I call bullshit

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

I call bullshit

Stefan Reich
...on this list.

It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.

It's the LIST. It just is against people starting something new.

Seemingly, all you guys want to do is criticize and talk, talk, talk. But not really start something that can take the world.

Sad, but well. Gotta see the truth to change it.

Cheers,
Stefan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Stefan Reich
Which brings me to the question...: How do we fix the problem?

=)


On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Stefan Reich <[hidden email]> wrote:
...on this list.

It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.

It's the LIST. It just is against people starting something new.

Seemingly, all you guys want to do is criticize and talk, talk, talk. But not really start something that can take the world.

Sad, but well. Gotta see the truth to change it.

Cheers,
Stefan

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Benjamin Heath
In reply to this post by Stefan Reich

I'm only a spectator, but I certainly haven't seen that at all. In your previous thread, everything was fine until you directed the conversation towards yourself, demanding to know why no one (apparently) had joined your project.

So, are you sure of your declaration, here?

On Apr 27, 2013 1:45 PM, "Stefan Reich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
...on this list.

It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.

It's the LIST. It just is against people starting something new.

Seemingly, all you guys want to do is criticize and talk, talk, talk. But not really start something that can take the world.

Sad, but well. Gotta see the truth to change it.

Cheers,
Stefan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Craig Barnes
On 27 April 2013 23:54, Benjamin Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm only a spectator, but I certainly haven't seen that at all. In your
> previous thread, everything was fine until you directed the conversation
> towards yourself, demanding to know why no one (apparently) had joined your
> project.
>
> So, are you sure of your declaration, here?

He comes here and does this every few months. Please
let's not turn this into another 100+ post trollfest.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Benjamin Heath

Understood. Moving along then.

On Apr 27, 2013 4:10 PM, "Craig Barnes" <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 27 April 2013 23:54, Benjamin Heath <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm only a spectator, but I certainly haven't seen that at all. In your
> previous thread, everything was fine until you directed the conversation
> towards yourself, demanding to know why no one (apparently) had joined your
> project.
>
> So, are you sure of your declaration, here?

He comes here and does this every few months. Please
let's not turn this into another 100+ post trollfest.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Alex Queiroz
In reply to this post by Benjamin Heath
Hallo,

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Benjamin Heath
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm only a spectator, but I certainly haven't seen that at all. In your
> previous thread, everything was fine until you directed the conversation
> towards yourself, demanding to know why no one (apparently) had joined your
> project.
>

It still amazes that he would receive any attention from people in
this list, in spite of his repeating offenses. I have had him
blacklisted from ages ago, but every now and then someone decides to
reply to him and I am forced to read his delusions again.

--
-alex
http://unendli.ch/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Rena
In reply to this post by Stefan Reich

On 2013-04-27 4:44 PM, "Stefan Reich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ...on this list.
>
> It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.

It is the way you present your ideas. You come in saying you have some big idea, to do something that sounds impossible, but you never explain how you intend to achieve these goals. For example, you mentioned a shell that sounds impossibly smart, and claim to have mathematical proof that it works, but you haven't shown that proof, any code, or any explanation of how it works. What are we supposed to do with a project we know nothing about?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Greg Lewin


On 28 April 2013 16:11, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 2013-04-27 4:44 PM, "Stefan Reich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ...on this list.
>
> It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.

It is the way you present your ideas. You come in saying you have some big idea, to do something that sounds impossible, but you never explain how you intend to achieve these goals. For example, you mentioned a shell that sounds impossibly smart, and claim to have mathematical proof that it works, but you haven't shown that proof, any code, or any explanation of how it works. What are we supposed to do with a project we know nothing about?


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Rena

On 2013-04-28 11:36 AM, "Greg Lewin" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder
>
> talk of solving the Halting Problem could be a clue.
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 16:11, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 2013-04-27 4:44 PM, "Stefan Reich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > ...on this list.
>> >
>> > It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.
>>
>> It is the way you present your ideas. You come in saying you have some big idea, to do something that sounds impossible, but you never explain how you intend to achieve these goals. For example, you mentioned a shell that sounds impossibly smart, and claim to have mathematical proof that it works, but you haven't shown that proof, any code, or any explanation of how it works. What are we supposed to do with a project we know nothing about?
>
>

I didn't see him claim to have solved that himself... People just seem to have assumed his alleged proof involves it. Though without seeing it, I guess assumptions are all we have.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Greg Lewin

I think you are right - I may have misinterpreted :

"> prove to us you have the chops to prove a computer program mathematically.

