🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7/18/18 12:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
> I hope that
> he would be happy with what has happened recently and if he wanted to 
> quibble about it, that would be fine too.
> 

Monitor history, or the other thing?

Al Kossow <a...@bitsavers.org> writes:

> On 7/18/18 12:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:

>> I hope that
>> he would be happy with what has happened recently and if he wanted to 
>> quibble about it, that would be fine too.

> Monitor history, or the other thing?

Oh, both, surely, but especially the other thing.

-- 
Rich Alderson					  ne...@alderson.users.panix.com
      Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
	  omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
									--Galen

On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to face was
> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I recently came
> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of DECTAPES,
> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
> 
> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on Bainbridge.  But
> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, he'd
> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
> 
> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
> 
> I think I still have that response somewhere.
> 

ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have 
done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a 
question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem ... 
MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to suggest 
you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker had done 
a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.

MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get along 
fine with him.  IMHO

I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:

> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to face was
>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I recently came
>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of DECTAPES,
>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>
>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on Bainbridge.  But
>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, he'd
>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>
>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>
>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>
>
> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>
> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
> along fine with him.  IMHO
>
> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .

This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.

I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
never found it to be an endearing trait.

I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
lording over the less gifted.

-- 
Dan Espen

On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> 
>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to face was
>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I recently came
>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of DECTAPES,
>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>
>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on Bainbridge.  But
>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, he'd
>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>
>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>
>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>
>>
>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>
>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>
>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
> 
> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
> 
> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
> never found it to be an endearing trait.
> 
> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
> lording over the less gifted.
> 

Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions... 
people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or not 
really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up 
themselves.

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 07/19/2018 12:25 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to 
>>>> face was
>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I 
>>>> recently came
>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of 
>>>> DECTAPES,
>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>
>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on 
>>>> Bainbridge.  But
>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, 
>>>> he'd
>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>
>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>
>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>
>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>
>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>
>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>
>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>
>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>> lording over the less gifted.
>>
> 
> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions... 
> people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or not 
> really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up 
> themselves.
> 
Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.

On 2018-07-19 06:48, Charles Richmond wrote:
> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to 
>> face was
>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I 
>> recently came
>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of DECTAPES,
>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>
>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on Bainbridge.  
>> But
>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, he'd
>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>
>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>
>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>
> 
> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have 
> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a 
> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem ... 
> MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to suggest 
> you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker had done 
> a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
> 
> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get along 
> fine with him.  IMHO
> 
> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .

I don't think I ever had any issues or fallouts with MRC, but enjoyed 
talking to him a lot, and yes I also miss him sorely from time to time.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:

> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to face was
>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I recently came
>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of DECTAPES,
>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>
>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on Bainbridge.  But
>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, he'd
>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>
>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>
>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>
>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>
>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>
>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>
>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>
>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>> lording over the less gifted.
>
> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid
> questions... people who waste your time and talents because they are
> too lazy (or not really interested enough) to do a *little* work and
> look things up themselves.

I suppose, but I remember one co-worker that could not be made to
understand MVS JCL's "not cataloged 2" message.  Tried every way
I could think of to explain it.  Eventually left her with working
JCL and never yelled at her.  Perhaps because I spent years as
a consultant I learned to treat co-workers as customers and
adopted the attitude that the customer is always right.

Honestly can't remember losing patience for those with less
ability.  If I spent a lot of time with someone and thought
they might be learning, I'd try to broach the subject of how
valuable reading manuals is.  Something like:

Gee, you know so much, thanks for your help.
You're welcome.  You can learn even more by reading manual X.

(Yeah, I'm perfect.)

:)

-- 
Dan Espen

On 2018-07-19, Dan Espen <dan1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>
>> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid
>> questions... people who waste your time and talents because they are
>> too lazy (or not really interested enough) to do a *little* work and
>> look things up themselves.
>
> I suppose, but I remember one co-worker that could not be made to
> understand MVS JCL's "not cataloged 2" message.  Tried every way
> I could think of to explain it.  Eventually left her with working
> JCL and never yelled at her.  Perhaps because I spent years as
> a consultant I learned to treat co-workers as customers and
> adopted the attitude that the customer is always right.

