Discussion:
Quick gender change
(too old to reply)
Quinn C
2018-02-14 22:35:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:

... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
*she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...

That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.

--
If you kill one person, you go to jail; if you kill 20, you go
to an institution for the insane; if you kill 20,000, you get
political asylum. -- Reed Brody, special counsel
for prosecutions at Human Rights Watch
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-14 22:55:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:

> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>
> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>
> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.

So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
Quinn C
2018-02-14 23:12:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>
>> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>>
>> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
>> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>>
>> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
>> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
>
> So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
> humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?

Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
but their soul, feminine.

In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
object is thought of as having a name or not:

"There was this dog, it's name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

--
Are you sure your sanity chip is fully screwed in?
-- Kryten to Rimmer (Red Dwarf)
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-15 04:08:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:12:39 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:

> >> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
> >> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
> >> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
> >> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
> >> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
> > So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
> > humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>
> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
> but their soul, feminine.
>
> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
> object is thought of as having a name or not:

That's the point.

> "There was this dog, it's name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

That's more like an arthur-Navi sentence.
Quinn C
2018-02-16 22:22:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:12:39 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>
>>>> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>>>> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
>>>> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>>>> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
>>>> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
>>> So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
>>> humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>>
>> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
>> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
>> but their soul, feminine.
>>
>> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
>> object is thought of as having a name or not:
>
> That's the point.
>
>> "There was this dog, it's name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>
> That's more like an arthur-Navi sentence.

But the NPR ad has the same issue, to me.

The neutral speaker that you are supposed to ask is obviously the same
one as the female one who is listening. You can't ask "speaker, the
dead object".

--
Woman is a pair of ovaries with a human being attached, whereas
man is a human being furnished with a pair of testes.
-- Rudolf Virchow
j***@gmail.com
2018-02-22 05:12:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 4:12:39 PM UTC-7, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >
> >> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
> >>
> >> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
> >> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
> >>
> >> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
> >> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
> >
> > So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
> > humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>
> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
> but their soul, feminine.
>
> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
> object is thought of as having a name or not:
>
> "There was this dog, it's name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

This is still on albasani.
Jerry Friedman
2018-02-22 05:13:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2/21/18 10:12 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 4:12:39 PM UTC-7, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>>
>>>> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>>>>
>>>> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
>>>> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>>>>
>>>> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
>>>> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
>>>
>>> So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
>>> humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>>
>> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
>> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
>> but their soul, feminine.
>>
>> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
>> object is thought of as having a name or not:
>>
>> "There was this dog, it's name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>
> This is still on albasani.

Disregard. Cancel. Posting while sleepy.

--
Jerry Friedman
Quinn C
2018-02-14 23:13:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>
>> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>>
>> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
>> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>>
>> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
>> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
>
> So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
> humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?

Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
but their soul, feminine.

In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
object is thought of as having a name or not:

"There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

--
Are you sure your sanity chip is fully screwed in?
-- Kryten to Rimmer (Red Dwarf)
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-15 04:09:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:13:59 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:

> >> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
> >> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
> >> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
> >> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
> >> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
> > So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device, its
> > humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>
> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
> but their soul, feminine.
>
> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
> object is thought of as having a name or not:
>
> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

I see what you did there.
Quinn C
2018-02-16 22:18:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:13:59 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>
>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>
> I see what you did there.

In a regular news system, you shouldn't have seen the old version.

--
Ice hockey is a form of disorderly conduct
in which the score is kept.
-- Doug Larson
Snidely
2018-02-20 07:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
>> On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 5:35:22 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>
>>> In an ad frequently heard these days on NPR:
>>>
>>> ... tell your smart speaker - who's name I will not say, because
>>> *she* might be listening - tell *it* to play NPR ...
>>>
>>> That would really be confusing in a language that has grammatical
>>> gender. The two pronouns would *have to* have distinct referents.
>>
>> So you wouldn't be able to refer to the two different aspects of the device,
>> its humanish persona and its electromaterial essence?
>
> Sure, but either with the same article, or as two different objects.
> For example, the character of a person would be masculine in German,
> but their soul, feminine.
>
> In the quote, the pronoun seems to change depending on whether the
> object is thought of as having a name or not:
>
> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."

