Wednesday, January 12, 2000, 4:04:18 PM, Claudius wrote:
> with the email you dare to post here you show your shortcomings.
Which are far less than yours.
> You are just getting really angry and aggressive
No, I am frustrated at yet another newbie trying to change the net world
and conventions to his mindset because he doesn't want to learn about its
established rules of conduct.
> the lack of arguments or your bad mood is not a reason to become personal
> insulting in a public mailing list.
They aren't insults, they are statements of fact. You don't have any
arguments and you won't listen to reason. Maybe a little shock therapy is
what you needed.
> With all your net-"culture" you are breaking netiquette and your "standards"
> let you forget the primary rules of social communication.
You are not one to talk about netiquette since you are singularly
unfamiliar with the most basic tenets of it.
> And this because I quoted in 1 out of 99 cases a different way than ">"
> and your dozen rules.
No, you didn't. Nor did you somehow magically refute that the established
net culture uses "> " as the basic quote character.
> I was trying to show you that there are different opinions about what people
> consider to be the core of an email client, that some people see some common
> points in the usage of news and emails, that sometimes one can learn from
> people's opinions that usually do not work with the internet.
I am aware there are different opinions. However, I am not discussing
"opinions." I am discussing technical *FACT* and have supported that
position. Quite frankly, I don't care that someone's opinion is that the sky
is orange with leaf brown polka dots everywhere. The fact is it is blue and
has been proven as such.
I don't care that your opinion is that you should be able to quote
willy-nilly, the fact is the standard convention is with the > character. I
don't care what your opinion is of what is "core" to an email client, the fact
is that without certain protocols and operations in place the rest is
meaningless. I don't care that your opinion is that news and email are
similar, the fact is they are technically different as well as culturally
different. Your opinions in these matters do nothing to change those facts.
> YOU sound like your position is the only possible, technically,
> ideologically correct position. And not just your opinion.
Because, like it or not, it is. Your *opinion* that I might be wrong
doesn't change the fact that I have supported my position with the technical,
historical and ideological standards of the internet. I am stating that it is
what it is because that is EXACTLY what it is. If you don't like that, fine.
I'm not about to call red blue just to appease you.
> YOU are not the online community.
No, but I know it better than most.
> YOU are the only one that has problems with that one single mail.
No, I'm the only one who doesn't let crap like that pass.
SL>> Because the standard convention in the printed medium when quoting
SL>> someone is radically different than here.
> There is NO convention in printed media.
"I beg to differ," said Steve authoritatively. "For some reason," he
continued, "people will always quote individuals by placing their words inside
quotes and normally attribute those quotes to individuals outside the quotes.
If you think this isn't the convention, pick up a couple dozen papers and read
them quoting individuals and you will see that it is quite common. That makes
it a convention of that particular media just as > quoting is a convention of
this media. You won't see > used in print any more than you will see print
quoting used here."
"Furthermore, issuing statements above without providing some supporting
evidence is quite annoying," Steve later lectured. "You're the one trying to
break the conventions and say there aren't any where there are. Support your
statements."
SL>> The convention of the culture that you have entered. I cannot believe I
SL>> still have to argue over this with every newbie that comes into a new
SL>> culture!
> I am the newbie that 'entered the culture'? Watch your mouth, Steve
> Lamb.
Yes, you are. Prove that you aren't. Nearly anyone who has been in the
net culture for more than a few months (outside of AOL) does things the proper
way for that culture.
> My utter lack of respect for the culture? Straighten up my act? Steve
> Lamb, is it time to leave this mailing list??? Do you have any respect
> for other people in you? Respect for my culture?
Yes, I do. I have respect for people who have some intelligence, some
integrity, who know their stuff and prove it by their actions. You, by your
actions, have proven that you don't know your stuff. By the very fact that
you're insisting on this idiotic debate that you're clear to lose it draws
into question your integrity and intelligence.
I may be brash, I may be rude, but like it or not, I'm right.
Glad to see you're finally quoting correctly. Amazingly, you're learning.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
