🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <n4l767$ija$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, no-spam@never.spam says...
> 
> https://www.regfiles.net/
> Setting up a new Windows installation & getting all ones programs / games 
> to work is a nightmare.
> Tho most will just run & setup themselves.
> A lot of games need correct details in the System Registry.
> 
> My method is to file copy the Games folder to its new location 
> (if it needs to be moved)
> & find the necessary entries in the original system Registry,
> export & edit them to the new installation registry .
> Not very easy.
> 
> Noticed this user/Fan made site :
> https://www.regfiles.net/ 
> which has very many reg entries for very many games & apps.
> Copy to Notepad the wanted entry, edit it with the needed paths.
> & name it with an .reg  extension.
> (\__/)
> (='.'=) 
> (")_(")  mouse (Eating a Sausage Roll Now)
>  

I find it easier to not install windows 10. 

I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming or 
run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant bit of
spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your computers is
belong to us.  No. Piss off.

-P.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 17:13:25 +1300, Peter Huebner
<p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I find it easier to not install windows 10. 
>
>I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming or 
>run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant bit of
>spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your computers is
>belong to us.  No. Piss off.

Sorry, but you seem to have succumbed to the tin foil hat theorists.

With only a few seconds spent customizing the privacy settings on
install (the part the tin foil hat theorists failed to pay close
attention to), or a few seconds turning a few options off if you miss
the opportunity upon install, Win10 is no more invasive than Win7, 8
etc.  Research it a bit and you'll find this is correct.

Don't hold your breath for Linux to become a valid gaming or desktop
OS option.  I was telling people that 22 years ago, and every year
since, and it has never been more true than right now.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 07:36:01 +0300, Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:

> Win10 is no more invasive than Win7, 8
> etc.

forced driver updates, deletion of 3rd party software at MS whims,
ugly and messy UI.

nope, fuck them. Win7 till the end of times ;)

-- 
Andrew Rybenkov

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 

> Peter Huebner <p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote: 
> 
>> I find it easier to not install windows 10. 
>>
>> I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming or 
>> run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant bit of
>> spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your computers 
>> is belong to us.  No. Piss off. 

Microsoft are/is no longer a Borg. And it's under extreme pressure from 
ultraportable PCs. That is to me obviously why it's giving away Windows 
10. It's not just trying to monopolize that market, it's feeling 
backward pressure from that market. Apple's iPhone revenue alone is more
than all of Microsoft's revenue combined. And then there's Android. And
Chromebooks. 

> Sorry, but you seem to have succumbed to the tin foil hat theorists. 

Microsoft would if it could. 

> With only a few seconds spent customizing the privacy settings on 
> install 

Currently I turn every one of them off. 

> Don't hold your breath for Linux to become a valid gaming or desktop 
> OS option.  I was telling people that 22 years ago, and every year 
> since, and it has never been more true than right now. 

When I first got on the Internet, two guys were discussing Linux. One of
them said it's the Holy Grail of operating systems. Still is. It's so 
incredibly irritating (and they know it) when asking a serious question 
about games or other software (like speech recognition) and they say "no 
problem". Some Linux Lunatics are so incredibly full of it it's 
unbelievable. Obviously Linux is good for some things, but any real 
computer user knows that what matters is whether the OS runs the 
applications you need. 

On 12/13/2015 9:05 PM, John Doe wrote:
> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Peter Huebner <p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I find it easier to not install windows 10.
>>>
>>> I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming or
>>> run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant bit of
>>> spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your computers
>>> is belong to us.  No. Piss off.
>
> Microsoft are/is no longer a Borg. And it's under extreme pressure from
> ultraportable PCs. That is to me obviously why it's giving away Windows
> 10. It's not just trying to monopolize that market, it's feeling
> backward pressure from that market. Apple's iPhone revenue alone is more
> than all of Microsoft's revenue combined. And then there's Android. And
> Chromebooks.
>
>> Sorry, but you seem to have succumbed to the tin foil hat theorists.
>
> Microsoft would if it could.
>
>> With only a few seconds spent customizing the privacy settings on
>> install
>
> Currently I turn every one of them off.
>
>> Don't hold your breath for Linux to become a valid gaming or desktop
>> OS option.  I was telling people that 22 years ago, and every year
>> since, and it has never been more true than right now.
>
> When I first got on the Internet, two guys were discussing Linux. One of
> them said it's the Holy Grail of operating systems. Still is. It's so
> incredibly irritating (and they know it) when asking a serious question
> about games or other software (like speech recognition) and they say "no
> problem". Some Linux Lunatics are so incredibly full of it it's
> unbelievable. Obviously Linux is good for some things, but any real
> computer user knows that what matters is whether the OS runs the
> applications you need.
>
I've been reading a lot of stuff about Win 10.  Some items that the 
independent experts all seem to agree on.