If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.

/dps

--
"I am not given to exaggeration, and when I say a thing I mean it"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain
Quinn C
2018-02-20 17:47:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Snidely:

> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>>
>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>
> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.

Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.

I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
surprise.

--
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to
chance.
Robert R. Coveyou
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-20 19:31:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Snidely:
> > Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
> > 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM

> >> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
> > If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>
> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>
> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
> surprise.

Messages canceled in GG are not visible to GG users. There is a note "This
message was canceled."

It's no surprise that you don't know what you're talking about when you criticize GG.
Quinn C
2018-02-20 21:49:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Snidely:
>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>
>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>>
>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>>
>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
>> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
>> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
>> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
>> surprise.
>
> Messages canceled in GG are not visible to GG users. There is a note "This
> message was canceled."

Which proves that it's an entity to itself and not part of Usenet.
Would I ask you to cancel your article on the 10 most important Usenet
servers, one by one?

> It's no surprise that you don't know what you're talking about when
> you criticize GG.

GG can do whatever it wants, but when people use it to participate in
Usenet, it's clunky.

Usenet is a system with federated servers. That word should mean
something to you. Google is a renegade state that wants to participate
without following the federal rules.

--
'Ah yes, we got that keyboard from Small Gods when they threw out
their organ. Unfortunately for complex theological reasons they
would only give us the white keys, so we can only program in C'.
Colin Fine in sci.lang
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-21 02:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 4:49:46 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Snidely:
> >>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
> >>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM

> >>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
> >>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
> >> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
> >> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
> >> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
> >> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
> >> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
> >> surprise.
> > Messages canceled in GG are not visible to GG users. There is a note "This
> > message was canceled."
>
> Which proves that it's an entity to itself and not part of Usenet.

Apparently other access devices do exactly the same thing. We had such a
complaint this morning. The word "supersede" was involved.

Oh, look. It was _you_.

> Would I ask you to cancel your article on the 10 most important Usenet
> servers, one by one?

No, you're not _that_ strange.

> > It's no surprise that you don't know what you're talking about when
> > you criticize GG.
>
> GG can do whatever it wants, but when people use it to participate in
> Usenet, it's clunky.
>
> Usenet is a system with federated servers. That word should mean
> something to you. Google is a renegade state that wants to participate
> without following the federal rules.

"Federated"? I think not.

Where is the Usenet Legislature that enacts laws? Where is the Usenet President
that executes them? Where is the Usenet Judiciary that interprets them?
Quinn C
2018-02-21 03:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 4:49:46 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Snidely:
>>>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
>>>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>
>>>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>>>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>>>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>>>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
>>>> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
>>>> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
>>>> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
>>>> surprise.
>>> Messages canceled in GG are not visible to GG users. There is a note "This
>>> message was canceled."
>>
>> Which proves that it's an entity to itself and not part of Usenet.
>
> Apparently other access devices do exactly the same thing. We had such a
> complaint this morning. The word "supersede" was involved.
>
> Oh, look. It was _you_.
>
>> Would I ask you to cancel your article on the 10 most important Usenet
>> servers, one by one?
>
> No, you're not _that_ strange.
>
>>> It's no surprise that you don't know what you're talking about when
>>> you criticize GG.
>>
>> GG can do whatever it wants, but when people use it to participate in
>> Usenet, it's clunky.
>>
>> Usenet is a system with federated servers. That word should mean
>> something to you. Google is a renegade state that wants to participate
>> without following the federal rules.
>
> "Federated"? I think not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_(information_technology)

> Where is the Usenet Legislature that enacts laws?

http://ietf.org/

> Where is the Usenet President
> that executes them? Where is the Usenet Judiciary that interprets them?

That's not how this federated system works, but I'm not going to try to
explain, for two reasons:

- It's way over your head,
- You have shown in the past that you have a vested interest in not
acknowledging the facts in this matter (for reasons I fail to grasp.)

