«

Dan Pop <> wrote in message
news:bgdi7q$e6l$...

[snip]

> Being a non-moderated newsgroup, the topicality is effectively defined
> by what the majority of the newsgroup regulars want to talk about. If
> they decide to ignore any C questions and start debating the merits of
> one-piece vs two-piece female swimsuits,

I vote we do that. C programs just aren't as enjoyable to
look at


-Mike

I've been lurking for awhile, and I notice that there are some real
tight-assed
prigs around here.

Bitch, bitch, bitch.

So what if it's not "Standard C?" If it looks like C, smells like C,
quacks
like C, and compiles like C, it's probably close enough.

But all this petty sniping kind of wants to dissuade me from
participating
here, and I wonder how much of you ****-ants bitch-slapping the
newbies has
driven them away.

And they're so fond of saying, "According to the Charter ..." Well,
Where's
The Charter?

A google advanced search on "charter group:news.announce.*
insubject:comp insubject:lang insubject:c" turned up:
--------------------<begin quote>------------------------

Searched English messages for charter group:news.announce.*
insubject:comp.lang.c. Results 1 - 7 of 7. Search took 0.78
seconds.

Sorted by relevance Sort by date

Sponsored Links
Newsgroup Access $4.95 mo
Starting at $4.95 mo. get instant
access to all the newsgroups
www.nntpservers.com
Interest:


See your message here...
RFD: comp.lang.c.crossplatform
.... CHARTER: comp.lang.c.crossplatform comp.lang.c.crossplatform
provides a forum for
discussing issues the C programmer can benefit from, whether or not
they ...
news.announce.newgroups - Jun 8, 1999 by -
View Thread (1 article)

RFD: comp.lang.c.code
.... CHARTER: comp.lang.c.code comp.lang.c.code is an un-moderated news
group for discussion
of common C programming problems and questions where participants are
....
news.announce.newgroups - Sep 5, 1995 by Bob Stout - View Thread (1
article)

RFD: comp.lang.c.moderated moderated
.... in crossposted to news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,
comp.lang.c, and comp.std.c.
NAME of GROUP: comp.lang.c.moderated DISTRIBUTION: world. CHARTER: For
the ...
news.announce.newgroups - Nov 26, 1994 by John William Chambless -
View Thread (1 article)

CFV: comp.lang.c.moderated moderated
.... of 2) moderated group comp.lang.c.moderated Newsgroups line:
comp.lang.c.moderated
The C ... CHARTER For the discussion of C programming topics that are
NOT system ...
news.announce.newgroups - Jan 22, 1995 by Ron "Asbestos" Dippold -
View Thread (1 article)

CALL FOR VOTES to create comp.lang.objective-c
.... 7.] This is a call for votes to create the news group
comp.lang.objective-c. This
group would be unmoderated and have the following proposed charter:
The news ...
news.announce.newgroups - Jul 17, 1990 by Charles Noren - View Thread
(1 article)

CALL FOR DISCUSSION to create comp.lang.objective-c
.... call for discussion for the creation of the news group
comp.lang.objective-c. This
group would be unmoderated and have the following proposed charter:
The news ...
news.announce.newgroups - Jun 22, 1990 by Charles Noren - View Thread
(1 article)

RESULT: comp.lang.c.moderated moderated passes 330:14
.... Newsgroups line: comp.lang.c.moderated The C programming language.
.... CHARTER For the
discussion of C programming topics that are NOT system-specific and
NOT ...
news.announce.newgroups - Mar 8, 1995 by Ron "Asbestos" Dippold - View
Thread (1 article)


-----------------------------<end quote>-----------------------------

As you can see, a charter for everything BUT comp.lang.c .

Which makes it a pretty stupid thing to get all petty about.

I'll check in after awhile and see if any actual programmers have
shown up.

Regards,
Rich

BTW, email to my header address just gets deleted. If you want me to
read
an email from you, hand-copy the header address and delete the
contiguous
'a', 'r', and 'd'.

On 31 Jul 2003 12:38:23 -0700, (Rich Grise) wrote:

[snip]
>And they're so fond of saying, "According to the Charter ..." Well,
>Where's
>The Charter?