1) (and this isn't even the experts, this is simply what IS happening) 
Unless you have taken and continue to constantly take precautions to 
prevent it, Microsoft WILL upgrade your Windows 7 or 8 to Windows 10. 
Without your permission.

2) You can NOT turn off the data logging and reporting from a Windows 10 
installation to MS.  Those privacy settings you think you are turning on 
don't do anywhere near as much as you think.

3) Every time W10 is updated, those privacy settings get reset to "send 
everything to MS".  Possibly they even reset without any updates.

4) Win 10 is not finished.  It may not even really be as far as long as 
being a beta.  Cortana doesn't work, it isn't finished.  Same with Edge 
and many of the other "new" features.

5) The current plan for W10 is in a few years to make it a "Windows as a 
service" operation.  Translation: You won't buy W10, you will be renting it.

In article <fjhs6b5eonec0bgk0...@4ax.com>, 
rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com says...
> 
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 17:13:25 +1300, Peter Huebner
> <p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >I find it easier to not install windows 10. 
> >
> >I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming or 
> >run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant bit of
> >spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your computers is
> >belong to us.  No. Piss off.
> 
> Sorry, but you seem to have succumbed to the tin foil hat theorists.
> 
> With only a few seconds spent customizing the privacy settings on
> install (the part the tin foil hat theorists failed to pay close
> attention to), or a few seconds turning a few options off if you miss
> the opportunity upon install, Win10 is no more invasive than Win7, 8
> etc.  Research it a bit and you'll find this is correct.

So spake the eternal optimist. I HAVE done the research, I spent hours 
and hours on said research since I do security for a whole lot of people 
in this rural district. 

You THINK you can disable it with a few seconds spent on un-clicking 
boxes.
Sorry, mate, you have succumbed to a big con. 
Most of that crap cannot be turned off by J.Random User unless you get
into turning services off and disabling/removing software that's not
even listed. 
The options you get on install are barely scratching the surface. 
Incidentally one of their recent 'patches' reenabled all that stuff 
without telling the user. Supposedly 'accidentally'. Not sure if they
have reversed that (yet).

But don't take note of what I have to say. I am not on a mission from 
God. You want your windows 10, have your windows 10 by all means.

***
I am not holding my breath viz Linux. I've tried Linux every other year 
since Linus came up with the idea, and found it wanting as a desktop OS.
Unlikely do do any gaming past, say, Civ 3 or 4. 

However, after installing, then uninstalling win10 on my laptop as 
testbed, and being ambushed by MS continually attempting to reinstall 
Win10 despite my having opted OUT, I put  Linux Mint on there. It's 
actually pretty nice. 
Some functionality is much better than Windows (installing
software from the repository). No complaints about media rendering, it's 
got a perfectly good office suite, browser, and email that handles imap 
superbly well. Colour me impressed. I have no hesitation taking it 
travelling like that. Only pity is that I  can't imagine Photoshop 
Elements will run on it.  Oh, and Linux does not like talking to network 
attached Canon Printers out of the box. Can be solved, but requires a 
lot of digging. Connects to the home network a treat though.   

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:38:39 +1300, Peter Huebner
<p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The options you get on install are barely scratching the surface. 
>Incidentally one of their recent 'patches' reenabled all that stuff 
>without telling the user. Supposedly 'accidentally'. Not sure if they
>have reversed that (yet).

There was some sort of bug that supposedly flipped one of the switches
back to default that was a side effect of a large update a few weeks
back, but on six separate Win10 machines just here in my home office,
none of them exhibited the errant behavior.  So, it wasn't the
sinister ruse the tin foil hat kiddies made it out to be, or the
switch would be flipped on all of them at time of update.

>But don't take note of what I have to say. I am not on a mission from 
>God. You want your windows 10, have your windows 10 by all means.

