On 07/06/2013 03:25 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 06/07/2013 6:11 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
>>> My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
>>> in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
>>> instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
>>> persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.
>>
>>
>> You are commendably conscientious, Michael.
>>
>> --
>> Regards
>>       Stephen
>
> Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no access
> to the POV wiki.
>
> Best regards,
> Michael
>
>
Ya know what Micheal ... I have other things to do than just POV-Wiki 
... and we have had a holiday here and I'd like to spend some time with 
my family. You are just to impatient for me, all just because no one 
answered in a timely manner. Oh and BTW I'd sure appreciate it if you'd 
refrain from making anymore fuckin' disparaging remarks about me, the 
process or people that are helping. LOL ... I'm not rejecting you ... 
I'm freekin' ignoring you.

Post a reply to this message

I, for one, and I'm sure Jim neither, didn't mean to be hostile with you
Michael, I am not the one in charge of documentation, Jim is, And thanks mostly
to him and the rest of the community, of whom you are more part of than myself,
POV-Ray has the best documentation in the whole open source world. That's why I
tried to be maybe a little too cautious to lose nothing of the so precious
POV-Ray links legacy. I still mean to pursue this goal, but as you pointed it
out, a wiki is more flexible than I'm used to think of, and I'll just go into
the history to restore what gets lost. So please in any case, do join us and
contribute, any way you please. I am sorry you got offended and managed to
offend Jim  because of my being too directive.
(i am not a native speaker, and I hope any misunderstanding gets cleared)

> > Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> > here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> > understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no accessh
> > to the POV wiki.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Michael

Post a reply to this message

Hi Maurice,

yes sometimes things are lost to translation and I will put our
misunderstandings as this. And I really hope that this quarrel ends now. And I
hope you can take gain from my findings I posted to the other thread here. About
Jim: I read his last posting here and I think that we should not take it too
seriously. My personal impression is that he was not sober while writing this
offensive lines against me, so I will forgive him.

Best regards from Darmstadt to the south of France,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

James Holsenback <nom### [at] nonecom> wrote:
> On 07/06/2013 03:25 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> > Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> >> On 06/07/2013 6:11 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> >>> My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
> >>> in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
> >>> instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
> >>> persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.
> >>
> >>
> >> You are commendably conscientious, Michael.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards
> >>       Stephen
> >
> > Yes I am. But I was rejected by Jim and Maurice, Maurice seems to be the master
> > here and I was made very clearly to accept this youngster. I still cannot
> > understand this behaviour by Jim or Maurice, but they simply give me no access
> > to the POV wiki.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Michael
> >
> >
> Ya know what Micheal ... I have other things to do than just POV-Wiki
> ... and we have had a holiday here and I'd like to spend some time with
> my family. You are just to impatient for me, all just because no one
> answered in a timely manner. Oh and BTW I'd sure appreciate it if you'd
> refrain from making anymore fuckin' disparaging remarks about me, the
> process or people that are helping. LOL ... I'm not rejecting you ...
> I'm freekin' ignoring you.

I really hope you apologize for this one very soon. Seems your are a heavier
drunkard like me.

Best regards
Michael

Post a reply to this message

On 07/07/2013 8:48 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
> Seems your are a heavier
> drunkard like me.

I think that you mean "heavy drinker" not drunkard. Calling someone a 
drunkard is offensive. :-)
A nod's as good as a wink... ;-)

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7/6/2013 10:28 PM, James Holsenback wrote:
> LOL ... I'm not rejecting you ... I'm freekin' ignoring you.

Didn't I warned you? Too much drama.  :)

Post a reply to this message

On 7/7/2013 2:36 PM, MichaelJF wrote:
>  My personal impression is that he was not sober while writing this
> offensive lines against me, so I will forgive him.

Post a reply to this message

On 7/7/2013 4:45 PM, Stephen wrote:
> Calling someone a drunkard is offensive.

He obviously intended it to be.

Post a reply to this message

> My point here is, that we should use the wayback machine more carefully as done
> in the past. I think regaining an old include file which still can be
> instructive after all the years is safe. But regaining complete old sites from
> persons who developed into an other direction may be cause trouble.

How may it cause trouble? Should we also not reference magazines, 
newspapers or books that have since gone out of print?

Post a reply to this message

I hope we can settle down all this matters. Thank you Stephen, yes I was unaware
of this difference, and I will apologize for using the word drunkard (@Todd: I
not intended it). (Seems to be we have the corresponging expressions
 "Trinker"=drinker and "Saeufer"=drunkard in German). And it may be that the
word "fucking" is taken much more offensive in Germany than in the U.S. I was
impatient only due to the fact that Maurice started to work at the link list and
did work I already had done. I have asked for an contact information where
to post my results very early but got no answer over some days. May be simply
because I addressed no special person (Maurice or Jim), so no one of them felt
responsible and nothing happened. The POV-Wiki is completely sealed. There is
first no option to register an account, there is still no option to contact
one of the maintainers. So it is no Wiki, it only looks like one. Within the POV
newsgroups Jim and Maurice hides their email-adresses (noo### [at] nomailcom or such
things). So I had no option to give them my list. Please forgive me my
frustration about this. Than I found the Web-Site of Maurice by looking at the
Blender-Site but I was not really sure if it was really the right person
(probability 1 means not certainty).

A second thing is that I completely underestimated the meaning of the American
Indipendence Day to Jim (especially being at a Thursday). As he states at his
Blog he was a veteran of the U.S. Army so this day will have a big importance
for him. This involves the comcept of national pride and a very special German
isuue. Most people (unfortunatelly not all) of my generation (50+) feel ashamed
being a German due to the cruelties Hitler gave to the world. Even born after
that and having no real responsibility most of my generation is not proud to be
German. This changes for the younger Germans. But can one really be proud
for a fact he has no say in? I can be proud about things I have created myself
but not at things that simply happens to me, like the place of birth. Our
national Holiday is the date of the reunion of West and East Germany, which is a
good development but did not erase Hitler or Stalin from history.

Best regards,
Michael

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message