I've done that, and quite extensively. It's a research topic I have engaged in."

...

However, the whole tone of his posts is decidedly manic and delusional.



On 28 April 2013 17:05, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 2013-04-28 11:36 AM, "Greg Lewin" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder
>
> talk of solving the Halting Problem could be a clue.
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 16:11, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 2013-04-27 4:44 PM, "Stefan Reich" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > ...on this list.
>> >
>> > It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just can't.
>>
>> It is the way you present your ideas. You come in saying you have some big idea, to do something that sounds impossible, but you never explain how you intend to achieve these goals. For example, you mentioned a shell that sounds impossibly smart, and claim to have mathematical proof that it works, but you haven't shown that proof, any code, or any explanation of how it works. What are we supposed to do with a project we know nothing about?
>
>

I didn't see him claim to have solved that himself... People just seem to have assumed his alleged proof involves it. Though without seeing it, I guess assumptions are all we have.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Coda Highland
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I think you are right - I may have misinterpreted :
>
> "> prove to us you have the chops to prove a computer program
> mathematically.
>
> I've done that, and quite extensively. It's a research topic I have engaged
> in."
>
> ...
>
> However, the whole tone of his posts is decidedly manic and delusional.
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 17:05, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On 2013-04-28 11:36 AM, "Greg Lewin" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion
>> >
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder
>> >
>> > talk of solving the Halting Problem could be a clue.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 28 April 2013 16:11, Rena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 2013-04-27 4:44 PM, "Stefan Reich"
>> >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > ...on this list.
>> >> >
>> >> > It's not MY problem. It's not my ideas. It's not the way I present
>> >> > them. It's not my character. You can't blame it on my anymore. You just
>> >> > can't.
>> >>
>> >> It is the way you present your ideas. You come in saying you have some
>> >> big idea, to do something that sounds impossible, but you never explain how
>> >> you intend to achieve these goals. For example, you mentioned a shell that
>> >> sounds impossibly smart, and claim to have mathematical proof that it works,
>> >> but you haven't shown that proof, any code, or any explanation of how it
>> >> works. What are we supposed to do with a project we know nothing about?
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I didn't see him claim to have solved that himself... People just seem to
>> have assumed his alleged proof involves it. Though without seeing it, I
>> guess assumptions are all we have.
>
>

Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
maturity here.

/s/ Adam

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

steve donovan
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
maturity here.

Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML in emails ;)
 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Craig Barnes
In reply to this post by Coda Highland
On 2013-04-28 11:36 AM, "Greg Lewin" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
> maturity here.
>

People taking this thread seriously are just embarassing
themselves and abusing about 2000 people's mailboxes.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Greg Lewin
In reply to this post by steve donovan



On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
maturity here.

Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML in emails ;)
 



well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.

But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite immoderate in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).

afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the ill; I am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety, recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much point in pretending otherwise.

I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the malicious sort, for that matter.

(I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Coda Highland
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
>>> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
>>> maturity here.
>>>
>> Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML in
>> emails ;)
>>
>>
>
>
> well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.
>
> But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite immoderate
> in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).
>
> afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the ill; I
> am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety,
> recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much point
> in pretending otherwise.
>
> I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the malicious
> sort, for that matter.
>
> (I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).

(You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)

No one ever said you have to be patient or polite to malicious
individuals, but it's rather immature to go out of one's way to deride
someone (for any reason!) on a development mailing list.

/s/ Adam

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Greg Lewin



On 28 April 2013 18:25, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
>>> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
>>> maturity here.
>>>
>> Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML in
>> emails ;)
>>
>>
>
>
> well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.
>
> But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite immoderate
> in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).
>
> afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the ill; I
> am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety,
> recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much point
> in pretending otherwise.
>
> I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the malicious
> sort, for that matter.
>
> (I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).

(You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)

No one ever said you have to be patient or polite to malicious
individuals, but it's rather immature to go out of one's way to deride
someone (for any reason!) on a development mailing list.

/s/ Adam




it's not derision (that is your view); it is recognition.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Plain Text Mail (Was Re: I call bullshit)

Kevin Martin
In reply to this post by Coda Highland
On 28 Apr 2013, at 18:25, Coda Highland wrote:

> (You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)

Greg Lewin's email is coming through in both plain text and HTML. I'm guessing your email client is defaulting to displaying the HTML?

