Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.os2.programmer:11358 comp.os.coherent:9167 comp.os.linux:36799 comp.os.mach:2828 comp.os.minix:22049 comp.periphs:3595 comp.unix.bsd:11943 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:2572 comp.os.386bsd.development:643
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer,comp.os.coherent,comp.os.linux,comp.os.mach,comp.os.minix,comp.periphs,comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.os.386bsd.development
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!olivea!charnel!rat!zeus!trumpet.calpoly.edu!jemenake
From: jemenake@trumpet.calpoly.edu (Joe Emenaker)
Subject: Re: QIC NEWS Vol.1 Special Edition #2
Message-ID: <1993Apr30.205928.144683@zeus.calpoly.edu>
Keywords: QIC NEWS special edition
Sender: news@zeus.calpoly.edu
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
References: <jmonroyC62JE8.9E7@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1993 20:59:28 GMT
Lines: 117
jmonroy@netcom.com (Jesus Monroy Jr) writes:
>Released
> +----------------------------------------+
> QQQQQQ II CCCCCC
> QQ QQ II CC N E W S
> QQ QQ II CC for 386bsd-Linux-Mach-OS/2
> QQ QQ II CC (and sometimes minix & coherent)
> QQQQQQ II CCCCCC Vol.1 Special Edition #2
> QQ (r)
> Quarter Inch Cartridge
> +----------------------------------------+
> News about QIC-40/80
[stuff deleted]
> >> How about:
> >>
> >> while( author(article) == jmonroy ){
> >> flame(article);
> >> delete(article);
> >> }
> >>
> Hey... you might want to copyright that early!
> Could make you a million!
>
> >> However, unless your aditude improves a bit,
> >> I am gonna stick you in my kill file.
> >>
> AHHHHH.... I will die from this surely..
> please don't!!
>
> >> Hoping that things will improve with your mind,
> >>
> *I* certainly hope so.
[stuff deleted]
> Continuing, there are other parties wishing to remain neutral
> that we must report on:
>
>
> From: nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou):
>
> "No, he's probably just an AI program run amok from
> some secret Microsoft laboratory."
Now, this idea, at first, seemed silly. However, judging from how your
responses to the feedback you received contain almost no indication of
any introspection, no indication that you've realized that all of these
people might be trying to clue you in on something, it suddenly DOES
seem possible that you're just some fancy parser routine that selects
interesting comments from the responses and then tries to generate
interesting replies; A Racter-Daemon from hell if you will.
However, theres a part of me that still thinks you're a human.
Unfortunately, it seems that you are so desensitized and so tuned-out
from feedback (due to all of the negative response) that you are unable
to take any of these responses seriously... so you just keep making a
bigger fool of yourself.
Here's a little story for you:
When I first saw the subject "QIC News", I was like: "Hey, great! We'll
finally get some hard info on controlling QIC drives... hopefully the
CMS Jumbo drives, too!".
Alas, I didn't find ANY information on programming for the QIC
controller. Instead, all I found was some guy trying to tell everyone
else on the net how to program properly. "Who the FUCK does this guy
think he IS?", I thought. "He comes across like: 'do it this way because
any other way is wrong.'." Included with all of this was a little
explanation of how to visualize multi-dim arrays by thinking of one of
ten houses on one of ten streets, in one of ten cities, etc. Oh! Well, I
didn't realize that I had subscribed to comp.lang.c.kindergarten!!! What
ever gave you the idea that you are qualified to even CONSIDER giving a
programming lesson to the net? How long have YOU been programming,
anyway? (Please keep the answer in decades)
So, that QIC News issue seemed to consist of two parts:
1 - Some guy pretending that his two cents are actually a silver dollar,
2 - A bunch of replies to flames of the guy for doing part 1 in the
previous issue.
However, in this latest issue, the first part is gone entirely, having
given way to the ever-increasing second part. Now, all you do is make
flippant remarks to people's chidings and, in so doing, show that you
haven't even given any serious thought to what they've said.
In fact, the ONLY mention of "QIC" in the issue was from people
rebuking you for the fact that there was no mention of it in the
PREVIOUS issue either!
At this point, the only thing that would convince me that there's much
consideration behind you actions at all would be if you confessed that
you're actually a sociology major doing a study on how people respond to
little annoying things that won't go away.... like gnats, mosquitoes,
and the person you seem to be.
Do us a favor. Either:
1 - Change the name of QIC-News to something OTHER than that to more
accurately reflect the content. (How about "Jesus, a legend in his
own mind"?).
2 - Make an earnest attempt to include ONLY news about the QIC standard
and programming for it. No more of this general "how to program"
crap. If you've got a set of guidelines about how to program
effectively, fine. We do, too. You don't try to step on OUR toes
and maybe we won't start a campaign to get your account frozen.
3 - Just pack up the whole circus an go home.
It's your move.
- Joe
--
Joe Emenaker - Sexual Engineer | Our infernal mailer daemon has been quite
jemenake@nike.calpoly.edu | insistent that my signature be limited to just
..or.. @bslab65.calpoly.edu | 4 lines. However, as you can see, I have
..or.. @cash.calpoly.edu | figured out an elegant way to put as many as