Well the issue here is that I am fundamentally a technologist, and I
make a living using technology.  I therefore cannot allow myself to
become a neo-luddite dinosaur.  Windows 10 is a better OS.  If it
feels like it's over your head then it may well be.

Prior versions of Windows will fall out of support eventually, and
just like Windows XP is today, they will become one massive security
hole waiting to be exploited without being patched.  So Windows 10 is
not an avoidable upgrade if you want to be a PC gamer.

If you don't care about PC gaming, you could always become an Apple
victim for general computing, and consoles for gaming and avoid
Windows that day.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:38:39 +1300, Peter Huebner wrote:

> I am not holding my breath viz Linux. I've tried Linux every other year
> since Linus came up with the idea, and found it wanting as a desktop OS.
> Unlikely do do any gaming past, say, Civ 3 or 4.
> 
> However, after installing, then uninstalling win10 on my laptop as
> testbed, and being ambushed by MS continually attempting to reinstall
> Win10 despite my having opted OUT, I put  Linux Mint on there. It's
> actually pretty nice.
> Some functionality is much better than Windows (installing software from
> the repository). No complaints about media rendering, it's got a
> perfectly good office suite, browser, and email that handles imap
> superbly well. Colour me impressed. I have no hesitation taking it
> travelling like that. Only pity is that I  can't imagine Photoshop
> Elements will run on it.  Oh, and Linux does not like talking to network
> attached Canon Printers out of the box. Can be solved, but requires a
> lot of digging. Connects to the home network a treat though.

The latest builds of Linux have finally surmounted the hurdle of making 
you login to Root as the admin and manually update drivers. New hardware 
detection and driver installation has improved by an order of magnitude.

Unfortunately, this leap has only gotten it to the place it should have 
been 10 years ago. Nice call on Mint. I use both Ubuntu and Mint, the 
latter is the one I always recommend to someone migrating from Windows.

-d

Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote: 

> John Doe wrote: 
>> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 
>>> Peter Huebner <p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote: 
>>>
>>>> I find it easier to not install windows 10. 
>>>>
>>>> I see the sheep flocking to it though. I think I'll give up gaming 
>>>> or run things (that will run) under Linux before I put that giant 
>>>> bit of spyware on my box. It's like the Microsoft Borg: All your 
>>>> computers is belong to us.  No. Piss off. 
>>
>> Microsoft are/is no longer a Borg. And it's under extreme pressure 
>> from ultraportable PCs. That is to me obviously why it's giving away 
>> Windows 10. It's not just trying to monopolize that market, it's 
>> feeling backward pressure from that market. Apple's iPhone revenue 
>> alone is more than all of Microsoft's revenue combined. And then 
>> there's Android. And Chromebooks. 
>>
>>> Sorry, but you seem to have succumbed to the tin foil hat theorists.
>>
>> Microsoft would if it could. 
>>
>>> With only a few seconds spent customizing the privacy settings on 
>>> install 
>>
>> Currently I turn every one of them off. 
>>
>>> Don't hold your breath for Linux to become a valid gaming or desktop
>>> OS option.  I was telling people that 22 years ago, and every year 
>>> since, and it has never been more true than right now. 
>>
>> When I first got on the Internet, two guys were discussing Linux. One 
>> of them said it's the Holy Grail of operating systems. Still is. It's 
>> so incredibly irritating (and they know it) when asking a serious 
>> question about games or other software (like speech recognition) and 
>> they say "no problem". Some Linux Lunatics are so incredibly full of 
>> it it's unbelievable. Obviously Linux is good for some things, but 
>> any real computer user knows that what matters is whether the OS runs 
>> the applications you need. 
>
> I've been reading a lot of stuff about Win 10.  Some items that the 
> independent experts all seem to agree on. 
> 
> 1) (and this isn't even the experts, this is simply what IS happening) 
> Unless you have taken and continue to constantly take precautions to 
> prevent it, Microsoft WILL upgrade your Windows 7 or 8 to Windows 10. 
> Without your permission. 

Maybe you should upgrade your tinfoil cap. 

I know for a fact that the "constantly take precautions" part is false. 
Every once in a while I see a pop-up about upgrading to Windows 10, but 
it simply does not happen on its own. 

Setting Windows Updates to manual is not rocket science. 

If I initiate Windows Updates, the upgrade to Windows 10 will be 
checked. However, I can simply uncheck that and get anything/everything 
else. 