Sometimes the only way I can deal with such situations is to view
the customers as living in a separate reality (thanks, Carlos
Castaneda, for the book of that title).  My job is to serve as
a bridge between the two realities.  Coming up with a mapping
between them is a challenge.

On the other hand, I left one job when I got tired of bridging
the yawning chasm between the Real World and salesmen's fantasies.

> Honestly can't remember losing patience for those with less
> ability.  If I spent a lot of time with someone and thought
> they might be learning, I'd try to broach the subject of how
> valuable reading manuals is.  Something like:
>
> Gee, you know so much, thanks for your help.
> You're welcome.  You can learn even more by reading manual X.
>
> (Yeah, I'm perfect.)
>
> :)

Sometimes, when you encounter a User from Hell who won't understand
however many times you explain, and won't use the quick and easy
tools you designed to let them do the job effortlessly, you just
have to answer their questions for the nth time, send them away,
and pray that it'll be a while before they (inevitably) come back
with the same questions the n+1th time.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 7/19/2018 12:47 PM, Richard Thiebaud wrote:
> On 07/19/2018 12:25 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a 
>>>>> pretty
>>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to 
>>>>> face was
>>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I 
>>>>> recently came
>>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of 
>>>>> DECTAPES,
>>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>>
>>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on 
>>>>> Bainbridge.  But
>>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to 
>>>>> say, he'd
>>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>>
>>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>>
>>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>>
>>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>>
>>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>>
>>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>>
>>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>>> lording over the less gifted.
>>>
>>
>> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions... 
>> people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or 
>> not really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up 
>> themselves.
>>
> Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.

You need to understand the tone of Usenet back 25 or 30 years ago. 
(That's where the old timers come from.)  Usenet was technical and dealt 
with technical details.  Those who did *not* measure up technically were 
encouraged to go away.  It was sort of self-policing...  people were 
discouraged from being nice to "hangers on".

With the flood of n00bs who know very little, but still presume to post 
and participate, it's understandable that the technically savvy have 
little patience for them.  Unlike many forums and message groups on the 
web, Usenet has a fairly long history...  I recommend trying to 
understand it in this light.

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:47:31 -0400, Richard Thiebaud <thieba...@aol.com>
wrote:
>On 07/19/2018 12:25 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to 
>>>>> face was
>>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I 
>>>>> recently came
>>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of 
>>>>> DECTAPES,
>>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>>
>>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on 
>>>>> Bainbridge.  But
>>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say, 
>>>>> he'd
>>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>>
>>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>>
>>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>>
>>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>>
>>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>>
>>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>>
>>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>>> lording over the less gifted.
>> 
>> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions... 
>> people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or not 
>> really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up 
>> themselves.
>> 
>Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.

I wholeheartedly agree.

I don't know if Mark ever had a support job where he was expected to help people
with less technical sophistication, so perhaps he could get a pass on being
polite.  And certainly there were no expectations or requirements regarding his
behavior on Usenet.

More than once I have seen management hire or favor people with more personable
demeanors over those who were more technically capable.  Businesses want smooth
operation, and that goal isn't aided by people who insult or demean their
coworkers.  As others have noted, the mark of a truly superior technical person
is being able to work with the less knowledgeable and explain things to them.
The irascible genius may be a common stereotype in fiction, but they're not very
pleasant to work with.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 02:12:11 -0500, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com>
wrote:
>On 7/19/2018 12:47 PM, Richard Thiebaud wrote:
>> On 07/19/2018 12:25 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a 
>>>>>> pretty
>>>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to 
>>>>>> face was
>>>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I 
>>>>>> recently came
>>>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of 
>>>>>> DECTAPES,
>>>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on 
>>>>>> Bainbridge.  But
>>>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to 
>>>>>> say, he'd
>>>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>>>
>>>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>>>
>>>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>>>
>>>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>>>
>>>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>>>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>>>
>>>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>>>> lording over the less gifted.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions... 
>>> people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or 
>>> not really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up 
>>> themselves.
>>>
>> Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.
>
>You need to understand the tone of Usenet back 25 or 30 years ago. 
>(That's where the old timers come from.)  Usenet was technical and dealt 
>with technical details.  Those who did *not* measure up technically were 
>encouraged to go away.  It was sort of self-policing...  people were 
>discouraged from being nice to "hangers on".

