Tom Galvin wrote:

> IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in
> news:l4as40lb39iv61huj2r191n76q3jbfir3u@4ax.com: 
> 
> 
> 
>>Any rules I have broken I have corrected myself on.  I'm no longer
>>using foul language. 
That may be so (for some value of foul) but you are still being rude
to anyone who might have a different opinion. So that you have
corrected yourself is a blatant lie.
>> The format postings were, after all, permitted.
>>Yes, I certainly appear rude to some, but let's face it, when in
>>argument with others, one certainly will appear rude.
If a large number of people complain about your behaviour then
take the hint, try to understand what they find rude and stop
doing it. FYI any statement from you along the lines of:
'one million lemmings can't be wrong' or statements of similar
intent, I will regard as rude, childish, and not to the point.
> 
> 
> IMHO, I think most people who frequent this server prefer having a 
> discussion rather than an argument.  Perhaps you misunderstood the intent 
> of my earlier quote of the the Acceptable Use Policy.  That specific 
> paragraph not only referenced profanity, but conduct as well.  Rude 
> behavior and harrasment are not condoned.  I include the relevant paragraph 
> below.
> 
>     Users of this news server may not post messages that could
>     reasonably be expected, by today's standards, to cause another
>     reasonable person to not want to use or visit this server due
>     to a feeling of harassment. Personal attacks, exhibiting
>     insulting or abusive behavior, are not an acceptable activity
>     on this news server. Likewise, the use of profanity is also
>     considered unacceptable.

I am seriously considering leaving if I see any more of this kind of
post from IMBJR. Not only does it takes too much time to go through
these senseless discussions, but I feel often so offended that it
takes also a considerable amount of time to calm down.
(IMBJR: any comment hinting at my sensitivity I will consider rude,
childish, and not to the point.)

Is there a place where I can register a formal complaint?

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 20:23:32 -0500, Christopher James Huff
<cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:

>> Now you give the greater detail. Sheeh! Dear me. I think you need to
>> leave if you cannot get it right first time.
>
>Why? You're the one causing trouble. I don't think anyone here would be 
>sad to see you leave. I would be very glad to see that happen. In fact, 
>I will state it as a personal request: Please leave, now, and never come 
>back.
>

I'll second this!

Post a reply to this message

IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in
news:1kks40pm331veesda157r26ivulhfl5cj1@4ax.com: 


> 
> This shall endevour to adhere to. 
> 
> Interestingly, though it does tend to make for a blander world though
> and is horribly open to interpretation. 
> 

NYC has plenty of rude, profane, harrasing interactions between people. 
However those same folks will become more courteous when entering certain 
islands of civility, like galleries, museums, theaters, restaurants... 

The internet has plenty of rude, profane, harrasing interactions between 
people.  Just think of this server as one those islands of civility.  It 
certianly has an amazing gallery.

-- 
Tom
_________________________________
The Internet Movie Project
http://www.imp.org/

Post a reply to this message

In article <3dbs40djq5o6hubm38mdjb4fgef5cdopes@4ax.com>, no### [at] spamhere 
says...
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:22:58 -0700, Patrick Elliott
> <sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> 
> >Given absolutely no other choice, so would I. However, that still means 
> >my camera that 'could' have taken around 30 high quality images (at 
> >around 2MB a piece with PNG, maybe less) can only take at most 10 images 
> >*if* I am using a 64MB memory card in it (with RAW and TIFF taking 5-6MB 
> >per image). I may as well use a normal camera and get 30 or more photos 
> >and have the advantage of negatives I can losslessly blow up to 100 times 
> >the normal photograph size. A digital camera *needs* to be able to at 
> >least match the same number of photos a normal camera can or what is the 
> >point?
> 
> Now you are talking, but then the scanner is going to have to be a
> good one.
> 
What scanner? Most places now will provide you with a CD containing 
digital copies of everything you took with the normal cameras. This may 
differ outside the US I supposed. Also some CD drives had issues reading 
the format, but generally only older models. The only real advantage a 
digital camera gives is "instant use" of the image or the ability to 
transfer it to your laptop as you take it (which inevitably saves the 
result in the same crappy JPG format. I swear that a few of them may even 
make it worse, since the camera probably uses group of settings, but your 
photo editor uses something else, so different artifacts get added in 
each process. After all, the programs don't save the file that came right 
off the camera, but a new version 'they' write based on decoding the 
image to view it.

-- 
void main () {

    call functional_code()
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:404e5536$1@news.povray.org...
> IMBJR wrote:
> > I am. Do you understand this simple concept? Here in the UK we
have
> > ADSL - it simply will not reach me.
>
> Dude, I worked on the team who invented it. I also hold a couple
patents
> related to it. I understand the concept a heck of a lot better than
you do.

    He's not wrong. In some places, you just can't get it yet. Hell,
there's even online campaigns to get it for some places. Here's what
it says about Wales, I'm in the 30% bracket that can't get it yet:

     http://62.172.198.79/broadband1/where_i_live/region_10.asp

     ~Steve~





>
> -- 
> Darren New, San Diego CA USA (PST)
>    I am in geocentric orbit, supported by
>    a quantum photon exchange drive....

Post a reply to this message

On 9 Mar 2004 19:17:33 -0500, Tom Galvin <tom### [at] imporg> wrote:

>IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in
>news:1kks40pm331veesda157r26ivulhfl5cj1@4ax.com: 
>
>
>> 
>> This shall endevour to adhere to. 
>> 
>> Interestingly, though it does tend to make for a blander world though
>> and is horribly open to interpretation. 
>> 
>
>NYC has plenty of rude, profane, harrasing interactions between people. 
>However those same folks will become more courteous when entering certain 
>islands of civility, like galleries, museums, theaters, restaurants... 
>
>The internet has plenty of rude, profane, harrasing interactions between 
>people.  Just think of this server as one those islands of civility.  It 
>certianly has an amazing gallery.

