|
in reply to -175 := +127 Thank you all! (Updated!Now -152 := +144)
- If I'm wrong, PROVE IT! Otherwise, shut the f*** up.
- You really are a dumb-arse.
- Instead you write crap like this.
- No shit Sherlock :)
- And no. Not a f***** chance. GO AWAY!
- you'd make some attempt to verify a wild-assed guess
- live in the real -- asynchronous -- world, where shit happens.
- Or "F*ck you Jack, I'm all right!"
- differences make Python a piss poor substitute for Perl.
- and recriminations pointless. As the saying goes: Piss, or get off the pot.
- Twat. Both syntaxes being discussed "already exist
f*** up implementation
- Write-once variables are a piss poor substitute; an anathema to Perl
- Twat! It will be a module on cpan as soon as
- $10,000 == $10,000. QED. B***shit!
- d he could make it transparent; and now we're all f*****!
- Perl has silently and unwantedly f***** my data. Broken!
- Dickhead!
- My app. All my own work. Twat!
- all those nay-sayers -- the cowardly little shits that yap anonymously from the side lines
- I knew you'd see through the bullshit!
- No shit Sherlock!
- comeback and defend it with a bunch of made up crap; is just vintage ikegami.
- FIXED! FIXED!? You make shit up.
- in a vain attempt to cover up the shit you've stirred.
- P>There is some asinine pedant in p5p adding this shit. I guess I could look up who
- Why the F*** does Micr$oft name things with overloaded words?
- n, lay the table and change the rope. Deedee's ex f*** for using er. Grope I, won't convert me. I pee in the cream
- ing counter-productive; automated bean-counting a piss-poor substitute for open and blame-free peer supp
- -- but your over-literal interpretation of it is crap.
- a "fact" for you. You are talking out of your arse.
- apable of learning; just not from people who make shit up and pass it off as knowledge.
- Bullshit! As normal. Why do you bother?
- I was gonna let this slide; but f*** it. You need to learn a lesson.
- Twat!
- No shit Sherlock!
- known as "Unicode". What price your pedantry now? Twat!
- e entirely with those that have to deal with this shit; I'm in a position where I don't have to
- but PM truncated it, and I'm too pissed off to try and re-create it.
- The problem was not taking the piss about the company's products
- thinking that's shite, but house rules
- See what I mean about people "responding" to shit they make up. And perpetuating a non-argument for
- g; you just need to learn how to read you fatuous f***wit.
- much less some half-arsed, pseudo-statistical piece of shit'n'shinola code
Had to remove a couple false positives manually, like Hardon
(Collider). I would talk about your frequent misspellings, improper
casing, bad HTML taking up screen space in every post, rather flexible
dictionary meanings in discussions, shoddy grammar, and such but that would just be
pedantic and you already taught me that lesson, as you promised. All
part of your humble efforts to further your altruism here.
You boasted recently in the middle of being offended that you are hard to offend. Of all the monks
currently active, I offer the list above as partial proof that you are
the easiest to offend and the fastest to reach for nastiness, epithets, and hyperbole as rebuttal. If this simple
profanity search through a fraction of your posts could instead be
targeted for overreaction, insults, and abusive
language, the list would be five times as long. Congratulations on
your mission to save the Perl hoi polloi from our crap algorithms and wrongthink.
|
Re: You're welcome — was Re: -175 := +127 Thank you all! (Updated!Now -152 := +144)
by Anonymous Monk on May 31, 2016 at 17:25 UTC
|
Sorry, would you mind sharing the regex used to collect this?
No joke intended.
| [reply] |
|
|
:P The only part of the recipe that is non-trivial (trivial = loading a list of user nodes on the site, copying the HTML and parsing it into node ids and fetching the ids into ?node_id={id};displaytype=xml with LWP::whatever, with a generous sleep between request to not tax the site, and pulling content from those…) is Regexp::Common::profanity + a little magic to check for elided spellings with as******s. Perl makes this stuff rather easy. I’m super grateful for it and its community every day.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
|
|
| [reply] |
Re: You're welcome — was Re: -175 := +127 Thank you all! (Updated!Now -152 := +144)
by shmem (Chancellor) on Apr 19, 2017 at 16:56 UTC
|
As already said, context matters; and then, taking absolutes as an argument gives a false picture, because if, say, Old Gray Bear was "foul mouthed" in one post, how many such posts of BrowserUk are needed to weigh against that?