I must strongly disagree with this characterization.  By the mid-1980s, only a
few years after Usenet was begun, DEC had an e-mail to Usenet gateway that
allowed nearly all of its almost 100,000 employees to participate in Usenet
discussions.  By that time there were already many non-technical newsgroups,
and their number continued to grow.  I recall reading many non-technical
threads at that time.

Yes, most Usenet users at that time were more technically sophisticated.  But
even they participated in discussions about other topics.  Nor do I recall ever
seeing non-technical people being encouraged to "go away," or people being
discouraged from being nice to them.

What was met with some opprobrium were violations of early "netiquette," the
rules of which were largely the result of bandwidth and memory limitations of
the day.  Lots of sites got their Usenet feeds via UUCP (Unix to Unix CoPy),
i.e. making connections at night with modems over phone lines.  In order to
reduce possible toll charges and disk space usage, posters were urged not to
quote entire messages they replied to, not to make "me too" posts, to limit
signature files to four lines or fewer, etc.  Regular violators of these
guidelines did face some wrath.

None of this necessarily excused any nasty behavior on Mark's part.  He was
under no obligation to participate in Usenet discussions, and he could have
simply said, "I"m sorry, I can't help you" to any direct requests for
assistance.


>With the flood of n00bs who know very little, but still presume to post 
>and participate, it's understandable that the technically savvy have 
>little patience for them.  Unlike many forums and message groups on the 
>web, Usenet has a fairly long history...  I recommend trying to 
>understand it in this light.

Every September, new University students would get accounts on their school's
computers, and some would discover Usenet.  They often would need to be
"educated" about its proper use.  When AOL introduced Usenet access for its
users in 1993, this became a year-round phenomena, hence the term "eternal
September."  Around the turn of the millennium, WebTV briefly took the clueless
crown from AOL.  Now we see the occasional Google Groups user who thinks it's
just another Google service, not a world-wide network.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 21:50:08 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2018-07-19, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> 
> [36 lines snipped]
> 
>> Sometimes, when you encounter a User from Hell who won't understand
>> however many times you explain, and won't use the quick and easy
>> tools you designed to let them do the job effortlessly, you just
>> have to answer their questions for the nth time, send them away,
>> and pray that it'll be a while before they (inevitably) come back
>> with the same questions the n+1th time.
> 
> That's because they don't want you to explain it to them, they want
> you to do it for them.
> 
> 

One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users 
should consist of just one button.

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
"Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:

> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users 
> should consist of just one button.

	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't 
even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???

I can't say MRC was any worse than the people in this thread now have been.

On the other hand, MRC was very willing to talk about things, explain 
and give his view. Yes, he did not care for people who expected others 
to do the work for them, but I can fully understand that, and I feel the 
same way.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

On 7/21/2018 1:35 PM, Questor wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:47:31 -0400, Richard Thiebaud <thieba...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>> On 07/19/2018 12:25 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> On 7/19/2018 9:33 AM, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/18/2018 2:27 PM, Stephen M. Jones wrote:
>>>>>> The past couple of weeks I've been thinking about MRC a lot.  He was a
>>>>>> fixture on alt.sys.pdp10 and I'm sure people thought of him as a pretty
>>>>>> difficult person.  I knew him in person and I know the MRC face to
>>>>>> face was
>>>>>> different than what you might come across on alt.sys.pdp10.  I
>>>>>> recently came
>>>>>> across a memo authored by BAH regarding 3M and the shortage of
>>>>>> DECTAPES,
>>>>>> et cetera and I also came across boxes carefully arranged by MRC from
>>>>>> Stanford that had not been opened until now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MRC was a private person and if he was a friend you could get to him.
>>>>>> For instance, he once gave me a DTMF code that would bypass his anti-
>>>>>> telemarketer setup on his phone when I need to all him on
>>>>>> Bainbridge.  But
>>>>>> MRC could also turn on you and if he thought you had nothing to say,
>>>>>> he'd
>>>>>> write an SMTP response that you'd get that would say something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 451: STOP TALKING ABOUT IT ALREADY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I still have that response somewhere.
>>>>>>
>>>>> ISTM that MRC did *not* "suffer fools lightly"... nor should he have
>>>>> done that IMO.  If you asked a question on <alt.sys.pdp10> ... a
>>>>> question that showed the asker had *not* worked much on his problem
>>>>> ... MRC would deride you and *not* offer any answers (other than to
>>>>> suggest you go away).  If a person's question indicated that the asker
>>>>> had done a lot of work on the problem, MRC was willing to offer help.
>>>>>
>>>>> MRC was *not* a baby sitter ... if you understood that, you'd get
>>>>> along fine with him.  IMHO
>>>>>
>>>>> I miss his presence on <alt.sys.pdp10> .
>>>>
>>>> This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>>>>
>>>> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
>>>> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>>>>
>>>> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
>>>> lording over the less gifted.
>>>
>>> Mr. Espen, even you can get tired of people with stupid questions...
>>> people who waste your time and talents because they are too lazy (or not
>>> really interested enough) to do a *little* work and look things up
>>> themselves.
>>>
>> Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree.
> 
> I don't know if Mark ever had a support job where he was expected to help people
> with less technical sophistication, so perhaps he could get a pass on being
> polite.  And certainly there were no expectations or requirements regarding his
> behavior on Usenet.
> 