I'm one of those experts. I make backups of my Windows drive. I have
accepted the Windows 10 upgrade twice so far (mainly out of curiosity).
Then reverted to Windows 8.1 by simply restoring one of the copies. 

Am 15/12/15 um 03:43 schrieb destruere:
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:38:39 +1300, Peter Huebner wrote:
>
>> I am not holding my breath viz Linux. I've tried Linux every other year
>> since Linus came up with the idea, and found it wanting as a desktop OS.
>> Unlikely do do any gaming past, say, Civ 3 or 4.
>>
>> However, after installing, then uninstalling win10 on my laptop as
>> testbed, and being ambushed by MS continually attempting to reinstall
>> Win10 despite my having opted OUT, I put  Linux Mint on there. It's
>> actually pretty nice.
>> Some functionality is much better than Windows (installing software from
>> the repository). No complaints about media rendering, it's got a
>> perfectly good office suite, browser, and email that handles imap
>> superbly well. Colour me impressed. I have no hesitation taking it
>> travelling like that. Only pity is that I  can't imagine Photoshop
>> Elements will run on it.  Oh, and Linux does not like talking to network
>> attached Canon Printers out of the box. Can be solved, but requires a
>> lot of digging. Connects to the home network a treat though.
>
> The latest builds of Linux have finally surmounted the hurdle of making
> you login to Root as the admin and manually update drivers. New hardware
> detection and driver installation has improved by an order of magnitude.
>
> Unfortunately, this leap has only gotten it to the place it should have
> been 10 years ago. Nice call on Mint. I use both Ubuntu and Mint, the
> latter is the one I always recommend to someone migrating from Windows.
>
> -d
>
Drivers itself were never the biggest issue of Linux, the constant 
change in the driver APIs/ABIs always was and still is, which made a non 
opensource third party driver market close to impossibe. Add to that the 
fact that every driver which goes into the kernel main distro must have 
been sanctioned by the head Penguin himself.
So simply shoving out a hardware and adding drivers to it no matter if 
closed source or opensource caused following troubles and getting it 
into the kernel takes a long time, and sometimes is impossible due to 
restricted code.

a) The user must hook in as root and call a manual build to hook the 
driver into the kernel or somebody delivers an automation gui for the 
process.
b) You can rest assured that within two months another change in the 
driver API/ABI will break the existing drivers of the hardware.
c) Sometimes there is a core driver abi abstraction layer like for some 
wifi adapters where you can hook in copyright protected code but that is 
not standardized and means configuration hell.

Compare that to Windows where a driver ABI change happens every 10 years 
and the mac with the same for every 5-10 years and you will see where 
Linuxs core problem is. The install process can be automated, but if it 
is not in the kernel it basically does not exist or causes lots of 
trouble for the end user.

Another problem was and still is X11/XFree but the linux people have 
recognized that and are working on alternatives but now they finally 
slwly get rid of x11 they have opened another pandoras box with their 
blob like startup process systemd which seems to be an all in one 
kitchen sink solution for everything under the earth, sort of a meta 
kernel, which screams for long time trouble.

In the end Linux shines on servers and on closed configurations like 
smartphones or tvs where the vendor has full control over the drivers 
and hardware and on those systems it is pretty much standard nowadays. 
But it entirely fails on an open desktop systems where you have myriads 
of exotic configurations and the user has full control over everything.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 04:33:15 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

>Maybe you should upgrade your tinfoil cap. 
>
>I know for a fact that the "constantly take precautions" part is false. 
>Every once in a while I see a pop-up about upgrading to Windows 10, but 
>it simply does not happen on its own. 
>
>Setting Windows Updates to manual is not rocket science. 
>
>If I initiate Windows Updates, the upgrade to Windows 10 will be 
>checked. However, I can simply uncheck that and get anything/everything 
>else. 
>
>I'm one of those experts. I make backups of my Windows drive. I have
>accepted the Windows 10 upgrade twice so far (mainly out of curiosity).
>Then reverted to Windows 8.1 by simply restoring one of the copies. 

Rin Stowleigh mult account. Suspected it since post one, but calling
based on the writing/tone of this. lol

If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include "always.look@message.header". 

