Using multi-dimensional array to print a magic square

[R J C]

Han from China scribbled:

Yawn.

Nobody really cares about the fake killfiles of Thompson, Heathfield,
and Falconer.

You seem to care, Han, which is equally unhealthy.

That said, I don't understand the obsession and fixation that two
or three people have with you and their killfiles. I think your
point about "fake killfiles" is a valid one, and tho I don't
condone all your actions on this newsgroup, it's obvious you've
managed to bruise a few egos with your immature ways.

You're all as bad as one another.

and Falconer. Haven't you worked that out by now, given all the
people who read and reply to my posts?

Yes, I've noticed that most of the posters here reply to your
posts. Most of the posters here also reply to the posts of
the three obsessed people you've mentioned. What does that say?
Neither your noise nor their noise is having any effect on what
people are here to discuss and learn about. The noise is
only self-serving at best. I don't see either party having
that realization anytime soon.

Rob

 

[Keith Thompson]

Han from China scribbled: [snip]
That said, I don't understand the obsession and fixation that two
or three people have with you and their killfiles. I think your
point about "fake killfiles" is a valid one,

[...]

It isn't.

 

[CBFalconer]

Han from China scribbled:

You seem to care, Han, which is equally unhealthy.
.... snip ...

Yes, I've noticed that most of the posters here reply to your
posts. Most of the posters here also reply to the posts of
the three obsessed people you've mentioned. What does that say?
Neither your noise nor their noise is having any effect on what
people are here to discuss and learn about. The noise is
only self-serving at best. I don't see either party having
that realization anytime soon.

Han doesn't seem to notice that he doesn't get replies from most.
Usually his entries are responded to by other trolls, such as
McCormack, Richard the nameless, the Golden California Wench, etc.
Most people only respond to quotes of trolls injected by the
(largely) ignorant.

Apparently Han is not going to attempt to reform.

 

[James Kuyper]

Han doesn't seem to notice that he doesn't get replies from most.
Usually his entries are responded to by other trolls, such as
McCormack, Richard the nameless, the Golden California Wench, etc.

We have enough trolls here that just getting responses from trolls
constitutes getting responses from a fair number of different people.
Don't forget that he also frequently gets responses from the newbies
that he's "helped".

 

[luserXtrog]

These are the people who don't reply to my posts:

  Thompson, Heathfield, Kuyper, McIntyre, Carmody, Sosman,
  Ambuhl, Falconer

Of those, the only two who actually know C and aren't phonies
are Kuyper and Sosman. I don't understand how a person like
Falconer, for instance, could expect anyone to care whether
he's killfiled them or not. Of those, the only one I have any
reason to believe has actually killfiled me is Sosman; the others
either:

(a) behave in ways inconsistent with the use of a killfile,
e.g., not answering ISO C questions when I'm the only one
to have done so, not correcting one another's posts when
I'm the only one to have done so. (And they are corrections,
because I can point out the instances where James, Rentsch,
David Thompson, and many others have agreed with my corrections
of the phony Thompson and the phony Heathfield. Someone
mentioned bruised egos? That's what this is all about, you
know: Someone came along and revealed how easy it is to
be nothing more than a Standard regurgitator, and now Thompson
and Heathfield have nothing, and they know it -- hence the
"obsession and fixation" from the naked emperors who just
wish that the pain would stop and that they could succeed in
getting everyone to dismiss my posts!) There are also funny
behavioral tells I don't wish to mention at this point.

History: I arrived on this newsgroup and exposed Heathfield's
hypocrisy last year with a series of posts about his book.
Thompson and the rest started attacking and insulting me
before I started attacking and insulting them. Check the
archives.

(b) have contradicted their stories and have had those
contradictions exposed.

(c) are unaware of the technical idiosyncrasies of their
news software and what happens when users of that software
actually killfile/scorefile people.

(d) have pretended that their news software is more limited
than what it really is.

(e) have accidentally slipped by replying directly to someone
supposedly in their killfile and then carrying on as if
nothing happened.

