lacking follow-through

[Carl Banks]

Re: lacking follow-through

On Sep 12, 12:35 pm, Fredrik Lundh <fred...@python ware.comwrote:

Steve Holden wrote:

The defence rests.

>
can you please stop quoting that guy, so we don't have to killfile you
as well...

Guy?


Carl Banks

[Carl Banks]

Re: lacking follow-through

On Sep 12, 8:16 am, Steve Holden <st...@holdenwe b.comwrote:

castironpi wrote:

On Sep 7, 5:03 pm, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <bj_...@gmx.net wrote:

On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:34:55 +1000, James Mills wrote:
>This is the strangest post I've seen
>since I've joined this list (only
>recently). What the ?
Yeah, castironpi sometimes doesn't make much sense.  Maybe because it's a
bot!?  :-)

>

Ciao,
        Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch

>

No, I'm legit, and I believe my complaint is.  That's all I can
guarantee anyway.  While I'm still not a vet on Usenet, I'm still
disappointed so far.  Though I should be flattered for my logic to be
ever compared to an A.I.'s.

>
Your various outpourings appear so rambling and ill-conceived that
silence is often the only polite response.
>
If you are flattered to be compared to an AI you must come from the same
race as Mr. Spock in Star Trek.

I'm surprised there is anyone who still gives castironpi credit for
being fully human.


Carl Banks

[Terry Reedy]

Re: lacking follow-through

Carl Banks wrote:

I'm surprised there is anyone who still gives castironpi credit for
being fully human.

His recent posts have generally been quite different from those of some
months ago. Even he recognizes that they were somewhat weird and has
tried to do better.

Did he ever make any degrading attacks on people like the above, to
deserve receiving such? This reminds me of my elementary school, where
people who made social mistakes were sometimes never allowed to recover
but were dumped on for years.

tjr

[Paul Boddie]

Re: lacking follow-through

On 13 Sep, 08:38, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.e duwrote:

>
His recent posts have generally been quite different from those of some
months ago. Even he recognizes that they were somewhat weird and has
tried to do better.

And I think we should at least go along with people if they're willing
to raise their level of discussion. I'd much rather read messages at
the level of the one which initiated this thread than idiotic,
supposedly humorous responses about contributors being "bots".

Did he ever make any degrading attacks on people like the above, to
deserve receiving such? This reminds me of my elementary school, where
people who made social mistakes were sometimes never allowed to recover
but were dumped on for years.

I get this impression as well: that "seniority" gives some kind of
right to dump on anyone, and that we should all find this a source of
amusement. It seems more like American high school, Hollywood style,
if you ask me.

Paul