General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2182075

    What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

    Locked

    by jdclyde ·

    People hop on the Web and start to wander around and sometimes they will stumble on a place called Tech Republic.

    Being new to computers and the proper ways to conduct themselves in discussions they will often make mistakes in their posting that will offend and alienate existing members who often would have bent over backwards to lend a hand, are now just bent on your distruction.

    If a few guidelines where followed, many of these people would have a much more productive and enjoyable experience here and in other discussions.

    [b]First, be respectful.[/b] Don’t read a few posts and ASSUME to feel it is your duty to set everyone straight. Lurk for a little bit to get the feel of the land.

    [b]Second, do your homework.[/b] If you have a technical question make sure you TRIED to find an answer before asking someone to spoon feed you one. Other people worked hard to learn what they know and are less likely to share that knowledge with someone who is too lazy to even try.

    [b]Third, separate questions from discussions.[/b] If you have a [b]technical question[/b] that you are seeking an answer to, go to the [b]Technical Question and Answer section[/b] and post it under the correct heading.
    Make sure to provide background information about the problem to assist in resolving your issue.

    If you have a [b]Discussion,[/b] go into that section and post uncer the correct heading. Discussions are a gathering of ideas. People will respond to your post with their take and this may not always agree with what you have put. This is how discussions work. Short of profanity, there is very little babysitting in this section.

    If you do not like the more controversial discussions, stick to the sectins that ARE of interest to you. There really is something for everyone here.

    This is a link that is one of the best write-ups of how to ask questions on the net that I have ever read.
    http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    By reading this, it will help YOU know how to ask a question in a way that will get YOU the information you need.

    Be respectful, friendly, and helpful and don’t take ANYTHING too seriously and you will have a GREAT time here at TR.

    jd

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3178681

      Reply To: What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      by firstpeter ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      I can agree with the first part (BE RESPECTFUL!). It is a given that we, as a community, will not agree on everything. If we did I would REALLY be scared (because either TR participation dropped to a total of 4 people or we’re all drinking the same watermelon Kool-aid).

      However it’s plain and clear in my charter that one of my duties is to set everyone straight (Article 3, Section 3.94, Paragrph 18). Sorry.
      🙂

      But seriously, I don’t know that I’d recommend that new folks lurk for a little bit to get the feel of the land before posting. I would agree that they should probably review other posts to see if the topic’s been discussed to death or not, but heck – I’d rather get new folks engaged right up front on day 1 in a discussion than to have them forget all about TR.

      That’s what happened to me – I found something in TR once upon a time (when I started) that interested me but I didn’t participate immediately (since I wasn’t sure whether I’d be ridiculed out of town by Oz or not – just kidding, Oz). Since I wasn’t “invested” in anything there it fell to a stray bookmark in my list, and LUCKILY I found it again and have been active ever since.

      Just my two fully respectful cents.

      • #3178670

        Lurking vs jumping head first in

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Reply To: What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

        I have seen many times when people make a single post, get blasted and are never seen from again.

        Also with some of the people here it takes some time to realize who is just giving an aquantance a ribbing vs just being a jerk.

        Or worse, they too get sucked into the void that is EL.

        I didn’t get in the discussions for about two years. Never even looked at them, and just read the newsletters. Got sucked in and have been stuck ever since.

        And yes, people SHOULD EXPECT to be “set straight”.

        In the least, they should look around as some of the posts. How many times have people come into off-topic discussions in the Misc section complaining that the discussion has nothing to do with tech? Then most recently was the guy how posted a discussion asking for a “step by step” set of instructions for something that the free support that came with his boxes would have done for him. All because he didn’t feel like looking it up himself.

        • #3178658

          EL’s a void?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Lurking vs jumping head first in

          Why, some of the most interesting people on TR hang out there!

          In all seriousness, all too many dive right into a discussion with absolutely no clue of what’s already been said.

          That might not be so bad were they replying to the bottom of the thread; but, most of these only read & reply to the root!

        • #3178644

          replay to root only

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to EL’s a void?

          Void? How about TRAP? SNARE? Mindcrack?