This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 

-- 
Tim O <timo56REMOVE hotmail.com> wrote in news:12uv6blhoc7pi5cu6s3bjplk8jhe1li6pb 4ax.com:

> Path: eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Tim O <timo56REMOVE hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg
> Subject: Re: Useful Site For When Re-installing
> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 06:26:22 -0500
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Lines: 21
> Message-ID: <12uv6blhoc7pi5cu6s3bjplk8jhe1li6pb 4ax.com>
> References: <n4l767$ija$1 speranza.aioe.org> <MPG.30d90907ad177af89896d6 news.eternal-september.org> <fjhs6b5eonec0bgk0lnq6dtrmlhhcbm9vd 4ax.com> <n4lim0$a5e$1 dont-email.me> <n4ljo5$chl$1 dont-email.me> <n4o56a$ghc$1 dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="b5be33a7ca0f20318f73488969b6c41c"; logging-data="25439"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org";     posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+CWte9EsmPQPkIjf4JqoUn"
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1171
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:VREMnGKIXwzuh1IVCrvDv6KcDa8=
> Xref: mx02.eternal-september.org comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action:35465 comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg:18162
> 
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 04:33:15 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
> <always.look message.header> wrote:
> 
>>Maybe you should upgrade your tinfoil cap. 
>>
>>I know for a fact that the "constantly take precautions" part is false. 
>>Every once in a while I see a pop-up about upgrading to Windows 10, but 
>>it simply does not happen on its own. 
>>
>>Setting Windows Updates to manual is not rocket science. 
>>
>>If I initiate Windows Updates, the upgrade to Windows 10 will be 
>>checked. However, I can simply uncheck that and get anything/everything 
>>else. 
>>
>>I'm one of those experts. I make backups of my Windows drive. I have
>>accepted the Windows 10 upgrade twice so far (mainly out of curiosity).
>>Then reverted to Windows 8.1 by simply restoring one of the copies. 
> 
> Rin Stowleigh mult account. Suspected it since post one, but calling
> based on the writing/tone of this. lol
> 
> 

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:46:28 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

>If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include "always.look@message.header". 
>
>This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 

That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from him.

A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many people
believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)

Unfortunately though, I don't have time for that kind of shit.

What's really a hoot about this is that you and I were just arguing
about something a few weeks back, and the same was true in the similar
incident before!  

So, these accusers are truly downs-syndrome cases (believe me, I've
seen a pic of timo and he's was definitely cursed with some mutated
DNA) or they just aren't paying any sort of attention to who's who. Or
both.

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 

> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote: 
> 
>> If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include
>> "always.look@message.header". 
>>
>> This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 

> What's really a hoot about this is that you and I were just arguing 
> about something a few weeks back 

That's part of our cover... 

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 20:09:11 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

>Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 
>
>> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote: 
>> 
>>> If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include
>>> "always.look@message.header". 
>>>
>>> This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 
>
>> What's really a hoot about this is that you and I were just arguing 
>> about something a few weeks back 
>
>That's part of our cover... 

Shh, don't blow it.

>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message 
>news:o6k07btl8rj5ca67n1c9qiakgm9ku3734e@4ax.com...
>
>On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:46:28 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
><always.look@message.header> wrote:
>
>>If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include 
>>"always.look@message.header".
>>
>>This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough.
>
>That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
>manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from him.
>
>A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
>relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
>being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
>way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many people
>believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)

That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me of 
being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed.

Chuck

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:50:27 -0500, "Chuck"
<chuck....@comcast.net> wrote:

>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message 
>>news:o6k07btl8rj5ca67n1c9qiakgm9ku3734e@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:46:28 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
>><always.look@message.header> wrote:
>>
>>>If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include 
>>>"always.look@message.header".
>>>
>>>This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough.
>>
>>That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
>>manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from him.
>>
>>A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
>>relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
>>being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
>>way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many people
>>believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)
>
>That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me of 
>being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed.
>
>Chuck

LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you
happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make
the accusation?  

And the x-douche was kill filed years ago, although just like spudboy
timmy, I get occasional residual bleeder posts which I guess are
Usenet's way of reminding me why I shitcanned them in the first place.

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 

> "Chuck" <chuck....@comcast.net> wrote: 
>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote: 
>>> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote: 

>>>> If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include 
>>>> "always.look@message.header". 
>>>>
>>>> This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 
>>>
>>> That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>> time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes 
>>> manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from
>>> him. 
>>>
>>> A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>> had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other 
>>> relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of 
>>> being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the 
>>> way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many
>>> people believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;) 
>>
>> That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me
>> of being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed. 

> LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you 
> happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make 
> the accusation?  
> 
> And the x-douche was kill filed years ago, although just like spudboy 
> timmy, I get occasional residual bleeder posts which I guess are 
> Usenet's way of reminding me why I shitcanned them in the first place.

Preventing yourself from seeing someone else's posts is 
counterproductive. The only effective filter on UseNet is Ignore 
SubThread that includes the whole thread if taken from the top. 

Mutual blocking as implemented on YouTube is the only real way to shake 
trolls. You can't see their posts but they can't see your posts either. 
Will be great when major Internet discussion forums adopt mutual 
blocking. 

Mutual blocking is also implemented on Facebook, but that's less of a 
discussion forum than YouTube. 

YouTube has become my hands-down favorite for discussion thanks to 
mutual blocking. On UseNet, contentious issues are impossible without 
floods of interference. On YouTube, you can discuss anything no matter 
how controversial without it turning into a pissing contest and without 
picking up relentless stalkers.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 23:33:06 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

>Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote: 
>
>> "Chuck" <chuck....@comcast.net> wrote: 
>>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote: 
>>>> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote: 
>
>>>>> If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include 
>>>>> "always.look@message.header". 
>>>>>
>>>>> This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough. 
>>>>
>>>> That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>>> time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes 
>>>> manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from
>>>> him. 
>>>>
>>>> A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>>> had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other 
>>>> relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of 
>>>> being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the 
>>>> way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many
>>>> people believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;) 
>>>
>>> That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me
>>> of being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed. 
>
>> LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you 
>> happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make 
>> the accusation?  
>> 
>> And the x-douche was kill filed years ago, although just like spudboy 
>> timmy, I get occasional residual bleeder posts which I guess are 
>> Usenet's way of reminding me why I shitcanned them in the first place.
>
>Preventing yourself from seeing someone else's posts is 
>counterproductive. The only effective filter on UseNet is Ignore 
>SubThread that includes the whole thread if taken from the top. 
>
>Mutual blocking as implemented on YouTube is the only real way to shake 
>trolls. You can't see their posts but they can't see your posts either. 
>Will be great when major Internet discussion forums adopt mutual 
>blocking. 
>
>Mutual blocking is also implemented on Facebook, but that's less of a 
>discussion forum than YouTube. 
>
>YouTube has become my hands-down favorite for discussion thanks to 
>mutual blocking. On UseNet, contentious issues are impossible without 
>floods of interference. On YouTube, you can discuss anything no matter 
>how controversial without it turning into a pissing contest and without 
>picking up relentless stalkers.

Understood / agreed on most of what you've said, except I strongly
disagree that selective kill filing is counter-productive.

First of all, it takes A LOT for me to kill file someone.  There has
been only a handful of folks is Usenet that I've had to do this with,
and they are truly bottom-of-the-barrel pieces of work who proved over
a period of months that they were beyond rehabilitation.

I don't kill file people just because I disagree with them, or because
they are assholes, etc.  I kill file them only when the following
conditions are true:

1) They've demonstrated a weird obsession with me (i.e. they will
engage me at every possible opportunity, excited that I even respond
to them but at the same time fundamentally realizing that they are
wasting my time.  They know I have nothing to learn from them, they
have everything to learn from me, but instead of trying to coexist
they choose to try to make everything a keyboard battleground, then
failing to admit defeat when they fall, rinse and repeat).  For
example timo had this bizarre obsession with my penis, he would find a
way to bring it into discussion several times per month (that was a
separate issue from his relentless stupidity).  Xoccyl would simply
make it a point to be a part of ANY thread I was a part of, and would
actively seek out an opposing view, and defend his views poorly and
with self-contradictory logic, never becoming any wiser.

2)  They are clearly making an exerted effort, going out of their way
to be a first-order cunt, and do so consistently/ on an ongoing basis.
Maybe this should be number one, because it's important.  I don't mind
if someone is a cunt without meaning to be, and I don't even mind if
they go out of their way to be a cunt occasionally.  But the people in
my kill file list earned their spot because being a first-order cunt
forms the very basis of who they are.  They will never be able to
change.  

3)  Their behavior persists even after I warn them they are close to
getting shitcanned (I never just kill file someone on a whim and move
on).

