On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:04 PM, Al Gest <himse...@gmail.com> wrote: > Who's likely to behave more intelligently, a person who experiments > and finds out what works and doesn't work for themselves and > understands from experience why things work or don't work, or a person > who religiously follows the preaching of some overcompensating > jackass?
Specious question. > flawed, you're just throwing fallacious remarks with the apparent aim > of pressuring your opponent into submission. I'm not responsible for your inferences. > There are people in this world, like Theo de Raadt, who through their > passion and frustration come across as assholes to the people at odds > with them, but still provide a constructive argument, and then there > are angry nerds who just come across as complete jackasses. Then there are whiners. > How you say something doesn't alter the substance of what you're > saying, and it is the substance that provides merit. There is no > substance in calling somebody stupid without explaining the why. "Why" has been explained many times in the past on this very list. On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 9:08 PM, errno <er...@cox.net> wrote: > So what now? Do we exchange gps coordinates so we can duke it > out physically, you lizard brained, pencil-necked fuckwad. That'll > prove who's right about... transparent fucking terminals of all things. Didn't take you long to shift into internet tough guy mode, eh? > I got a better idea. How about if you just take your pigheaded antisocial > misgivings and shuv them up your gaping asshole along with that brainfull > of shit head of yours? I think you forgot to delete the word "brain"? Not sure what's going on here. I think maybe the idea is that you're angry because I don't like transparent terminals? Write back > Next time, remove the giant throbbing horse dick out of your mouth > before you open it. Though I know that might be difficult, what with > your insatiable appetite for cock. I don't normally open my mouth to type. Transparent terminals unnecessarily increase computational power required to render simple text. They make a fundamental application harder for a computer to run. This makes the core program less portable by raising the hardware requirements. The only gain is (arguably) aesthetic. This, in short, is a completely braindead idea of no practical value, unless you tend to use a computer in the manner of someone who has been hit very hard in the head and has forgotten entirely what computers do and what terminals are