          Are you implying people new to a “discussion” such as EL should READ the whole thing before joining in? I have only read the headings for over 90% of the postings myself and only follow it loosely just to see how much activity it still gets and how big it can grow. Think “traperkeeper” or “borgmart”.

          But yes, reading at least a FEW of the posts would be a good thing.

        • #3178637

          Discussions launched from TR Articles are the worst.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to replay to root only

          Most never even [b]see[/b] any of the discussion.

          They merely click on the [i]Add your comment[/i] link on the article & move on!

        • #3178618

          A VERY misleading title!

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Discussions launched from TR Articles are the worst.

          Because that is all it becomes, a drive by comment plastered on the bathroom wall.

          It is not part of a discussion if you don’t look to see what is there and then RETURN to see what others have said to your post.

        • #3178459

          Perhaps they should remove that link?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to A VERY misleading title!

          Either that, or, in response to a click on that link 1st display the discussion to date.

        • #3178431

          “join the discussion”

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to A VERY misleading title!

          would be much better, and then take you to the discussion to see what is there.

          After seeing what is there, add to the conversation or reply to what someone else has posted.

          Otherwise the way it is now you get fifty posts that are all the same thing and they never come back knowing that this was a discussion, not a stale posting board.

        • #3178393

          Currently 3 discussion links on Articles.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to A VERY misleading title!

          1) Discuss
          2) View all comments
          3) Add your comment

          Nos. 1 & 2 take one to the 1st post of the Discussion itself; no. 3 posts using the Article itself as the root.

          Those using no. 3 seem, for the most part, to never follow up with a clink on the Return to the Discussion link.

          Perhaps it would be best to combine nos. 1 & 2 into a single link, and eliminate no. 3, leaving it to the postor to determine whether his post is best rooted in the Article or in response to existing posts.

          Thoughts?

        • #3176598

          “Return to discussion” link

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to A VERY misleading title!

          Is WAY to small.

          I do like the related posts page, but would ALMOST prefer to be taken directly back to the discussion than to have to look around for that link back?

          IF the return to discussion link was more pronounced on the page with more of a discription the new user would be more likely to follow it back?

          Return to discussion? What discussion? All I did was “post a comment” instead of join a discussion.

        • #3178440

          I wish I had.

          by absolutely ·

          In reply to replay to root only

          [Are you implying people new to a “discussion” such as EL should READ the whole thing before joining in?]

          I would recommend it for the individual newbie’s sake. Had I seen how the EL thread had already evolved, thus disproving the original assertion that evolution into a new species is impossible, I would not have had to bother addressing the more minor fallacies presented throughout the thread.

        • #3178428

          But just think

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I wish I had.

          of all the fun you would have missed out on?

          AND Don’t go dragging that into here “young man” (term of endearment, not actual age reference). We don’t need to have spill over now!

        • #3178394

          And, as an extra benefit, …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to But just think

          EL gained ever so many additional posts, taking it well past the mark set by WIVFGB, and setting the standard for others to beat.

          Absolutely smashing!

        • #3178653

          Instructions

          by firstpeter ·

          In reply to Lurking vs jumping head first in

          What?!?! Someone didn’t read the instructions first?!?! 🙂

          Point taken – I certainly wouldn’t want to lose anyone on this great forum because they took something too seriously. I would hope that folks would look beyond it or would at least take non-direct-insult comments for what they are (it’s hard not to take personal offense when someone uses the terms “idiot”, “fool”, or “liberal” to describe you in a post… *grin*), but that’s probably wishful thinking…

        • #3178640

          Been called a lot of things in my days

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Instructions

          but “liberal” is fight’en words! B-)

          Can honestly say that is something people DON’T call me.

          The other thing some people don’t realize is just how diverse the group is. They don’t always realize this is a GLOBAL group.

        • #3178632

          What? You’re NOT Liberal?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Been called a lot of things in my days

          It seems to me that, compared to some here, you’re at least more centered than conservative.

        • #3179125

          Define Liberal

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to What? You’re NOT Liberal?

          It varies greatly with the context.

          John Stuart Mill who lived from 1806 – 1873 was a “classical” liberal, but his work On Liberty is a classic used by many to help define individual freedoms, including freedom from government interference.