Sometimes it can be very difficult to force your mail program to send plaintext only emails as everything nowadays is supposed to be all singing/dancing and pretty. I have accidentally sent HTML emails quite a few times.

However, you should be able to configure your mail client to show the plaintext version of all emails by default.

In Mail on OS X, you do this:

defaults write com.apple.mail PreferPlainText -bool TRUE

Thanks,
Kev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Coda Highland
In reply to this post by Greg Lewin
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 18:25, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
>> >>> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
>> >>> maturity here.
>> >>>
>> >> Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML
>> >> in
>> >> emails ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.
>> >
>> > But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite
>> > immoderate
>> > in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).
>> >
>> > afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the
>> > ill; I
>> > am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety,
>> > recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much
>> > point
>> > in pretending otherwise.
>> >
>> > I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the
>> > malicious
>> > sort, for that matter.
>> >
>> > (I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).
>>
>> (You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)
>>
>> No one ever said you have to be patient or polite to malicious
>> individuals, but it's rather immature to go out of one's way to deride
>> someone (for any reason!) on a development mailing list.
>>
>> /s/ Adam
>>
>
>
>
> it's not derision (that is your view); it is recognition.
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=%0D%0Amanic%20state
>

It's still an ad hominem attack, focusing on a (perceived or
otherwise) flaw in the individual instead of discussing the points of
the topic at hand.

/s/ Adam

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Greg Lewin



On 28 April 2013 19:00, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 18:25, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
>> >>> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
>> >>> maturity here.
>> >>>
>> >> Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML
>> >> in
>> >> emails ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.
>> >
>> > But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite
>> > immoderate
>> > in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).
>> >
>> > afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the
>> > ill; I
>> > am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety,
>> > recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much
>> > point
>> > in pretending otherwise.
>> >
>> > I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the
>> > malicious
>> > sort, for that matter.
>> >
>> > (I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).
>>
>> (You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)
>>
>> No one ever said you have to be patient or polite to malicious
>> individuals, but it's rather immature to go out of one's way to deride
>> someone (for any reason!) on a development mailing list.
>>
>> /s/ Adam
>>
>
>
>
> it's not derision (that is your view); it is recognition.
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=%0D%0Amanic%20state
>

It's still an ad hominem attack, focusing on a (perceived or
otherwise) flaw in the individual instead of discussing the points of
the topic at hand.

/s/ Adam



I guess you still don't understand. The fact that he is in a manic state is very relevant to the scope of claims he has made earlier.

I have to hit the road now, will not be online for a while.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: I call bullshit

Paul Hudson-2

You should be very careful before diagnosing a mental condition from email. In other words, don't...

On 28 Apr 2013 19:10, "Greg Lewin" <[hidden email]> wrote:



On 28 April 2013 19:00, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 28 April 2013 18:25, Coda Highland <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Greg Lewin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 28 April 2013 18:15, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Coda Highland <[hidden email]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Whether or not the subject is a troll, there's no reason to be
>> >>> stooping to namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Let's show some
>> >>> maturity here.
>> >>>
>> >> Absolutely, let's move on. And nothing justifies using large font HTML
>> >> in
>> >> emails ;)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > well, your last line wrt maturity could be seen as ad hominem in itself.
>> >
>> > But more importantly, he is making major claims and being quite
>> > immoderate
>> > in his language in doing so (and showing clear signs of a manic state).
>> >
>> > afaics there are two main categories of troll - the malicious and the
>> > ill; I
>> > am merely pointing out that he looks very like the second variety,
>> > recognising that may save time in the long run, and I don't see much
>> > point
>> > in pretending otherwise.
>> >
>> > I don't see why anyone needs to be patient with or polite to the
>> > malicious
>> > sort, for that matter.
>> >
>> > (I did not realize I was coming through large, my apologies).
>>
>> (You're stil coming through quite large, looks like about 18pt.)
>>
>> No one ever said you have to be patient or polite to malicious
>> individuals, but it's rather immature to go out of one's way to deride
>> someone (for any reason!) on a development mailing list.
>>
>> /s/ Adam
>>
>
>
>
> it's not derision (that is your view); it is recognition.
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=%0D%0Amanic%20state
>

It's still an ad hominem attack, focusing on a (perceived or
otherwise) flaw in the individual instead of discussing the points of
the topic at hand.

/s/ Adam



I guess you still don't understand. The fact that he is in a manic state is very relevant to the scope of claims he has made earlier.

I have to hit the road now, will not be online for a while.

12