So, because my nature tends to be that of a problem solver / fixer of
things, if I see someone being an idiot, my first instinct is to try
to fix them.  There are of course too many idiots on the 'Net, and
frankly some of them just cannot be fixed.  Selectively shitcanning a
user here and there has a huge benefit to my Usenet productivity, even
with the broken sub-threads and such, because it prevents me from
having to make a judgement call on whether to try to participate and
help the poor fuck based on my instinct or not.  They become mostly
out of sight, out of mind.

>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message 
>news:5e367b9goof4vtkci1e6j6k1u4rs1upcm8@4ax.com...
>
>on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:50:27 -0500, "Chuck"
><chuck....@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message
>>news:o6k07btl8rj5ca67n1c9qiakgm9ku3734e@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:46:28 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
>><always.look@message.header> wrote:
>>
>>>If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include
>>>"always.look@message.header".
>>>
>>>This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough.
>>
>>That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
>>manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from him.
>>
>>A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
>>relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
>>being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
>>way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many people
>>believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)
>
>That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me of
>being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed.
>
>Chuck
>
>LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you
>happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make
>the accusation?

I was agreeing with you on something, or you with me.  With his opinion, who 
cares.  He was probably one of the people who made me quit posting so many 
years ago.  You can't win an argument with an idiot.

Chuck

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 00:48:43 -0500, "Chuck"
<chuck....@comcast.net> wrote:

>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message 
>>news:5e367b9goof4vtkci1e6j6k1u4rs1upcm8@4ax.com...
>>
>>on Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:50:27 -0500, "Chuck"
>><chuck....@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote in message
>>>news:o6k07btl8rj5ca67n1c9qiakgm9ku3734e@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:46:28 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
>>><always.look@message.header> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include
>>>>"always.look@message.header".
>>>>
>>>>This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough.
>>>
>>>That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>>time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
>>>manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from him.
>>>
>>>A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>>had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
>>>relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
>>>being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
>>>way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many people
>>>believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)
>>
>>That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me of
>>being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed.
>>
>>Chuck
>>
>>LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you
>>happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make
>>the accusation?
>
>I was agreeing with you on something, or you with me.  With his opinion, who 
>cares.  He was probably one of the people who made me quit posting so many 
>years ago.  You can't win an argument with an idiot.

Winning is never really my goal anyway.  The possible outcomes I
expect from any sort of argument/debate etc. are either for me to
learn something new, my opponent to learn something new, or in an
ideal world, both.

There is a certain category of people who are simply incapable of
learning something new from me, even further from being capable of
teaching me anything, and those are the people who inevitably end up
in my kill file.