See.
But even percentage is wrong, misleading (and off the point), because to get an accurate picture, you would need to conduct a thorough survey of the net effect of BrowserUk's incriminated posts (for "bad language"! seriously? Pipi Kaka Furz?) in an infallible manner. Pulling out only bad words is bad science, as is evaluating the nodes reputation. Many things get downvoted offhand; but they may yield effect, even to the point where one's downvoting is seen later as erroneous.
The effect on each of our fellow monks is always individual and cannot be measured by statistics because... well, because it is individual, an effect caused on an individual mind, with its own settings, background, temporary conditions, parents, condition of spouse and whatnot.
So, this compilation amounts to "he said jehovah! let's stone him!"
Congratulations on your mission to save the Perl hoi polloi from our crap algorithms and wrongthink.
Hmm... nosepicking.?
perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'
| [reply] |
|
|
I think stirring up this thread is a big mistake but I respect and like you so it matters to me what you think.
If I had read my own post without context, I would have had the reaction you did. My post was in the context of some then recent history and made because of fatigue from what I perceived as false humility poured over braggadocio wedded with XP whining.
It’s not about profanity; that was just an easy highlight without the need for deep reading and analytical scribbling. It’s about unwarranted hostility and the penchant to dig in and dish the last word.
I considered BUK a friend. I had defended his—and a couple other high-contributing monks who have some rough social skills—attitude in deference to the level of skill and help he brings and I came to his aid personally in private messages in the CB a few years ago and felt pride and a real connection that I could help a senior monk having a hard day. Then, a bit back, he called me a “twat” and a “pedant” (the definition of the pot calling the kettle black here) for replying too flatly about a Unicode/mixed-corrupt-data question; Mixed Unicode and ANSI string comparisons?. He felt to the need to double down on it, too; Context, pedantry and appropriate response.. At that point I’d had enough, clearly, and that sentiment had legs.
I respected and liked him. So it mattered to me what he thought. I was pretty hurt. Deference is permanently off the table for me. Case by case only now and the case in question rattled my cage.
From a couple weeks ago; A data selection problem(in3D).–
OP: Any thoughts, speculations or suggestions gratefully received.
Response: [This? Is this the idea?]
OP: …Either you have something that will help … or you don't, and move on. …if I wanted a half-arsed solution, I had (and demonstrated) that a week ago. …But if joy is too much for you....
Hostility, not grace, for answering the call of participation, for falling short, in direct contradiction to the tone offered in the question. It’s a mode, not an outlier.
Footnote, FTR, I do not dispute whatsoever the plain fact that BUK is among the most valuable contributors here.
Update: regarding “…the penchant to dig in and dish the last word.” Got the last word twice, so far, this time. Oh, it was a banner effing post at the old PerlMonks family.
| [reply] |
|
|
And since you brought it up. Have you been back to that subthread?
Have you read the alternate subthread resulting from the same post to which you added your non reply?
Do you not see how that alternate subthread moves the discussion forward; where as your adds exactly nothing to it?
I also considered you "a friend" -- we've had many good interactions -- but wouldn't it be hypocritical of me to not react to your non-contribution in the same way I would had it come from anonymonk?
It saddens me that you choose to be so offended by my very mild rebuke of you for your non-helpful, non-useful, non-contributory, non-informative, non-response; but then a lot about this place saddens me.
But what saddens me most of all is that there are so many here who's only contributions are to stifle, harangue and suppress those who'd like to get on with using this place for a free and open exchange of ideas as it's intended. So sad.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
Suck that fhit
| [reply] |
|
|
Response: This? Is this the idea?
Once again, you omit context. You fail to quote the part of the post to which I responded. The part I quoted in my response. Ie. "Is that intended (and only) use of this magic palette?"
What you see as "Hostility, not grace,"; I see as proportionate response in kind.
As with every single SoPW I have posted going back years; there is always some anonymonk with a chip on his shoulder telling me that he doesn't feel my question is worthy of asking; or my purpose worthy of his (or PM's) consideration. My reply simply pointed out that as with every other SoPW by every other monk, he is free to ignore my questions.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
Suck that fhit
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
|
|
| [reply] |
| A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in. |
|
|
