Pointer to DVD Frequently Asked Questions List

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Stan Brown, Mar 28, 2005.

  1. Stan Brown

    Will Riley Guest

    So you can't DYOFHW.
    Your previous articles are not a good indicatation of knowledge.
    The attempt at a straw-man argument was obvious.
    This attempt at a straw-man argument is obvious. Your opinion
    represents nothing but your opinion.
    This attempt at a straw-man argument is obvious. You criticize him
    for things for imaginary faults from which you obviously suffer.
    This assumes facts not in evidence.
    This attempt at a straw-man argument is obvious. You made the
    statement without justification. If you'd like to attempt to justify
    "a representation of the group", feel free to do so.
    This attempt at a straw-man argument is obvious. You made the
    statement without justification. If you'd like to attempt to justify
    "representating the group", feel free to do so. Your question,
    "[You're] not part of the group?" will be held against you. If you
    can make rules, so can FAQman.
    The problem is the way you state your opinions on what a FAQ should be
    as "objective".
    Fair enough.
    So, he's a bit unstable, along with being a hypocrit.
    As the newsgroup degenerates, there are more and more like him.
    This attempt at a straw-man argument is obvious. You and he are
    engaged in a little battle of little wits. I'm not part of it.
     
    Will Riley, Apr 3, 2005
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. Stan Brown

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    Yeah I saw those but they don't mean "Everyone in this group was happy
    ....". See you have to interpret statements. And my interpretation was
    that it was his opinion that the majority of the group was happy ...
    etc. Clearly YMMV.

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Apr 3, 2005
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. Stan Brown

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    True but just because you say something is spam doesn't make it spam.

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Apr 3, 2005
    #43
  4. Stan Brown

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    Will Riley wrote:

    ...snip..
    What you have just written is nothing more than your opinion. Clearly
    you can't know that Jay's statement represents only his opinion. I'd
    suspect that his statement represents several people's opinion.
    Pot. Kettle. Black.

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Apr 3, 2005
    #44
  5. Stan Brown

    Jay G. Guest

    SPAM is unsolicited mass emailing. The word has been adopted for use in
    USENET, where the definition hits a snag, since *all* Usenet posts are
    mostly unsolicited and delivered en mass. Thus "mass" is redefined as a
    post that has been posted in numerous newsgroups has been labeled spam, as
    well as a post that is repeated numerous times in the same newsgroup.
    "Unsolicited" has also gone through a redefining as not something that
    hasn't been asked for in advance, but something that wouldn't be welcome in
    the group. Since the posts Meister criticized were limited to one group
    and were welcomed by a portion of the group, they can't be accurately
    described as spam.
    Yes, because wanting to understand where you're coming from is a good ploy
    to further communication and understanding. Better to not try and
    understand the other side and just call them names.
    And as I'm part of the group, my opinion represents part of it. At the
    least, it also represents the opinion of those who have posted the same
    opinion. It could even possibly represent the majority of the group, or
    even the opinion of everyone but three opposing voices in this thread.

    But fine, it only represents me. Which means that your opinions represent
    only you, and Meister's represent only him. Which means we're all on equal
    grounding, and your complaining about my complaining of his complaining is
    as hypocritical as it comes.
    I criticized him for his actual posts. I say how his posts come off as.
    I'm not criticizing him as a person. That's what you and he do.
    If you have evidence I made a FAQ, please provide it.
    You keep using this phrase, "straw-man." I do not think it means what you
    think it means. Go look it up, the actual definition will surprise you.
    Did I say it's okay for a FAQ to only represent a part of the group? It's
    fun when you post these absolutes, like every rule for a FAQ is the same,
    and that personal judgment can't enter things, since everything is
    absolutely equal. Meister can make rules to define his FAQ, it doesn't
    mean they are correct or above criticism.
    You don't think a FAQ should be objective?
    Who's posting on this thread then? The Straw Man?

    -Jay
     
    Jay G., Apr 3, 2005
    #45
  6. Stan Brown

    Stan Brown Guest

    Excessive multiple postings of the same or essentially the same
    article to one or more newsgroups.

    http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html#2.1
    http://spam.abuse.net/overview/whatisspam.shtml

    Of course that just defers the problem to defining "excessive".

    But the definition does not refer to content in any way. The
    presence of advertising (even if there were ads in my article,
    which there aren't) does not affect whether something is spam. I
    think by any reasonable definition, a once-a-week posting of a
    four-line pointer to a relevant web page would not be spam.

    Might I respectfully make a request? While I appreciate the many
    folks who have sprung to my defense, I think all your logic is
    wasted on FAQmeister. He's going to do what he's going to do, and I
    believe it's best for the group not to contribute to long threads
    wrangling about his soi-disant FAQ. The metadiscussions take up
    even more bandwidth than his aticle!
     