But as you said... Usenet is *not* a "support job", or ant kind of work 
for pay.  If little simpering nitwits want to waste your time with dumb 
questions (the answers to which one could find themselves with a little 
effort), one is *not* required to "help" them.  Mark was *not* "the 
jackass whisperer".  He had *no* desire and *no* responsibility to solve 
other people's problems.

> More than once I have seen management hire or favor people with more personable
> demeanors over those who were more technically capable.  Businesses want smooth
> operation, and that goal isn't aided by people who insult or demean their
> coworkers.  As others have noted, the mark of a truly superior technical person
> is being able to work with the less knowledgeable and explain things to them.
> The irascible genius may be a common stereotype in fiction, but they're not very
> pleasant to work with.
> 

If being on Usenet was a "job", then you might have a point.  But 
posting on Usenet is *not* a job.


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 7/22/2018 4:18 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't 
> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
> 
> I can't say MRC was any worse than the people in this thread now have been.
> 
> On the other hand, MRC was very willing to talk about things, explain 
> and give his view. Yes, he did not care for people who expected others 
> to do the work for them, but I can fully understand that, and I feel the 
> same way.
> 

Yes Johnny!!!  MRC helped me with a small DEC-10 assembly language 
project of mine... *but* I did a ot of work on the project before asking 
MRC any questions.  I'm glad someone here understands!  *Not* that my 
opinion means much, but MRC was a great guy IMO.

Franky I can *not* understand why anyone would think those on Usenet... 
would have *any* responsibility to support whining simpletons!


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 7/21/2018 3:37 PM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
> "Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
> 
>> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users
>> should consist of just one button.
> 
> 	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.
> 

Remember on the cartoon show "The Jetsons", George Jetson's job at 
Spacely Sprockets... was pushing one single button over and over 
again...  George said:  "These three hour work weeks are murder!"  :-)

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> He had *no* desire and *no* responsibility to solve 
> other people's problems.

OTOH, if you had a clue but were missing information, he was very
willing to point you in the right direction.  I'm pretty sure he was
one of the people who helped when I was trying to grok the ITS symbolic
system call dispatch code path.

Andy

On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, Andy Valencia wrote:

> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
>> He had *no* desire and *no* responsibility to solve
>> other people's problems.
>
> OTOH, if you had a clue but were missing information, he was very
> willing to point you in the right direction.  I'm pretty sure he was
> one of the people who helped when I was trying to grok the ITS symbolic
> system call dispatch code path.
>
One of the weird things about Usenet is that we needed those newcomers to 
drive by the newsgroup and post their basic questions, it put life into 
the newsgroup, but it probably was a bad place for the newcomer.

They come with some idea that they think they know a solution to, and if 
they ask about how to implement that solution, it turns out they may be 
going down a wrong path.  They often don't post the problem.

I've also noticed some people try to legitimize their question, "I'm an 
engineer and blah blah blah", when from the questino it's clear they don't 
know much, but are trying to bluff their way into getting an answer.