As many others will tell you, the comp.lang.c usenet newsgroup predates quite a
lot of the administrivia that goes into creating a new newsgroup. I doubt that
the original usenet creators of this newsgroup ever published a charter.

[snip]

--
Lew Pitcher
IT Consultant, Enterprise Technology Solutions
Toronto Dominion Bank Financial Group

(Opinions expressed are my own, not my employers')

Rich Grise wrote:
> I've been lurking for awhile, and I notice that there are some real
> tight-assed
> prigs around here.

Perhaps some, but not in general.

>
> Bitch, bitch, bitch.
>
> So what if it's not "Standard C?" If it looks like C, smells like C,
> quacks
> like C, and compiles like C, it's probably close enough.

No. Not really.

>
> But all this petty sniping kind of wants to dissuade me from
> participating
> here, and I wonder how much of you ****-ants bitch-slapping the
> newbies has
> driven them away.

Not the smart ones.

[snip]

Here's a comment I addressed to one with a similar attitude a couple of
years ago.

> It's all about maintaining topicality -- to help ensure the usability of
> this forum well into the future. When the signal-to-noise ratio degrades
> on a newsgroup, those best equipped to answer questions -- a purely
> altruistic endeavor -- stop doing so. This newsgroup discusses the ISO
> standard C language -- certainly a large enough subject in its own right.
>
> The other reason why it's best to post to the most specific newsgroup
> possible is that that's where the expertise in a given subject lies;
> it's a brutal form of quasi-realtime peer review, which benefits those
> asking questions (as any mistake made by a respondent will most
> certainly be corrected).
>

I hope this clears things up. The attempt to enforce topicality is
nothing more than an attempt to maintain the usefulness of the newsgroup
-- both to those with questions and those with answers.

HTH,
--ag
--
Artie Gold -- Austin, Texas

"Rich Grise" <> wrote in message
news: om...
[a lot of things]

Not everyone here has such strongly typed attitudes. Anyway it would seem
that you are a bit het up yourself and have resorted to profanity.

Here in comp.lang.c, according to my understanding we talk about ANSI
standard C. Unfortunately people do tend to questions which are C related,
but are also specific to a given implementation, or operating system. This
means that the readers here may not be able to answer the questions, and
ofcourse there are often newsgroups dedicated specifically to C, under given
operating systems and compilers.

It's hopeless to assume that this group could be used effectively for all
and any questions on C, some of which would be very irrelevant to many
people. It is then ANSI C that people hope to discuss here.

It is unfortunate, I think, that this group is not called comp.lang.ansi.c
( or similar ) but I guess in the early days there wasn't ANSI C. I would
agree that sometimes people may get over upset in some cases where, the
question isn't wholly ANSI C, or doesn't have an 'ANSI C' answer.

Example:

How does memory allocation work in C behind the scenes?

It's not really mentioned in the standard but many people could, and often
do provide likely, or at least interesting thoughts on the subject, which I
think (personally) isn't that bad or offtopic.

"Rich Grise" <> wrote in message
>
> I've been lurking for awhile, and I notice that there are some real
> tight-assed prigs around here.
>
I wish people would realise that this is an international ng. Vulgar
language is acceptable in some cultures, but not in all, particularly when
children might be reading.

Rich Grise wrote:

> And they're so fond of saying, "According to the Charter ..." Well,
> Where's
> The Charter?

I don't know who this "they" is. You may get referred to the FAQ, but
that doesn't discuss topicality. There is no charter. This newsgroup
is one of the first established, long before the current newsgroup
naming rules, so with a different name, and long before charters for
newsgroups. It has survived and not turned into one of the many usenet
cesspools because we *do* stick to the topic of the newsgroup. It is
part of the culture of the newsgroup, which arose before people needed
legislation to decide how to behave.


--
Martin Ambuhl

Rich Grise wrote:

> Well, Where's The Charter?

I don't think that there is one
and I don't think that it matters anyway.

The comp.lang.c newsgroup is *not* moderated.
You can post anything you like.
The only question is whether or not anyone will respond.
The comp.lang.c newsgroup has more than its fair share
of "off-topic cops" but they are merely expressing an opinion.
They succeed only to the extent that they can persuade
other subscribers *not* to respond to articles
that they consider to be off-topic.
If you don't agree with them, please ignore them.