Comparing this place with NYC's finest is a joke.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 00:42:38 +0100, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:

>
>
>Tom Galvin wrote:
>
>> IMBJR <no### [at] spamhere> wrote in
>> news:l4as40lb39iv61huj2r191n76q3jbfir3u@4ax.com: 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>Any rules I have broken I have corrected myself on.  I'm no longer
>>>using foul language. 
>That may be so (for some value of foul) but you are still being rude
>to anyone who might have a different opinion. So that you have
>corrected yourself is a blatant lie.

People are rude me, I respond in kind. Seems we are all in breach of
that rather vague AUP.

>>> The format postings were, after all, permitted.
>>>Yes, I certainly appear rude to some, but let's face it, when in
>>>argument with others, one certainly will appear rude.
>If a large number of people complain about your behaviour then
>take the hint, try to understand what they find rude and stop
>doing it. FYI any statement from you along the lines of:
>'one million lemmings can't be wrong' or statements of similar
>intent, I will regard as rude, childish, and not to the point.

Talk about trolling. Are you trying to get me into trouble?

>> 
>> 
>> IMHO, I think most people who frequent this server prefer having a 
>> discussion rather than an argument.  Perhaps you misunderstood the intent 
>> of my earlier quote of the the Acceptable Use Policy.  That specific 
>> paragraph not only referenced profanity, but conduct as well.  Rude 
>> behavior and harrasment are not condoned.  I include the relevant paragraph 
>> below.
>> 
>>     Users of this news server may not post messages that could
>>     reasonably be expected, by today's standards, to cause another
>>     reasonable person to not want to use or visit this server due
>>     to a feeling of harassment. Personal attacks, exhibiting
>>     insulting or abusive behavior, are not an acceptable activity
>>     on this news server. Likewise, the use of profanity is also
>>     considered unacceptable.
>
>I am seriously considering leaving if I see any more of this kind of
>post from IMBJR. Not only does it takes too much time to go through
>these senseless discussions, but I feel often so offended that it
>takes also a considerable amount of time to calm down.
>(IMBJR: any comment hinting at my sensitivity I will consider rude,
>childish, and not to the point.)

Talk about trolling. Are you trying to get me into trouble?

>
>Is there a place where I can register a formal complaint?

Please, put me in your killfile and be done with it.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 18:15:03 -0700, Patrick Elliott
<sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

>In article <3dbs40djq5o6hubm38mdjb4fgef5cdopes@4ax.com>, no### [at] spamhere 
>says...
>> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:22:58 -0700, Patrick Elliott
>> <sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> 
>> >Given absolutely no other choice, so would I. However, that still means 
>> >my camera that 'could' have taken around 30 high quality images (at 
>> >around 2MB a piece with PNG, maybe less) can only take at most 10 images 
>> >*if* I am using a 64MB memory card in it (with RAW and TIFF taking 5-6MB 
>> >per image). I may as well use a normal camera and get 30 or more photos 
>> >and have the advantage of negatives I can losslessly blow up to 100 times 
>> >the normal photograph size. A digital camera *needs* to be able to at 
>> >least match the same number of photos a normal camera can or what is the 
>> >point?
>> 
>> Now you are talking, but then the scanner is going to have to be a
>> good one.
>> 
>What scanner? 

The scanner they use for the negatives? You *are* referring to
chemical prints aren't you?


--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 15:37:25 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
wrote:

>IMBJR wrote:
>> I am. Do you understand this simple concept? Here in the UK we have
>> ADSL - it simply will not reach me. 
>
>Dude, I worked on the team who invented it. I also hold a couple patents 
>related to it. I understand the concept a heck of a lot better than you do.

So? That still does not mean I gets to play with ADSL. You should
understand that.

>
>> T1? Well, whilst we are burning money let's get the pavement outside
>> the house paved with diamonds.
>
>Is it broadband? Yes. Are you out of range of it? No. Nobody mentioned a 
>word about cost so far.

I did. Just then. This is not about laziness, my chum, it is about
cost.

>
>You chose not to get it not because you're lazy, but because it costs 
>too much. 

Well, duh! So bang so your lazy accusations. Dear me!

>Others chose not to download random 3rd-party image viewers 
>that may or may not work and may or may not corrupt other software on 
>their system that they rely on, not because they're lazy but because it 
>costs them too much. Said costs are not always measured in dollars, or 
>pounds.

Costs? The software can be sourced freely. Just because you've been
bitten by software does not mean we all have.

>
>Understand?

All too well that you do not.

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:58:57 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
>news:404e5536$1@news.povray.org...
>> IMBJR wrote:
>> > I am. Do you understand this simple concept? Here in the UK we
>have
>> > ADSL - it simply will not reach me.
>>
>> Dude, I worked on the team who invented it. I also hold a couple
>patents
>> related to it. I understand the concept a heck of a lot better than
>you do.
>
>    He's not wrong. In some places, you just can't get it yet. Hell,
>there's even online campaigns to get it for some places. Here's what
>it says about Wales, I'm in the 30% bracket that can't get it yet:
>
>     http://62.172.198.79/broadband1/where_i_live/region_10.asp

Exactly!

>
>     ~Steve~
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> -- 
>> Darren New, San Diego CA USA (PST)
>>    I am in geocentric orbit, supported by
>>    a quantum photon exchange drive....

--------------------------------
My First Subgenius Picture Book:
http://www.imbjr.com

Post a reply to this message