I recall a really long thread that was crossposted between 
rec.radio.amateur.homebrew and sci.electronics.design and to either one, 
there would have been a different answer.  But in this case, the poster 
stuck with it, but every time someone suggested something, he'd careen off 
in that direction, getting further from the initial problem.  Much time 
later, he finally revealed what he needed, a simple signal generator to 
test his radio controlled model receiver, and something fairly simple 
would fit.  A lot of time and misdirection went into that thread, if he'd 
read some magazine articles or even a Radio Handbook he'd have been in a 
much better position to start.  He just wasn't "speaking the language".

Some of the reason newsgroups are dying is that those newcomers no longer 
come by, Most never stayed, but without them asking questions, the rest of 
us just sit checking newsgroups to see if anyone has posted.

   Michael

Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> writes:

 [regarding my late friend Mark]

> He had *no* desire and *no* responsibility to solve other people's problems.

I will disagree with the point about "no desire".  Mark was the long time
developer/maintainer of the TOPS-20 mail system known as MM, which included the
user interface program by that name, the MMAILR queue handler, SMTP listener,
DECNET listener (!),[1], a Chaosnet listener, and a dial-up phone send-and-
receive subsystem, as well as miscellaneous utility programs.

He did this for free, because TOPS-20 needed a decent mail program which could
live on heterogeneous networks.  He had a full time job as systems programmer
for the Computer Science Department Computer Facility at Stanford University,
which he performed well.

He created the original IMAP RFC, IMAP 2bis, and IMAP 4.  (IMAP2bis was done
because he felt a responsibility, as the creator of IMAP, to fix the massive
bodge which was IMAP2, the creation of a committee.  So I guess I take
exception to the second claim above, as well.)

After he moved to the University of Washington's networking group, he helped
make the Pine mail program network-capable by writing a C client library for
IMAP.

He was the architect for the Alpine e-mail program.

All because he wanted to allow people to communicate more freely, and saw ways
to solve that problem.

He just didn't want to hold your hand as you rode your tricycle.

-- 
Rich Alderson					  ne...@alderson.users.panix.com
      Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
	  omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
									--Galen

On 2018-07-23, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> On 7/21/2018 3:37 PM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
>> "Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users
>>> should consist of just one button.
>> 
>> 	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.
>
> Remember on the cartoon show "The Jetsons", George Jetson's job at 
> Spacely Sprockets... was pushing one single button over and over 
> again...  George said:  "These three hour work weeks are murder!"  :-)

    This is the story of a man named Stanley.

    Stanley worked for a Company in a big building where he was employee
    number Four Two Seven.  Employee number Four Two Seven's job was
    simple - he sat at his desk in Room Four Two Seven and he pushed
    buttons on a keyboard.  Orders came to him through a monitor on
    his desk, telling him what buttons to push, how long to push them,
    and in what order.  This is what employee Four Two Seven did every
    day of every month of every year.  And although others might have
    considered it soul-rending, Stanley relished every moment that the
    orders came in.  As though he had been made exactly for this job.

    And Stanley was happy.

http://www.stanleyparable.com

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 2018-07-21, Kerr-Mudd,John <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 21:50:08 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-07-19, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>> [36 lines snipped]
>> 
>>> Sometimes, when you encounter a User from Hell who won't understand
>>> however many times you explain, and won't use the quick and easy
>>> tools you designed to let them do the job effortlessly, you just
>>> have to answer their questions for the nth time, send them away,
>>> and pray that it'll be a while before they (inevitably) come back
>>> with the same questions the n+1th time.
>> 
>> That's because they don't want you to explain it to them, they want
>> you to do it for them.
>
> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users 
> should consist of just one button.

Not this button, I hope:

http://dilbert.com/strip/20160612

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 2018-07-23, Michael Black <mbl...@pubnix.net> wrote:

> Some of the reason newsgroups are dying is that those newcomers no longer 
> come by, Most never stayed, but without them asking questions, the rest of 
> us just sit checking newsgroups to see if anyone has posted.

Besides, they can't post pictures here.  Where's the fun in that?