    Stan Brown, Apr 3, 2005
    #46
  7. Stan Brown

    Will Riley Guest

    Thanks for pointing out the obvious, Dork. I'm sure G missed the
    point and that neither he nor you is aware of straw man arguments.
    Clearly his opinion is only his opinion, Duck. Clearly you don't know
    that.
    I'm sure there are others who have the ignorance is bliss opinion.
    You hold it yourself. All that's left is for you to proclaim that
    you'd suspect that spam isn't spam and advertisements aren't
    advertisements.
    J G. Dick Suds. Ignorant and proud of it.
     
    Will Riley, Apr 3, 2005
    #47
  8. Stan Brown

    Justin Guest

    Dick Sidbury wrote on [Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:40:40 -0500]:
    Excessive multiple postings of the same or essentially the same
    article to one or more newsgroups.

    That covers the bulk of the messages posted by the genre online guy.
    They were all the same article posted every other day, if not more
    often.
     
    Justin, Apr 3, 2005
    #48
  9. Stan Brown

    Justin Guest

    Jay G. wrote on [Sat, 2 Apr 2005 23:29:13 -0600]:
    The first commercial SPAM was transmitted via USENET. Before it was
    called spam.
    Usenet messages are not delivered to anyone, they are retrived by people
    who want to see them.
    Yes, they can. Also, they were not limited to one group.

    Excessive multiple postings of the same or essentially the same
    article to one or more newsgroups.
     
    Justin, Apr 3, 2005
    #49
  10. Stan Brown

    Justin Guest

    Dick Sidbury wrote on [Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:39:25 -0500]:
    Yes, they do. This tool obviously thinks he speaks for not just the
    majority but everyone.
     
    Justin, Apr 3, 2005
    #50
  11. Like FAQmeister's FAQ pointers?

    Matthew
     
    Matthew L. Martin, Apr 3, 2005
    #51
  12. Stan Brown

    Dick Sidbury Guest

    And you know this because...

    dick
     
    Dick Sidbury, Apr 3, 2005
    #52
  13. Stan Brown

    Jay G. Guest

    Usenet messages are delivered to thousands of servers. By you definition,
    no message on Usenet could be called unsolicited because "they are
    retrieved by people who want to see them."
    I guess that depends on what thinks is "excessive" or "essentially the
    same" then, doesn't it?

    http://spam.abuse.net/ has a definition of spam as:
    "Usenet spam is a single message sent to 20 or more Usenet newsgroups."

    Really though, the question isn't what constitutes spam. It's about
    Meister's whining. It's clear that there are two sides to this debate,
    with neither side about to change their minds. Since Meister isn't about
    to stop posting his FAQ, this debate could happen every week. Happily,
    those in difference to Meister's view have been content to let Stan's
    inoffensive posting of the FAQ to be sufficient enough counterpoint to not
    drag the argument up every time he posts. Sadly, Meister isn't civilized
    enough to do the same.

    -Jay
     
    Jay G., Apr 3, 2005
    #53
  14. Stan Brown

    Jay G. Guest

    Considering your constant misuse of the term, it seems the only thing
    you're aware of about straw man arguments is the name.

    -Jay
     
    Jay G., Apr 3, 2005
    #54
  15. Stan Brown

    Will Riley Guest

    You repeatedly attempted to mistate my arguments and then challenged
    me to defend them. You didn't DYOFHW on the term.
     
    Will Riley, Apr 3, 2005
    #55
  16. Stan Brown

    Will Riley Guest

    You got that backwards.
    No, that's where the definition cam from.
     
    Will Riley, Apr 3, 2005
    #56
  17. Stan Brown

    Will Riley Guest

    They're wrong. They've confused cancellable spam (see BI) with spam.
    It's about his whining and your whining about his whining.
    His FAQ is useless.
     
    Will Riley, Apr 3, 2005
    #57
  18. Stan Brown

    Justin Guest

    Jay G. wrote on [Sun, 3 Apr 2005 10:14:37 -0500]:
    Where does the word unsolicited enter into the discussion. The fact that
    UCE is a form of spam does not mean it is all of spam.

    Ignoring the fact that SPAM as we know it today was named after a USENET
    post?
    So, by that definition a penile enlargement message posted to 19 groups
    isn't spam.
     
    Justin, Apr 3, 2005
    #58
  19. Stan Brown

    Stan Brown Guest

    I think that history is backward. The first commercial spam, 11
    years ago this month, was by Canter & Siegel, a firm of attorneys,
    that posted the same ad to a great many Usenet newsgroups. It was a
    while until e-mail spamming became a phenomenon, at which point the
    word "spam" was used for it also. Even though strictly speaking
    "spam" is a Usenet phenomenon, the more accurate term UBE
    (unsolicited bulk e-mail) never really caught on.

    I've already posted references to a couple of definitions of spam.
    For the history see "1994" in Google's 20-year history at
    http://www.google.com/googlegroups/archive_announce_20.html .
     
    Stan Brown, Apr 3, 2005
    #59
  20. Stan Brown

    Stan Brown Guest

    Pointers? He posts an article of nearly 500 lines, not a pointer.

    (That still doesn't make it spam, in my humble opinion, since it's
    just once a week to one newsgroup.)
     
    Stan Brown, Apr 3, 2005
    #60
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.