My last post

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/23/2004 2:01 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/22/2004 12:20 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:


I think there's a bit of Chicken Little stuff going on here.

Interesting point of view from someone who sometimes
behaves like a troll himself...

Interesting: your definition of troll seems to be "someone who posts stuff I
disagree with". Or something like that.

Typical troll diversionary reply. You deliberately crossposted
a thread with my name on it, minus the original thread and context,
for the purpose of trolling.

Bull****. Check the messages in both newsgroups: they were *not* crossposted.
I simply posted [almost] the same message in both places. Not at all the same
as crossposting (or does your dictionary define that differently too?).

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

The result (and intent) was the same.

Troll...

I really do find myself taking David's
side on this Tom. unless he is including
both groups in the header he is not
crossposting. Despite what you say
and the sometimes ill manner David
posts under (sometimes) I would not
call him a troll. A little cranky sometimes
but he does listen to other opinions, that in
my book is worth note.

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

The result (and intent) was the same.

Troll...
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

I really do find myself taking David's
side on this Tom. unless he is including
both groups in the header he is not
crossposting. Despite what you say
and the sometimes ill manner David
posts under (sometimes) I would not
call him a troll. A little cranky sometimes
but he does listen to other opinions, that in
my book is worth note.

In article ,
Tom Phillips wrote:

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

The result (and intent) was the same.

Troll...
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

On 10/23/2004 9:00 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/23/2004 2:01 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/22/2004 12:20 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:


I think there's a bit of Chicken Little stuff going on here.

Interesting point of view from someone who sometimes
behaves like a troll himself...

Interesting: your definition of troll seems to be "someone who posts stuff I
disagree with". Or something like that.

Typical troll diversionary reply. You deliberately crossposted
a thread with my name on it, minus the original thread and context,
for the purpose of trolling.

Bull****. Check the messages in both newsgroups: they were *not* crossposted.
I simply posted [almost] the same message in both places. Not at all the same
as crossposting (or does your dictionary define that differently too?).

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

Remember what crossposting (that is, actual crossposting, which consists of
making a post with multiple newsgroups in the header) does: it often does
become the tool of a troll who wants to spread an argument to multiple
newsgroups in the hopes of generating a lot of spillover.

Not at all the same as posting two messages in two newsgroups.


--
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a
really easy way: stop participating in it.

- Noam Chomsky

On 10/23/2004 9:34 PM Gregory W Blank spake thus:

I really do find myself taking David's
side on this Tom. unless he is including
both groups in the header he is not
crossposting. Despite what you say
and the sometimes ill manner David
posts under (sometimes) I would not
call him a troll. A little cranky sometimes
but he does listen to other opinions, that in
my book is worth note.

Cranky? You're too kind.


--
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a
really easy way: stop participating in it.

- Noam Chomsky

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/23/2004 9:34 PM Gregory W Blank spake thus:

I really do find myself taking David's
side on this Tom. unless he is including
both groups in the header he is not
crossposting.

Semantics, however. The intent and result was/is the same.

Might try that argument in court. Technicalities usually get
criminals off the hook even though the crime was still committed...

Despite what you say
and the sometimes ill manner David
posts under (sometimes) I would not
call him a troll.

I _said_ he behaves sometimes like a troll.


A little cranky sometimes
but he does listen to other opinions, that in
my book is worth note.

Cranky? You're too kind.

Another word comes to my mind and it begins with A.

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/23/2004 9:00 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/23/2004 2:01 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 10/22/2004 12:20 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:


I think there's a bit of Chicken Little stuff going on here.

Interesting point of view from someone who sometimes
behaves like a troll himself...

Interesting: your definition of troll seems to be "someone who posts stuff I
disagree with". Or something like that.

Typical troll diversionary reply. You deliberately crossposted
a thread with my name on it, minus the original thread and context,
for the purpose of trolling.

Bull****. Check the messages in both newsgroups: they were *not* crossposted.
I simply posted [almost] the same message in both places. Not at all the same
as crossposting (or does your dictionary define that differently too?).

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.


No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...


Remember what crossposting (that is, actual crossposting, which consists of
making a post with multiple newsgroups in the header) does: it often does
become the tool of a troll who wants to spread an argument to multiple
newsgroups in the hopes of generating a lot of spillover.

Not at all the same as posting two messages in two newsgroups.

--
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a
really easy way: stop participating in it.

- Noam Chomsky

Tom Phillips wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:


Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.


No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...


BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.

You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
result; you just changed the way header was posted.

Tom Phillips wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:


Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.


No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...


BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.

You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
result; you just changed the way header was posted.

On 10/24/2004 1:42 PM Tom Phillips spake thus:

Tom Phillips wrote:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Oh, like it makes a difference _how_ you crossposted...

Yes, it does make a difference, Virginia.

No. It doesn't. Not for your purpose and intent...

Or does it suit you to play fast and loose with terms like "crossposting" when
you're disputing them, but strict and precise when you're defending your
definition of "photography"?

You're making a semantical argument. So now you're also a hypocrite...

Of course I'm making a semantic (not semantical) argument, you ninny: we're
talking about the meaning of a word (crossposting) here.

Or do you want words to mean just what *you* want them to mean, like in _Alice
in Wonderland_?

BTW, what constitutes photography is still whether you actually
create a photograph resulting from using a photographic medium.

You actually made a crosspost. You didn't change the medium or
result; you just changed the way header was posted.

Not according to the Hacker's Dictionary, which is a widely respected source
on such matters:

http://hackersdictionary.com/html/entry/cross-post.html

I'll let other disinterested parties decide whether what I did was crossposting.


--
Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a
really easy way: stop participating in it.

- Noam Chomsky