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 23 Jul 2018 21:56:21 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:

>On 2018-07-23, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/21/2018 3:37 PM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
>>> "Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users
>>>> should consist of just one button.
>>> 
>>> 	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.
>>
>> Remember on the cartoon show "The Jetsons", George Jetson's job at 
>> Spacely Sprockets... was pushing one single button over and over 
>> again...  George said:  "These three hour work weeks are murder!"  :-)
>
>    This is the story of a man named Stanley.
>
>    Stanley worked for a Company in a big building where he was employee
>    number Four Two Seven.  Employee number Four Two Seven's job was
>    simple - he sat at his desk in Room Four Two Seven and he pushed
>    buttons on a keyboard.  Orders came to him through a monitor on
>    his desk, telling him what buttons to push, how long to push them,
>    and in what order.  This is what employee Four Two Seven did every
>    day of every month of every year.  And although others might have
>    considered it soul-rending, Stanley relished every moment that the
>    orders came in.  As though he had been made exactly for this job.
>
>    And Stanley was happy.
>
>http://www.stanleyparable.com

The best $10 I ever spent for software by far.

While I was checking on that, I came across a game(?) called PC
Building Simulator. Which as of today sounds about as appealing as the
Help Desk Simulator.

On 24 Jul 2018 07:42:07 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2018-07-23, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> > On 2018-07-23, Michael Black <mbl...@pubnix.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Some of the reason newsgroups are dying is that those newcomers no
> >> longer come by, Most never stayed, but without them asking questions,
> >> the rest of us just sit checking newsgroups to see if anyone has
> >> posted.
> >
> > Besides, they can't post pictures here.  Where's the fun in that?
> 
> Which is ironic, given that most of Usenet (by volume) these days consists
> of copyright violations of one kind or another.

	Yebbut you have to pay to get at most of that, the (few remaining)
free servers generally don't carry the binaries.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

In article <pj1i3s$md0$1...@Iltempo.Update.UU.SE>,
Johnny Billquist  <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't 
>even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>
>I can't say MRC was any worse than the people in this thread now have been.
>
>On the other hand, MRC was very willing to talk about things, explain 
>and give his view. Yes, he did not care for people who expected others 
>to do the work for them, but I can fully understand that, and I feel the 
>same way.

I always enjoyed reading what he had to say; he was what you
might call "lively."  I got into it with him once or twice about
something; ironically I was right and he was wrong.  He took it
well, though.  Could he be prickly?  Sure; who isn't from time
to time.

He did a huge service to those who want to learn from history by
keeping the legacy of the PDP-10 and TOPS-20 alive.

	- Dan C.

On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't 
>even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???

Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?

This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.

On 7/23/2018 4:56 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-07-23, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 7/21/2018 3:37 PM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
>>> "Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users
>>>> should consist of just one button.
>>>
>>> 	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.
>>
>> Remember on the cartoon show "The Jetsons", George Jetson's job at
>> Spacely Sprockets... was pushing one single button over and over
>> again...  George said:  "These three hour work weeks are murder!"  :-)
> 
>      This is the story of a man named Stanley.
> 
>      Stanley worked for a Company in a big building where he was employee
>      number Four Two Seven.  Employee number Four Two Seven's job was
>      simple - he sat at his desk in Room Four Two Seven and he pushed
>      buttons on a keyboard.  Orders came to him through a monitor on
>      his desk, telling him what buttons to push, how long to push them,
>      and in what order.  This is what employee Four Two Seven did every
>      day of every month of every year.  And although others might have
>      considered it soul-rending, Stanley relished every moment that the
>      orders came in.  As though he had been made exactly for this job.
> 
>      And Stanley was happy.
> 
> http://www.stanleyparable.com
> 

This sounds like a description from the novel _1984-!!!

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
> 
> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
> 
> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.

To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:

"This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.

I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
never found it to be an endearing trait.

I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
lording over the less gifted."

Or to quote you:

"> Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.

I wholeheartedly agree.

I don't know if Mark ever had a support job where he was expected to 
help people
with less technical sophistication, so perhaps he could get a pass on being
polite.  And certainly there were no expectations or requirements 
regarding his
behavior on Usenet."