Now, count the number of people who have been reading and
making rather civil replies to my posts:

  David Thompson, Richard Tobin, Richard, Twink, Kenny,
  Nate Eldredge, pete, John Bode, Danny C, Harald, Dik,
  Larry Jones, Ben B, Ben P, Richard Bos, Nick Keighley,
  Kaz, blargg, BartC, Jacob, Richard Harter, Spiros
  Bousbouras, Barry Schwarz, Flash Gordon, Jack Klein,
  Stephen Sprunk, Chris McDonald, Franken Sense (George,
  Larry Gates), Tim Rentsch, Lew Pitcher, ...

It's clear that most people read and reply to my posts, so
I'm not sure why Falconer persists with his little lie.

Yours,
Han from China

I read you too, dude!

 

[R J C]

Han from China scribbled:

These are the people who don't reply to my posts:

Thompson, Heathfield, Kuyper, McIntyre, Carmody, Sosman,
Ambuhl, Falconer

Of those, the only two who actually know C and aren't phonies
are Kuyper and Sosman. I don't understand how a person like
Falconer, for instance, could expect anyone to care whether
he's killfiled them or not. Of those, the only one I have any
reason to believe has actually killfiled me is Sosman; the others
either:

History: I arrived on this newsgroup and exposed Heathfield's
hypocrisy last year with a series of posts about his book.
Thompson and the rest started attacking and insulting me
before I started attacking and insulting them. Check the
archives.

I've been lurking on and off and caught your little Heathfield
series---hence not condoning all your actions. However, the
specifics of you and Thompson elude me. Nevertheless, what
you've given there is a testable, falsifiable claim:- I can
find no objections to each party producing a timestamped message
of the alleged earliest attack or insult.

Now, count the number of people who have been reading and
making rather civil replies to my posts:

David Thompson, Richard Tobin, Richard, Twink, Kenny,
Nate Eldredge, pete, John Bode, Danny C, Harald, Dik,
Larry Jones, Ben B, Ben P, Richard Bos, Nick Keighley,
Kaz, blargg, BartC, Jacob, Richard Harter, Spiros
Bousbouras, Barry Schwarz, Flash Gordon, Jack Klein,
Stephen Sprunk, Chris McDonald, Franken Sense (George,
Larry Gates), Tim Rentsch, Lew Pitcher, ...

It's clear that most people read and reply to my posts, so
I'm not sure why Falconer persists with his little lie.

Another testable, falsifiable claim---this one I believe to
be accurate.

You'd endear more people to you if you stuck to the testable
claims instead of the crazy ranting and raving, Han. Aren't
you the one who harps on about evidence?

Rob

 

[CBFalconer]

We have enough trolls here that just getting responses from trolls
constitutes getting responses from a fair number of different people.
Don't forget that he also frequently gets responses from the newbies
that he's "helped".

Well, his responses from trolls aren't seen here, because those
trolls are plonked. The newbies often draw a warning from me (or
others) that they are discussing with a troll.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ~75 lines of trolling ...

I read you too, dude!

Was it necessary to quote the troll?

 

[James Kuyper]

... snip ~75 lines of trolling ...

Was it necessary to quote the troll?

luserXtrog said that he does read Han; therefore, it follows that he's
not in agreement with us about Han being a troll - an error in judgment
that he has every right to make. Having made that error, he can see no
wrong it quoting Han.

However, even if Han were not a troll, quoting an entire article to post
a tiny response to one part of it would still be bad netiquette.

 

[James Kuyper]

Han from China scribbled: ....

I've been lurking on and off and caught your little Heathfield
series---hence not condoning all your actions. However, the
specifics of you and Thompson elude me. Nevertheless, what
you've given there is a testable, falsifiable claim:- I can
find no objections to each party producing a timestamped message of the
alleged earliest attack or insult.

My earliest attacks on Han were not in retaliation for his attacks, but
were instead criticisms of his erroneous C advice, which I quickly came
to realize was deliberately erroneous.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

Han gives very good factual help to people. How that is being a troll is
anyones guess. It seems James that a certain small clique don't like
being undermined. I hadn't had you pegged as one of them but it seems
you deem yourself so.