--
A chrysanthemum by any other name would be easier to spell.
Peter Moylan in alt.usage.english
Kerr-Mudd,John
2018-02-21 10:24:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 03:35:35 GMT, Quinn C
<***@crommatograph.info> wrote:

> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 4:49:46 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>>>> * Snidely:
>>>>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info>
>>>>>> as of 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>>
[]
>
> That's not how this federated system works, but I'm not going to try
> to explain, for two reasons:
>
> - It's way over your head,
> - You have shown in the past that you have a vested interest in not
> acknowledging the facts in this matter (for reasons I fail to grasp.)
>

Why keep replying to him? He just won't accept/understand your kind
explanations.

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-21 15:20:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 5:24:47 AM UTC-5, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

> Why keep replying to him? He just won't accept/understand your kind
> explanations.

How would you know?

Are you aware that the one solitary single time I referenced you was to agree with a
certain characterization you made?
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-21 15:19:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:35:39 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 4:49:46 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 12:47:15 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>> * Snidely:
> >>>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
> >>>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM

> >>>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
> >>>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
> >>>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
> >>>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered), which is generally more
> >>>> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
> >>>> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
> >>>> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
> >>>> surprise.
> >>> Messages canceled in GG are not visible to GG users. There is a note "This
> >>> message was canceled."
> >> Which proves that it's an entity to itself and not part of Usenet.
> > Apparently other access devices do exactly the same thing. We had such a
> > complaint this morning. The word "supersede" was involved.
> > Oh, look. It was _you_.
> >> Would I ask you to cancel your article on the 10 most important Usenet
> >> servers, one by one?
> > No, you're not _that_ strange.
> >>> It's no surprise that you don't know what you're talking about when
> >>> you criticize GG.
> >> GG can do whatever it wants, but when people use it to participate in
> >> Usenet, it's clunky.
> >> Usenet is a system with federated servers. That word should mean
> >> something to you. Google is a renegade state that wants to participate
> >> without following the federal rules.
> > "Federated"? I think not.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_(information_technology)
>
> > Where is the Usenet Legislature that enacts laws?
>
> http://ietf.org/
>
> > Where is the Usenet President
> > that executes them? Where is the Usenet Judiciary that interprets them?
>
> That's not how this federated system works, but I'm not going to try to
> explain, for two reasons:

Then it wasn't an apt analogy, and "federated" is still the wrong word.

> - It's way over your head,
> - You have shown in the past that you have a vested interest in not
> acknowledging the facts in this matter (for reasons I fail to grasp.)

eh? I find nothing wrong with GG, except for the "posting limit" (which I think is because
of inadequate snipping) and not being able to see the list of crossposted ngs.
Quinn C
2018-02-21 18:19:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.

I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
there?

--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed, most experts
agree, is by accident. That's where we come in; we're computer
professionals. We cause accidents.
Nathaniel Borenstein
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-22 02:46:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:

> > [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
>
> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
> there?

What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
the wrong word.
Quinn C
2018-02-22 13:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Peter T. Daniels:

> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
>>> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
>>
>> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
>> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
>> there?
>
> What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
> structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
> it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
> reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
> the wrong word.

Thanks for confirming that I pushed your buttons exactly, in this case
the absurd belief that the US has registered "federal" at the
International Word Patent Office, a belief that disqualifies you from
ever doing any work in the field of semantics.

For the sake of my schedule and the group, I'll try to minimize my
reactions to similar ridiculousness from you.

--
*Hardware* /n./ The parts of a computer that can be kicked
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-22 15:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 8:52:18 AM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >
> >>> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
> >>
> >> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
> >> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
> >> there?
> >
> > What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
> > structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
> > it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
> > reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
> > the wrong word.
>
> Thanks for confirming that I pushed your buttons exactly, in this case
> the absurd belief that the US has registered "federal" at the
> International Word Patent Office, a belief that disqualifies you from
> ever doing any work in the field of semantics.

How idiotic. The point is that it does _not_ use the word "federated," so that when you tried
to make an analogy, you chose the wrong word.

> For the sake of my schedule and the group, I'll try to minimize my
> reactions to similar ridiculousness from you.

