--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Okay. I understand.
> Still, WTF is plonk or PLONK?
> Anyone?

Plonk (Usenet)
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Plonk warning
Plonk is a Usenet jargon term for adding a particular poster to one's kill file 
such that the poster's future postings are completely ignored. It was first 
used in 1989, and by 1994[1] was a commonly used term on Usenet regarding kill 
file additions.
The word is an example of onomatopoeia, intended to humorously represent the 
supposed sound[2] of the user hitting the bottom of the kill file (imagining 
perhaps the kill file as a bucket). It is also sometimes given as an acronym 
standing for Please Log Off, Net Kook, though this is likely a backronym. Other 
used expressions are "put lamer on killfile" [3] and Please Leave Our 
Newsgroup: Killfile!
It is also used as a verb: "I plonked that idiot". As a public repudiation of 
the plonked poster, it is appended to the end of one's reply (or may constitute 
the entire reply). A user might also simply reply to the impugned post with the 
word "Plonk".
The term's usage later expanded to include the use of e-mail filters that 
delete incoming messages that meet certain filter criteria set by the receiving 
user, so block messages from annoying senders. It has also often been 
figuratively used on BBSes, webboards, blogs, IRC, and wikis (which usually do 
not actually have filters), and is occasionally used in reference to blocking a 
user on an IM protocol.

> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@> wrote:
> >
> > Well dear I'm not neutral and I refuse to plonk this time.
> > 
> > 
> > On Jul 9, 2013, at 7:18 PM, obbajeeba <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Ravi, you being a neutral and all, acould you answer this for me, please?
> > > WTF is a PLONK? 
> > > 
> > > Thank you, Obba Gopi
> > > 
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula <chivukula.ravi@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Share dear - calm down please, you are getting triggered.
> > > > 
> > > > Please look up "argue" in the dictionary as well and see how it 
> > > > compares 
> > > > to debate and engaging in conversation. Let me know if you need any 
> > > > help.
> > > > 
> > > > Hint: There's an emotional aspect in argue which isn't present in 
> > > > debate. So people usually qualify it when used with debate such as 
> > > > "heated" debate.
> > > > 
> > > > Oh what the fuck here it is
> > > > 
> > > > argue - "exchange or express diverging or opposite views, *typically in 
> > > > a heated or angry way*"
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 7/9/13 5:42 PM, Share Long wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ann's turn to PLONK. Simply amazing!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > from google dictionary
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > de·bate
> > > > >
> > > > > /diˈbāt/
> > > > > Noun
> > > > > A formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or 
> > > > > legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Verb
> > > > > Argue about (a subject), esp. in a formal manner.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Synonyms
> > > > > /noun/. discussion - dispute - argument - disputation
> > > > >
> > > > > /verb/. dispute - discuss - argue - deliberate - canvass
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > *From:* Ann <awoelflebater@>
> > > > > *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:03 PM
> > > > > *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Does the size of one's ego equate to 
> > > > > their "need to argue?"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>, Share Long <sharelong60@> 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > turq wrote: have a corollary need to portray anyone who *won't* 
> > > > > argue with them as "broken" or "defective" or "bad" in some way.
> > > > > > Judy commented: Nobody has said anything like that for days.
> > > > > > Emily to Xeno about Share: worse than that, not being willing to 
> > > > > even engage in conversation or debate or play on what she does, FFL 
> > > > > style or anything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Share replies: PLONK
> > > > >
> > > > > This is perhaps one of the most unbelievable responses I have ever 
> > > > > witnessed at FFL. "engage in conversation", "debate" or "play" arenot 
> > > > > arguing Share. My God, simply amazing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > > From: authfriend <authfriend@>
> > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 2:55 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Does the size of one's ego equate to 
> > > > > their "need to argue?"
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Â
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> > > > > <mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com>, turquoiseb <no_reply@> 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > (snip)
> > > > > > > Yet on this forum (judging from the posts I skip these days but 
> > > > > can grok
> > > > > > > the essence of just from their first words in Message View), some 
> > > > > people
> > > > > > > not *only* seem to have a constant need to argue, they *also* 
> > > > > > > seem to
> > > > > > > have a corollary need to portray anyone who *won't* argue with 
> > > > > > > them as
> > > > > > > "broken" or "defective" or "bad" in some way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, you're hallucinating again. Nobody has said anything
> > > > > > like that for days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But you've said what you say here I don't know how many
> > > > > > times. Dozens.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to