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

On 2018-07-24, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> On 7/23/2018 4:56 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2018-07-23, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 7/21/2018 3:37 PM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:54:01 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> "Kerr-Mudd,John" <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> One erm acquaintance claimed that the user interface for some users
>>>>> should consist of just one button.
>>>>
>>>> 	In some cases it should probably be disconnected.
>>>
>>> Remember on the cartoon show "The Jetsons", George Jetson's job at
>>> Spacely Sprockets... was pushing one single button over and over
>>> again...  George said:  "These three hour work weeks are murder!"  :-)
>> 
>>      This is the story of a man named Stanley.
>> 
>>      Stanley worked for a Company in a big building where he was employee
>>      number Four Two Seven.  Employee number Four Two Seven's job was
>>      simple - he sat at his desk in Room Four Two Seven and he pushed
>>      buttons on a keyboard.  Orders came to him through a monitor on
>>      his desk, telling him what buttons to push, how long to push them,
>>      and in what order.  This is what employee Four Two Seven did every
>>      day of every month of every year.  And although others might have
>>      considered it soul-rending, Stanley relished every moment that the
>>      orders came in.  As though he had been made exactly for this job.
>> 
>>      And Stanley was happy.
>> 
>> http://www.stanleyparable.com
>
> This sounds like a description from the novel _1984-!!!

Ah, but it's a lot more fun.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> writes:

> On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>>
>> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
>>
>> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
>> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
>> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
>> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.
>
> To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:
>
> "This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person.
>
> I've met more than a few people that acted like that and
> never found it to be an endearing trait.
>
> I know I'm smarter than average but don't see any point in
> lording over the less gifted."
>
> Or to quote you:
>
> "> Yes, but he doesn't have to get unpleasant about it.
>
> I wholeheartedly agree.
>
> I don't know if Mark ever had a support job where he was expected to
> help people
> with less technical sophistication, so perhaps he could get a pass on being
> polite.  And certainly there were no expectations or requirements
> regarding his
> behavior on Usenet."

I fail to see how I'm "bashing" MRC.

First off, I didn't know him.
I merely commented on how I feel about the type of person I saw
portrayed.  I don't think much of people that don't have time for
their co-workers.  Whether this MRC guy fits that portrayal I have
no idea.

-- 
Dan Espen

On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 23:47:13 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>> 
>> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
>> 
>> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
>> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
>> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
>> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.
>
>To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:
[.,..]
>Or to quote you:

You can quote all the irrelevant posts you like, but it still doesn't support
your claim.

It's not bashing if it's true.

On 2018-07-25, Dan Espen <dan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> writes:
>
>> On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>>>
>> polite.  And certainly there were no expectations or requirements
>> regarding his
>> behavior on Usenet."
>
> I fail to see how I'm "bashing" MRC.
>
> First off, I didn't know him.
> I merely commented on how I feel about the type of person I saw
> portrayed.  I don't think much of people that don't have time for
> their co-workers.  Whether this MRC guy fits that portrayal I have
> no idea.
>

I am reminded of a cartoon that was, I think, in the New Yorker years ago.
in the foreground, a management type was giving a press release to a PR man.

"After many years Mr. M has decided to step back from the front line, 
and enjoy a well earned retirement."

In the background, several security men are trying to pull the old guy 
away from his desk.

No, I do not know the man mentioned.

Maus

On 2018-07-25 19:29, Questor wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 23:47:13 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>> On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>>>
>>> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
>>>
>>> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
>>> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
>>> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
>>> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.
>>
>> To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:
> [.,..]
>> Or to quote you:
> 
> You can quote all the irrelevant posts you like, but it still doesn't support
> your claim.
> 
> It's not bashing if it's true.

Bashing have nothing to do with the truthfulness of the statement or not.

Look up the word maybe? (I did, since I'm not a native speaker, although 
I was pretty sure what the meaning of the word was anyway).

And you asked who I was accusing of bashing MRC. Is there any better way 
to answer that than by quoting such bashings and illustrations of 
expression of not knowing the guy?

Jeez. The guy is dead and cannot defend himself. You are attributing 
various things to him which definitely go beyond what you know about and 
attacking him as a person. I find it to be in bad taste, and especially 
when it happens in a thread started by someone expressing a feeling of 
loss since he's not longer with us.

