Re: [OT] PostgreSQL: bytea help needed.
From: George William Herbert (gherbert_at_retro.com)
Date: 02/06/05
- Next message: prg: "Re: Forward slashes in filenames"
- Previous message: chunhui_true: "get ftp command in uft8???"
- In reply to: Jim Logajan: "Re: [OT] PostgreSQL: bytea help needed."
- Next in thread: mlw: "Re: [OT] PostgreSQL: bytea help needed."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 06 Feb 2005 06:34:51 GMT
Jim Logajan <JamesL@Lugoj.com> wrote:
>gherbert@retro.com (George William Herbert) wrote:
>> Trolling this across the Linux groups to try and bring additional
>> pressure on NAN moderators is net abuse, Mike. You owe the linux
>> group readers an appology. You probably are in violation of the
>> terms of serivce of your news provider.
>
>Hmmm - bad day for you? It seems a little odd to read the above from the
>same person who (unless I missed it) not only didn't object when a thread
>was started on the Iraqi elections that was cross-posted to
>sci.geo.geology, sci.space.policy, and alt.religion.islam but actually
>contributed to it:
>
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.geo.geology/msg/c9273720287fc7e3
>Now why is it okay to post on the Iraqi elections, or the motives that
>drove the Soviet Union to invade Afghanistan (on a thread whose subject
>line mentioned only the Iraqi elections), to two groups that are supposed
>to be about geology and space policy - yet not be in violation of your
>Terms of Service (TOS), while another person who posts a message
>complaining about the delay in voting on a newsgroup for a software
>application on some relevant software newsgroups would be guilty of being
>in violation of their TOS?
Well.... as it happens, this is one of those convoluted cases
where it looks a lot worse than it really is. Though, if I were
on a general crossposts are evil rampage, I would have to host my
own petard.
The person I was responding to directly appears to be a sci.geo.geology
native, though the pseudonym is marginally opaque. (Tom <me@privacy.net>)
In that set of groups, that pseudonym appears in sci.geo.geology alone
or in xposts into it. So presumably Tom knew what s/he was doing
in keeping the xpost going.
The posts are at least marginally on topic in alt.religion.islam,
especially given that Tom's assertion was that an incipient Islamic
uprising is why Afghanistan was invaded by the Soviet Union in 1979.
As for sci.space.policy ... "off topic" ceased to be a meaningful
term applied to the group some time ago. I try to be better than
average on topicality there, which is not saying a whole lot.
I thought you read s.s.p, anyways. I shouldn't have to be
telling you that...
As to the question of TOS violations; I didn't add those newsgroups
nor was I trolling nor attempting to enrage participants in other
newsgroups. The only newsgroup in which the thread arguably is
off topic is sci.geo.geology, but a bunch of its participants
including the guy who started the thread are sci.geo.geology
regulars. If other sci.geo.geology posters object to the
crossposts they can complain about them. We just had a discussion
on that topic and responsibility for things you crosspost last
week in those groups... I would stop xposting a thread to an
off topic group if its users complained.
Responding further to your last point above:
>while another person who posts a message
>complaining about the delay in voting on a newsgroup for a software
>application on some relevant software newsgroups would be guilty of being
>in violation of their TOS?
That's not what happened here, Jim. Mark trolled a relevant thread
about SQL software into news.groups . He didn't make a complaint,
he trolled a thread in. The thread's initiators didn't do it.
He did. And he out and out admitted he was doing it to piss
us off, so he knew it was net abuse when he was doing it.
As I pointed out to him, he could and should have asked either
by posting to news.groups or email. Flaming instead of asking
would have been bad. Flaming by trolling another conversation
into news.groups in order to make a point, goes beyond bad into
extreme hostility.
>Would it help ease your angst if we start a discussion on whether a Sunni
>Muslim boycott of the PostgreSQL CFV would cause NASA to consider not only
>continued support of the Hubble space telecscope, but updating it to a
>real-time Linux kernel while changing its optics to use lenses ground from
>obsidian formed during the Cenozoic?
That's absurd. There's no open-source implimentation of
Volcano 1.0, the obsidian-formation protocol. Linus would never
allow non-GPLed lenses to be incorporated into the kernel,
not even for good sushi and sake. No matter how much more
clearly you want to see the Muslim boycott from orbit,
you're going to have to stick to VXWorks, Embedded Oracle,
and Ikonos in order to monitor the CFV.
-george william herbert
gherbert@retro.com
- Next message: prg: "Re: Forward slashes in filenames"
- Previous message: chunhui_true: "get ftp command in uft8???"
- In reply to: Jim Logajan: "Re: [OT] PostgreSQL: bytea help needed."
- Next in thread: mlw: "Re: [OT] PostgreSQL: bytea help needed."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