As with any sort of political struggle, there's a large group in the
middle (the so-called "common man") that really doesn't care about the
conflict, one way or another, but cares deeply about being on the
winning side when the dust clears. That is, they need to know which
side to back.

Generally, the conventional wisdom is always to back the Establishment,
since they are likely to outlast the rebels. This general approach
doesn't always work, of course, but is, I must admit, likely to work in
CLC, for the simple reason that it matters a lot more to Thompson et al,
than it does to us. One of the core propaganda messages of the THFTU (*)
has been that the trolls (referring to us) will eventually get tired
and move on (and that, in general, trolls come and go, but the regs are
here for the long haul).

And I think this is true. I honestly believe that the only thing that
will separate any of THF (and a few others that make up the core group)
from this newsgroup is death. My guess is that a lot of these guys are
in their 40s and 50s now (except CBF, of course, who is at least 80)
and will still be posting their dreck to CLC 20, 30, 50 years from now.
I can tell you honestly, that I almost certainly won't still be here
then. So, they are right - they will outlast us.

In conclusion, Kuyper (and others) *are* right to back the Establishment.

(*) Thompson/Heathfield/Falconer Trolling Unit

 

[Keith Thompson]

Han from China scribbled:

[more of the same]
[...]

I've been lurking on and off and caught your little Heathfield
series---hence not condoning all your actions. However, the
specifics of you and Thompson elude me. Nevertheless, what
you've given there is a testable, falsifiable claim:- I can
find no objections to each party producing a timestamped message of
the alleged earliest attack or insult.

[...]

I get the impression that HfC is making some kind of claim about
who insulted whom first, and you're asking that "each party"
(presumably that would include me) produce timestamped evidence
regarding that claim.

I, for one, will not do so.

I have certainly posted harsh criticisms of HfC in the past.
(I've done so less often since I stopped reading most of what
he posts.) If you want to call those criticisms "attacks" or
"insults", I won't disagree, unless those words are meant to imply
that the criticisms were unwarranted.

Who insulted whom first is irrelevant. If I insult HfC, I do so
because of what he's written here, not necessarily in response to HfC
insulting me. This is not a game, at least as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not sure what you mean by "However, the specifics of you and
Thompson elude me.".

 

[luserXtrog]

luserXtrog said that he does read Han; therefore, it follows that he's
not in agreement with us about Han being a troll - a<snip!> judgment
that he has every right to make. H<snip!>e can see no
wrong it quoting Han.

However, even if Han were not a troll, quoting an entire article to post
a tiny response to one part of it would still be bad netiquette.

Acknowledged.
Liberal snippage employed.

 

[Richard Bos]

It isn't.

It is, and his point about people taking their own (real or fake)
killfiles far too seriously is even more valid. However, he does seem a
bit limited in his understanding of who takes himself too seriously,
here - at the very least, he should add those who complain about being
put in a fake killfile in that category. Complaining about being or not
being in someone's fake or not fake killfile is at least as much a sign
of a pathological ego as proclaiming about who is or isn't in yours.

Richard

 

[Keith Thompson]

It is, and his point about people taking their own (real or fake)
killfiles far too seriously is even more valid.

[...]

HfC apparently claims that posters who claim to have killfiled him
have not really done so. This claim is baseless and, I believe,
false. If there's a valid point in there somewhere, I'm not going to
take the time to find it.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

It is, and his point about people taking their own (real or fake)
killfiles far too seriously is even more valid. However, he does seem a
bit limited in his understanding of who takes himself too seriously,
here - at the very least, he should add those who complain about being
put in a fake killfile in that category. Complaining about being or not
being in someone's fake or not fake killfile is at least as much a sign
of a pathological ego as proclaiming about who is or isn't in yours.

That is, of course, a complete misrepresentation of Han's (and my) position.

Keep in mind that it was me who first worked out that the regs were simply
lying (no surprise there!) when they claim to have killfiled me (us).

 

[Richard Bos]

That is, of course, a complete misrepresentation of Han's (and my) position.

Is it, now?

Keep in mind that it was me who first worked out that the regs were simply
lying (no surprise there!) when they claim to have killfiled me (us).

'nuff said.

Richard