Yeah, right.
Snidely
2018-02-23 07:27:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thursday or thereabouts, Peter T. Daniels asked ...
> On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 8:52:18 AM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>>>
>>>>> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
>>>> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
>>>> there?
>>>
>>> What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
>>> structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
>>> it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
>>> reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
>>> the wrong word.
>>
>> Thanks for confirming that I pushed your buttons exactly, in this case
>> the absurd belief that the US has registered "federal" at the
>> International Word Patent Office, a belief that disqualifies you from
>> ever doing any work in the field of semantics.
>
> How idiotic. The point is that it does _not_ use the word "federated," so
> that when you tried to make an analogy, you chose the wrong word.

Except he didn't choose it, he just used the word in the way others in
the trade [including those writing the documentation] have used it.

>> For the sake of my schedule and the group, I'll try to minimize my
>> reactions to similar ridiculousness from you.
>
> Yeah, right.

Buttons left unpushed ... an idea that appeals to me.

/dps

--
"This is all very fine, but let us not be carried away be excitement,
but ask calmly, how does this person feel about in in his cooler
moments next day, with six or seven thousand feet of snow and stuff on
top of him?"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-02-23 12:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 2:28:00 AM UTC-5, Dave S wrote:
> On Thursday or thereabouts, Peter T. Daniels asked ...
> > On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 8:52:18 AM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> >>> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> >>>> * Peter T. Daniels:

> >>>>> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
> >>>> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
> >>>> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
> >>>> there?
> >>> What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
> >>> structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
> >>> it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
> >>> reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
> >>> the wrong word.
> >> Thanks for confirming that I pushed your buttons exactly, in this case
> >> the absurd belief that the US has registered "federal" at the
> >> International Word Patent Office, a belief that disqualifies you from
> >> ever doing any work in the field of semantics.
> >
> > How idiotic. The point is that it does _not_ use the word "federated," so
> > that when you tried to make an analogy, you chose the wrong word.
>
> Except he didn't choose it, he just used the word in the way others in
> the trade [including those writing the documentation] have used it.

Except he didn't make that point. He simply used "federated" to introduce an analogy (a
far-fetched analogy) to the US government.

> >> For the sake of my schedule and the group, I'll try to minimize my
> >> reactions to similar ridiculousness from you.
> > Yeah, right.
>
> Buttons left unpushed ... an idea that appeals to me.
s***@gmail.com
2018-02-23 20:18:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 4:21:45 AM UTC-8, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 2:28:00 AM UTC-5, Dave S wrote:
> > On Thursday or thereabouts, Peter T. Daniels asked ...
> > > On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 8:52:18 AM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> > >> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > >>> On Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 1:19:29 PM UTC-5, Quinn C wrote:
> > >>>> * Peter T. Daniels:
>
> > >>>>> [...] and "federated" is still the wrong word.
> > >>>> I'm sure the fields of nuclear physics and medieval art history also
> > >>>> wait for your evaluations of their terminology, so why don't you start
> > >>>> there?
> > >>> What do nuclear physicists and art history have to do with the governing
> > >>> structures of Usenet? If "federated" is a technical term in either of them,
> > >>> it's escaped me. But since you were using it -- _very_ loosely -- with
> > >>> reference to the structure set up in the US Constitution, you were using
> > >>> the wrong word.
> > >> Thanks for confirming that I pushed your buttons exactly, in this case
> > >> the absurd belief that the US has registered "federal" at the
> > >> International Word Patent Office, a belief that disqualifies you from
> > >> ever doing any work in the field of semantics.
> > >
> > > How idiotic. The point is that it does _not_ use the word "federated," so
> > > that when you tried to make an analogy, you chose the wrong word.
> >
> > Except he didn't choose it, he just used the word in the way others in
> > the trade [including those writing the documentation] have used it.
>
> Except he didn't make that point. He simply used "federated" to introduce an analogy (a
> far-fetched analogy) to the US government.

Well, you've convinced yourself.

/dps
s***@gmail.com
2018-02-20 22:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 9:47:15 AM UTC-8, Quinn C wrote:
> * Snidely:
>
> > Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
> > 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
> >>
> >> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
> >
> > If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>
> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>
> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered),

I have answered 2 different "name was Fido" messages, both of which
are visible on ES.