The total number of people I've actually shitcanned on Usenet is
remarkably small -- those with the honor should know they are truly
members of an elite club of douchebaggery.  It's amazing what happens
once you shitcan the problem children.  The quality of conversation
rebounds almost immediately and the time wasted on pointless debates
nosedives just as quickly.  Highly recommend.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 19:08:39 -0500, Rin Stowleigh wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 23:33:06 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
> <always.look@message.header> wrote:
> 
>>Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Chuck" <chuck....@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>"Rin Stowleigh"  wrote:
>>>>> John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> If I were nym-shifting, my ID would not include
>>>>>> "always.look@message.header".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This one needs a brand-new tinfoil cap, an upgrade isn't enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's pretty funny.  Even though I shitcanned spud boy timmy a long
>>>>> time ago, his relentless commitment to stupidity still sometimes
>>>>> manifests in ways I can still reap occasional entertainment from
>>>>> him.
>>>>>
>>>>> A few months back, there was a similar incident where someone else I
>>>>> had kill filed (who exactly escapes me) was accusing some other
>>>>> relatively sparse-posting user (forgot who the victim was too) of
>>>>> being a sock puppet account of mine (which I've never had, by the
>>>>> way).  At some point it becomes a huge compliment that so many
>>>>> people believe me to be often imitated but never duplicated. ;)
>>>>
>>>> That sounds like me.  Xxoycl, spelling might be incorrect, accused me
>>>> of being your sock puppet.  And he should definitely be kill filed.
>>
>>> LOL.  Yep, I remember now, thanks for the clarification.  Do you
>>> happen remember what it was by any chance that inspired him to make
>>> the accusation?
>>> 
>>> And the x-douche was kill filed years ago, although just like spudboy
>>> timmy, I get occasional residual bleeder posts which I guess are
>>> Usenet's way of reminding me why I shitcanned them in the first place.
>>
>>Preventing yourself from seeing someone else's posts is
>>counterproductive. The only effective filter on UseNet is Ignore
>>SubThread that includes the whole thread if taken from the top.
>>
>>Mutual blocking as implemented on YouTube is the only real way to shake
>>trolls. You can't see their posts but they can't see your posts either.
>>Will be great when major Internet discussion forums adopt mutual
>>blocking.
>>
>>Mutual blocking is also implemented on Facebook, but that's less of a
>>discussion forum than YouTube.
>>
>>YouTube has become my hands-down favorite for discussion thanks to
>>mutual blocking. On UseNet, contentious issues are impossible without
>>floods of interference. On YouTube, you can discuss anything no matter
>>how controversial without it turning into a pissing contest and without
>>picking up relentless stalkers.
> 
> Understood / agreed on most of what you've said, except I strongly
> disagree that selective kill filing is counter-productive.
> 
> First of all, it takes A LOT for me to kill file someone.  There has
> been only a handful of folks is Usenet that I've had to do this with,
> and they are truly bottom-of-the-barrel pieces of work who proved over a
> period of months that they were beyond rehabilitation.
> 
> I don't kill file people just because I disagree with them, or because
> they are assholes, etc.  I kill file them only when the following
> conditions are true:
> 
> 1) They've demonstrated a weird obsession with me (i.e. they will engage
> me at every possible opportunity, excited that I even respond to them
> but at the same time fundamentally realizing that they are wasting my
> time.  They know I have nothing to learn from them, they have everything
> to learn from me, but instead of trying to coexist they choose to try to
> make everything a keyboard battleground, then failing to admit defeat
> when they fall, rinse and repeat).  For example timo had this bizarre
> obsession with my penis, he would find a way to bring it into discussion
> several times per month (that was a separate issue from his relentless
> stupidity).  Xoccyl would simply make it a point to be a part of ANY
> thread I was a part of, and would actively seek out an opposing view,
> and defend his views poorly and with self-contradictory logic, never
> becoming any wiser.
> 
> 2)  They are clearly making an exerted effort, going out of their way to
> be a first-order cunt, and do so consistently/ on an ongoing basis.
> Maybe this should be number one, because it's important.  I don't mind
> if someone is a cunt without meaning to be, and I don't even mind if
> they go out of their way to be a cunt occasionally.  But the people in
> my kill file list earned their spot because being a first-order cunt
> forms the very basis of who they are.  They will never be able to
> change.
> 
> 3)  Their behavior persists even after I warn them they are close to
> getting shitcanned (I never just kill file someone on a whim and move
> on).
> 
> So, because my nature tends to be that of a problem solver / fixer of
> things, if I see someone being an idiot, my first instinct is to try to
> fix them.  There are of course too many idiots on the 'Net, and frankly
> some of them just cannot be fixed.  Selectively shitcanning a user here
> and there has a huge benefit to my Usenet productivity, even with the
> broken sub-threads and such, because it prevents me from having to make
> a judgement call on whether to try to participate and help the poor fuck
> based on my instinct or not.  They become mostly out of sight, out of
> mind.


Mainly lurking here and on the RPG groups for a few months, but it seems 
you may be obsessing on this. I have seen nobody talk about you, yet I've 
read of your killfile many times and see lots of anger in this post. When 
others are always the problem, perhaps its time to focus inward.

Maybe I've watched too much of Yoda during the holiday break. Best wishes 
to all in the new year :-)

-d

In article <n5p9as$akj$1...@dont-email.me>, n...@thanks.com says...
> 
> Mainly lurking here and on the RPG groups for a few months, but it seems 
> you may be obsessing on this. I have seen nobody talk about you, yet I've 
> read of your killfile many times and see lots of anger in this post. When 
> others are always the problem, perhaps its time to focus inward.
> 
> Maybe I've watched too much of Yoda during the holiday break. Best wishes 
> to all in the new year :-)
> 
> -d
> 
> 

When someone wheels out the 'idiot' word the moment someone else 
disagrees with them, then that speaks for itself. 
When someone's first reaction to a post they don't agree with is to
cast aspersions on  the poster's IQ or state of knowledge, then that 
speaks for itself too.

-P.

---

Konfucius say: "What is green, it lives under a bridge and molests 
goats?"

Yoda says: "Trying to teach a pig to play poker gets you nowhere, and it 
just annoys the pig". 


*scoring newsgroups will be removed from headers*