hand without review entirely on the basis
of style versus substance issues.
 
> get you to stop? I would be happy to try and put together the
> necessary collection. Would, say, 4 people who say they agree with you
> be enough?
 
Any proof that I am correct that would be accepted as correct by an
academic journal will be sufficient.
 
 
 
--
Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott
 
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>: Oct 29 07:40PM +0100

For gods sacke stop cross posting on 4 newsgroups.
 
Especially comp.lang.prolog doesn't make much sense.
 
RAM/RASP is probably best housed on comp.theory.
 
olcott schrieb:
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Oct 29 06:46PM

On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 13:38:52 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Any proof that I am correct that would be accepted as correct by an
> academic journal will be sufficient.
 
So you want others to provide the proof of the correctness of your
ideas because you are unable to provide it yourself? And until then
you intend to annoy them into doing this task for you by unacceptable
posting practices?
 
Surely not: you must inadvertently be being dishonest. Given your
interest in logic you must surely understand how ridiculous that is.
 
Please ponder your absurdness and reconsider my offer of agreement.
Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>: Oct 29 06:55PM

On 29/10/2020 18:20, Manfred wrote:
> So, the advise still holds that those repliers should better remove the
> language groups from their replies, unless they aim at landing into the
> killfile themselves.
 
Interesting - I'm not familiar with that problem. Perhaps you give me a
couple of recent examples of such responses, and the newsgroup where
you're seeing them? (msgid values would be enough)
 
On the sci.math newsgroup I use ignore subthread fairly extensively and
it pretty much eliminates posts by the well-known trolls/crackpots.
Sometimes I think "why am I seeing this post about TrollPoster who's in
my filter?". But when I look closer I see it's not down to poor
newsreaders - typically it is either that the post is merely /about/
TrollPoster and not actually a reply to her, or it is a reply to a
TrollPoster post from such a long time ago that it's not recorded in my
local newsreader. (Neither of these is down to posters using poor
newsreaders.)
 
Mike.
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com>: Oct 29 02:16PM -0500

On 10/29/2020 1:46 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
 
> Surely not: you must inadvertently be being dishonest. Given your
> interest in logic you must surely understand how ridiculous that is.
 
> Please ponder your absurdness and reconsider my offer of agreement.
 
The prior respondent had indicated that they specifically intended to be
dishonest. My reply was on that basis.
 
--
Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott
 
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Oct 29 07:25PM

On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:16:44 -0500
 
> > Please ponder your absurdness and reconsider my offer of agreement.
 
> The prior respondent had indicated that they specifically intended to be
> dishonest. My reply was on that basis.
 
Please stop avoiding the question in such a manipulative way.
 
Would four people saying they agree with you be enough to stop you
posting to comp.lang.c++, given that you now seem agree that it is
unacceptable to expect others to provide the proofs that you are unable
to provide yourself? (Were others to do the work, you would be robbed
of the recognition that you think you so richly deserve: you would
not even be an asterisk.)
Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>: Oct 29 07:43PM

On 29/10/2020 18:29, Nikolaj Lazic wrote:
 
> Is this the same PO?
> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/0i86aQ3WPaA
> https://www.bailbondshq.com/nebraska/sarpy-inmate-OLCOTTJr/20150325001
 
Both are PO.
Mike.
Mostowski Collapse <janburse@fastmail.fm>: Oct 29 07:40PM +0100

For gods sacke stop cross posting on 4 newsgroups.
 
Especially comp.lang.prolog doesn't make much sense.
 
RAM/RASP is probably best housed on comp.theory.
 
olcott schrieb:
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)