> which is generally more
> useful than a Cancel, and I use Cancel-Lock/Cancel-Key, so on most
> servers it's going to be honored. I know for the three big German ones:
> Individual, Eternal-September, Albasani. Google doesn't, to no
> surprise.

Please note my previous message was not via GG.

/dps
Quinn C
2018-02-21 03:13:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* ***@gmail.com:

> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 9:47:15 AM UTC-8, Quinn C wrote:
>> * Snidely:
>>
>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>>>>
>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>>>
>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>>
>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>>
>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered),
>
> I have answered 2 different "name was Fido" messages, both of which
> are visible on ES.

They actually aren't. I have not been pulling from ES for a while now,
so I was able to check this easily. I pulled the last 2500 messages in
the group, and only the later version of my post is shown.

There is also no answer of yours to the first version, on ES or my
current main server. Except for your two messages in this subthread, no
one other than me and PTD has posted to this thread.

The time between my original post and the Supersedes was 1:20 minutes.
That should be pretty successful.

--
Ice hockey is a form of disorderly conduct
in which the score is kept.
-- Doug Larson
Snidely
2018-02-21 07:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Quinn C formulated the question :
> * ***@gmail.com:
>
>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 9:47:15 AM UTC-8, Quinn C wrote:
>>> * Snidely:
>>>
>>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
>>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>>>>
>>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>>>
>>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>>>
>>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered),
>>
>> I have answered 2 different "name was Fido" messages, both of which
>> are visible on ES.
>
> They actually aren't. I have not been pulling from ES for a while now,
> so I was able to check this easily. I pulled the last 2500 messages in
> the group, and only the later version of my post is shown.
>
> There is also no answer of yours to the first version, on ES or my
> current main server. Except for your two messages in this subthread, no
> one other than me and PTD has posted to this thread.
>
> The time between my original post and the Supersedes was 1:20 minutes.
> That should be pretty successful.

Okay, I give. I can't prove you wrong at this point.

/dps

--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>
Quinn C
2018-02-21 13:18:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
* Snidely:

> Quinn C formulated the question :
>> * ***@gmail.com:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 20, 2018 at 9:47:15 AM UTC-8, Quinn C wrote:
>>>> * Snidely:
>>>>
>>>>> Quinn C is guilty of <10g3415sjmptw$***@mid.crommatograph.info> as of
>>>>> 2/14/2018 3:13:55 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "There was this dog, its name was Fido, and he yapped incessantly."
>>>>>
>>>>> If you sent a CANCEL, you can't count on servers honoring it.
>>>>
>>>> Just assume that I know as much about the matter as you.
>>>>
>>>> I sent a Supersede (to which you answered),
>>>
>>> I have answered 2 different "name was Fido" messages, both of which
>>> are visible on ES.
>>
>> They actually aren't. I have not been pulling from ES for a while now,
>> so I was able to check this easily. I pulled the last 2500 messages in
>> the group, and only the later version of my post is shown.
>>
>> There is also no answer of yours to the first version, on ES or my
>> current main server. Except for your two messages in this subthread, no
>> one other than me and PTD has posted to this thread.
>>
>> The time between my original post and the Supersedes was 1:20 minutes.
>> That should be pretty successful.
>
> Okay, I give. I can't prove you wrong at this point.

If you actually publicly answered to the first version of my post, just
give me the Message-ID.

My first version is probably available on the server, so you could have
gotten it in a number of ways, but it will not be actively offered.
That's how cancels are done usually.

Technically, it will be removed from the XOVER, therefore, a newsreader
pulling news the regular way will not ask for it.

--
Q: What do computer engineers use for birth control?
A: Their personalities.
Snidely
2018-02-22 09:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Quinn C explained :

> If you actually publicly answered to the first version of my post, just
> give me the Message-ID.

I would if I could. Either I'm remembering what I meant to do, or my
system has decided I shouldn't show off.

/dps

--
"I am not given to exaggeration, and when I say a thing I mean it"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain
Loading...