I believe that most subscribers to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
subscribe because they are interested in reading about
ANSI/ISO standard C but most of the contributers are well aware
that they are not "know-it-alls" who are expert
in every implementation of the C computer programming language
and that there are more appropriate forms for discussion
of extensions to ANSI/ISO C that are frequented by experts
in those implementations. Whenever possible,
we try to re-direct implementation specific questions
to a more appropriate forum.
I subscribe to gnu.gcc.help for example and sometimes
answer questions there knowing that, if I say something wrong,
I will be immediately corrected by someone who understands
the question better than I do.

Greg P. wrote:
> "Artie Gold" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> | > But all this petty sniping kind of wants to dissuade me from
> | > participating
> | > here, and I wonder how much of you ****-ants bitch-slapping the
> | > newbies has
> | > driven them away.
> |
> | Not the smart ones.
> | [snip]
> What do you mean by smart? I think you mean thick-skinned?

Perhaps. It was more of a throwaway line related to the OPs attitude
than anything else. `Thick-skinned' may be part of it however -- but
it's also the realization that c.l.c is a great resource for learning;
some of the regulars with the most "attitude" provide the best learning
experience as well.

>
> I remember when I first learned C. I don't think I could have been placed
> into the category of "newbies: smart ones". I made more bugs than I did code
> and caused a few seg faults in the process.

Ah, but you persevered! If being "smart" meant knowing all the stuff
already, "smart" folks would never need to ask questions!

>
> This news group is an awesome resource for conversing (the best IMO), but
> some people here are a little too hard on the new guys. They seem to have a
> "holier than though" ego sometimes, like: "Why don't you know as much as
> me?". This isn't fair.

Well, I don't really see much of that myself, but in general the best
policy is to take the info and forget the 'tude.

>
> Of course, though, my argument does not extend to not reading the FAQ:
> that's a different case. I also think that (besides in some peeps
> signatures) the FAQ should be posted a bit more often.

Yup. Programming of any sort takes knowledge and talent, exhibiting
proper etiquette requires little of either. It is almost always those
who can't be bothered to make even a minimal effort toward the latter
that get "flamed to a crisp".

As far as FAQs are concerned, there's always http://www.faqs.org.

Cheers,
--ag


--
Artie Gold -- Austin, Texas

Greg P. wrote:

> Artie Gold wrote:
>
> | > But all this petty sniping kind of wants to dissuade me from
> | > participating
> | > here, and I wonder how much of you ****-ants bitch-slapping the
> | > newbies has
> | > driven them away.
> |
> | Not the smart ones.
> | [snip]

> What do you mean by smart? I think you mean thick-skinned?

> I remember when I first learned C.
> I don't think that
> I could have been placed into the category of "newbies: smart ones".
> I made more bugs than I did code
> and caused a few seg faults in the process.
> This news group is an awesome resource for conversing (the best IMO)
> but some people here are a little too hard on the new guys.
> They seem to have a "holier than though" ego sometimes, like:
> "Why don't you know as much as me?". This isn't fair.

What do you expect from computer geeks and nerds.
These aren't the most sensitive, well adjusted people.
Some of them have serious emotional problems
and are prone to vent their anger an frustration
on unwary new subscribers who aren't prepared to defend themselves.
But, if you are advocating tolerance for new subscribers,
you should also be prepared to advocate understanding
for the geeks and nerds that respond to them.

> Of course, though, my argument does not extend to not reading the FAQ:
> that's a different case.
> I also think that (besides in some peeps signatures)
> the FAQ should be posted a bit more often.

No!
The FAQ is a *HUGH* document now. It should *never* be posted.
When subscribers respond to Frequently Answered Questions (FAQs),
They should cite and quote the relevant FAQ first and only then
add commentary as required to elaborate and clarify.
Simply admonishing a new subscriber to "read the FAQ"
is seldom very helpful. People who do so are merely venting.
We would all be better off if they did *not* respond at all.
If you feel that you must respond to FAQs,
please read the FAQ yourself first and provide a URL
to the specific FAQ(s) that is(are) most relevant to the question(s).