And I can assure you that I had plenty of discussions with him, and I 
didn't have any problems with him.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> writes:

> On 2018-07-25 19:29, Questor wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 23:47:13 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>> On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>>>>
>>>> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
>>>>
>>>> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
>>>> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
>>>> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
>>>> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.
>>>
>>> To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:
>> [.,..]
>>> Or to quote you:
>>
>> You can quote all the irrelevant posts you like, but it still doesn't support
>> your claim.
>>
>> It's not bashing if it's true.
>
> Bashing have nothing to do with the truthfulness of the statement or not.
>
> Look up the word maybe? (I did, since I'm not a native speaker,
> although I was pretty sure what the meaning of the word was anyway).
>
> And you asked who I was accusing of bashing MRC. Is there any better
> way to answer that than by quoting such bashings and illustrations of
> expression of not knowing the guy?
>
> Jeez. The guy is dead and cannot defend himself. You are attributing
> various things to him which definitely go beyond what you know about
> and attacking him as a person. I find it to be in bad taste, and
> especially when it happens in a thread started by someone expressing a
> feeling of loss since he's not longer with us.
>
> And I can assure you that I had plenty of discussions with him, and I
> didn't have any problems with him.
>
>   Johnny

Just to be clear, I didn't attribute anything to MRC.
Others did that.  I merely commented on a working style I've seen
others exhibit.  I have no basis for claiming MRC was that kind of
worker.

-- 
Dan Espen

On 2018-07-26 04:18, Dan Espen wrote:
> Just to be clear, I didn't attribute anything to MRC.
> Others did that.  I merely commented on a working style I've seen
> others exhibit.  I have no basis for claiming MRC was that kind of
> worker.

Dan, I don't want to have any conflict with you, and I agree that it got 
spun into something bigger by people commenting you rather than what you 
said. But you did write "This MRC fellow doesn't sound like a nice person."

Oh well. Maybe we can lay this to rest now? I think it's safe to say the 
thread took another direction than what the OP intended. But no point in 
continuing that.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: b...@softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol

On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 20:14:04 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>On 2018-07-25 19:29, Questor wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 23:47:13 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>> On 2018-07-24 19:06, Questor wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:18:03 +0200, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>> How on earth did this become a MRC bashing thread by people who didn't
>>>>> even know him, what he did, or what he wrote???
>>>>
>>>> Who are you accusing of bashing MRC, or not knowing what he did?
>>>>
>>>> This thread aptly demonstrates the saying (the origin of which is not clear)
>>>> that "people may not remember what you said, but they will remember how you made
>>>> them feel."  Mark could be abrasive at times, and that stands out just as much
>>>> as the contributions he made to the PDP-10 community.
>>>
>>> To quote Mr. Espen above, since you don't seem to care to read the history:
>> [.,..]
>>> Or to quote you:
>> 
>> You can quote all the irrelevant posts you like, but it still doesn't support
>> your claim.
>> 
>> It's not bashing if it's true.
>
>Bashing have nothing to do with the truthfulness of the statement or not.

It certainly does.  Imagine that when person X drives a car, they travel at
twice the speed limit, swerve all over the road, bang into other cars, don't
stop at traffic signals, and so on.  Am I bashing them if I say person X is a
very bad and unsafe driver?  If that is bashing them, what should I say about
the driving of person X instead?


>Look up the word maybe? (I did, since I'm not a native speaker, although 
>I was pretty sure what the meaning of the word was anyway).

Then I would say your reading comphrension of English is poor.  You are
imagining that I wrote things I did not.


>And you asked who I was accusing of bashing MRC. Is there any better way 
>to answer that than by quoting such bashings and illustrations of 
>expression of not knowing the guy?

I've known about Mark Crispin since the mid-1980s.  I've been reading
alt.sys.pdp10 for over twenty years, so I've read almost everything he ever
wrote there.


>Jeez. The guy is dead and cannot defend himself. You are attributing 
>various things to him which definitely go beyond what you know about and 
>attacking him as a person. 

What, specifically, have I attributed to him?  What attack did I make on him as
a person?  You need to read what I wrote more carefully.


>And I can assure you that I had plenty of discussions with him, and I 
>didn't have any problems with him.

Other people obviously did, to varying degrees.