Markus E L wrote:
> Duane Rettig wrote:
>
>> Markus E L
>> writes:
>>
>>>> But that is not the problem of comp.lang.lisp, it is the problem of
>>> Unfortunately due to your, Ken's and Nicolas' activities this has also
>>> become a c.l.f problem. And know what: Here it's the c.l.l activists
>>> that have become the problem. So go away (or do you suggest we try the
>>> same kind of cure with you (plural) as you tried with JH?).
>> It looks like you're already trying the same kind of cure. How's that
>> working out for you?
>
> Well, depends. Duane, I know, you have problems if I'm posting too
> much, but I'm regularly appalled by the fact, that your (or Eds
> answer) doesn't get the situation:
>
>> I'm not an "activist", and I don't care much about what Jon Harrop
>> posts; I simply ignore most of what he says. But it seems you've now
>> turned me into an activist, in order to point out the hypocrasy of
>> your condemnation.
>
> I'm not putting c.l.l on CC, I'm just answering to cross-posts. Ken
> and Nicolas started cross-posting in the middle of a flame war. That
> should make a difference: The first (my behaviour) qualifies a
> legitimate, the second (Ken's and Nicolas') qualifies as disruptive.
>
> So I simply refute your accusation of hypocrisy. Perhaps you spoke up
> w/o checking your facts completely. Perhaps it's the language barrier
> again (but I wonder why it's always the same people, like you, who
> seem not to be able to understand), but you should and could know
> better. Better try next time?
>
>> It would be better for you to heed your own advice and just stop.
>
> Oh, come on. I did not ask anybody to stop answering. I asked to stop
> _actively_ transplanting c.l.l flame wars to c.l.f. Rainer Joswig has
> done that in the past, Ken Tilton and Nicolas Neuss have done it
> recently. And now I say it again (and I hope it is now clear what I'm
> asking): Please stop this, anybody. If you start a flame war with Jon
> Harrop or anybody else, keep it in c.l.l and don't start crossposting
> to c.l.f.
>
> (I'm not asking anybody to stop this thread. It will die when it is
> time, because everybody has said what needed to be said and there is
> no way to stop it anyway, isn't there).
>
> And as a message to all: Please ask yourself, how come, you got me in
> c.l.l so suddenly again: Certainly not because I'm reading c.l.l,
> certainly not because I've been putting c.l.l on CC and certainly not
> because Jon Harrop's post original post went to c.l.f. So ask yourself
> why the thread is now crossposted to both groups.
>
> If you understand how that situation came to be, you can perhaps see,
> what I don't want to see happen again: That people like Ken or Nicolas
> begin crossposting their insults to c.l.f. That is what I asked to be
> stopped, though I admit, considering the frame of mind of the
> perpetrators: It was probably useless (and we have the same usual
> suspects participating in this thread as months ago in the Jon Harrop
> wars).
>
> The other problem, the continuance of this thread is less a problem
> for me (though it might be for c.l.f or c.l.l): I can always stop
> reading, when I want. For the moment I just prefer to point out the
> errors in the (probably well meant) responses of more normal people
> who now assume a kind of symmetry between parties (which isn't there,
> for the reasons given above).
>
> Note that I don't want to punish c.l.l for Ken's or Nicolas'
> behaviour. That's not why I continue answering. I've mostly not
> engaged in insult (I used the word morons, though). Ken and Nicolas
> on the other side definitely want to punish c.l.f (as a whole) for not
> taking their side and explicitely said so AFAICS. Ken (and Nicolas?)
> have also defended use of bad language, of insulting as a way of
> implemeting their ideas of policy on c.l.l.
>
> So please: Nobody accuses me, that I'm applying "the same
> cure". Compare my posts to those of the perpetrators, and you'll see a
> difference, me thinks. Of course, if posting is an offence in itself,
> I understand your position that I'm just doing the same. Though I
> would have thought the problem, especially with Ken's strategy, is not
> that he responds, it's the content (and the crossposting).
Once folks start complaining about other folks we go straight to the
jail of self-reference do not collect $100. Above you try some
hairsplitting to bail yourself out of that jail, and those arguments are
not without merit unless you share my perspective, which is a step or
three back from the details of the noise where I can see the whole thing
starting with JH trying to promote his commercial site on c.l.l and then
folks taking issue with his pattern of posting and then yadda yadda
yadda. Nowhere in your carefully reasoned analysis do I see mention of
Jon, just me and Nicolas and someone else I forget. You also worry over
profanity, again your microscope is a little closer than the hubble I
like to use, and before you start meta-arguing over which zoom setting
is "better" the whole problem you have with us is precisely your zoom
setting which manages to crop out the big harrop bang so you will never
make sense of our cross-posting behavior.
buddha taught that the universe is one vast interconnected web of cause
and effect. centuries later some bored physicists proved a quantum event
in another galaxy could change the outcome of a billiard shot at my
corner pub. like a good lawyer you want to limit the evidence and
testimony to those bits of the universe that support your case, viz,
that Kenny is the problem. But this is Usenet, no matter how often you
say it started with me I will cut and paste Ulf saying "Why would we
want to get rid of him, Jon rocks" and the many posts where Jon taunted
c.l.l or c.l.c++, mocking folks reporting his behavior and proudly
proclaiming "sales, not hits" is why he is here.
But you just want to say, ooh, kenny has a potty mouth, and oooh, kenny
is crossposting. guilty and guilty, ie fuck yeah!, but I am doing so
deliberately, deliberately extending the chain reaction of
unpleasantness to c.l.f so that the chain reaction gets back to Jon thru
people he respects. It does no good to appeal to my normally vast
respect for other NGs (I end up in other groups quite a bit seeking help
with the many toys I like to use developing software) because that is
not the problem, the problem is Jon messing with c.l.l folks who haven't
the sense to ignore him mainly because they themselves are so decent
they keep hoping Jon will be as well.
>
> Hope that is all clear now and can probably serve as an answer to some
> others (to whom I'll not respond separately).
>
> (Though I'm sure, I'll be flamed just for the number of postings of
> today by people who didn't read this, because they couldn't be
> bothered, but -- well, can't be helped).
A pattern emerges. :) Sh*t, I have Jon in my killfile and I am still
stuck in this spiderweb
-- see what _____ started? Not to worry, I'll
get your name in there, too, I have work to do!
peace out
kenny