          In many societies a “liberal” is a centrist, not a socialist, not a laisse fair capitalist, someone in between.

          Only in America is it an invective hurled so often with venom.

          James

        • #3179097

          A Liberal Defined

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          In today’s political climate, a liberal is a person willing to give the shirt off someone else’s back.

          Or, said in the consistent Maxwell Edison way, a liberal is a person who espouses taking a dollar from the person who earned it, only to give it to a person who did not.

          How a “liberal” was defined 200 years ago is pretty meaningless. How it’s defined today is something a current-day “liberal” would rarely admit.

          For the record, George W. Bush is a liberal in many respects. Ted Kennedy is a liberal in every respect.

        • #3179094

          I will concede

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          That you have made a good Maxwell Edison coming from a certain perspective definition.

          But by framing it in a totally negative light, its not a definition I would call objective. I know we are just having some fun here, (welcome back by the way, where did you go?) but I wouldn’d define someone of another religion as someone who hates my faith – there must be a more balanced definition. And yours is very USAian centric. A Liberal in a former communist state may be a great leader.

          James

        • #3188005

          James – It was neither positive or negative

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          I actually try to look at it exactly for what it is. And it is what it is, no more, no less. A “liberal” in my book, is a proponent of just about any government social program, or more of the same government social program, but never one to repeal such government social programs. And the common denominator for all such programs is that they require taking money from the person who earned it, only to give it to a person who did not.

          Why is that negative instead of simply calling a spade a spade? Not many people, I will admit, would openly admit to espousing such a thing when broken down to such an obvious “smallest common denominator”, and I suppose it could be that it appears rather “negative” as a result. (But if so, why do so many people support something that’s negative?) Liberalism, in its simplest form, involves taking the property of one person so it can be given to another person. Call it whatever you want; call it positive or call it negative; but it is what it is. If you believe that it’s an overall force for good, then it could be a positive, I suppose. But if it’s seen as a an overall force that’s detrimental to either the individual or society (or both, as I believe), then it’s a negative.

          But to look at “negative” is a different way, liberalism actually flourishes on negativism. How many liberal social programs use positive reinforcement as a means to advance the program? I can’t think of any. How many liberal social programs actually try to convince people that they hold the keys to their own destiny instead of brain-washing them into thinking that they’re simply victims of something or someone else? I can’t think of any. How many liberal social programs actually solved a problem to the point that it was no longer a problem? Again, I can’t think of any. It’s funny how the “problems” keep getting exponentially worse as the programs get bigger. I can’t imagine any “positive-type thinker” who actually would support such a wide range of social programs since, by definition, they are all built on the premise that the recipient of such programs are unable to solve their own problems and/or are not responsible for them — the exact opposite of the “positive thinking” mind-set.

          Come to think of it, liberalism is a negative. It creates negatives. It builds on negatives. And it continues to support and reinforce any number of negatives, whether it be a negative mind-set or a negative life-style. It’s no wonder I’m so adamantly opposed to it. It violates the very core of my being. And the “liberals” who continue to advance such programs actually want my core violated, or else they couldn’t advance their liberal agenda.

          Which brings me to your religion analogy when you compared a person of one religion as someone who hates another faith. To carry the analogy to the next step, let me define “liberal” as a Catholic and a “non-liberal” as a Mormon. (No connections intended, just pulling them out of the air.) For your analogy to be accurate, the Catholic would force the Mormon into Catholicism, which simply doesn’t happen. Sure, they may judge one another over a variety of things, but it’s pretty much live and let live. A Mormon, in the comparison, could practice the Mormon faith without the approval and/or involvement of the Catholic. But the Catholic must actually force the Mormon into the collective — you will be assimilated, and resistance is futile. A liberal must force a non-liberal to comply, but the reverse is not true. And by my interpretation of the US Constitution, that’s a gross infringement on the core principles of individual liberty.

        • #3187974

          Same opinion worded differently

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          Whereas Maswell implis that a Liberal accepts taking someone else money and giving it to someone else, I see it as allowing someone to take MY money and give it to someone else.

          I don’t mind my money going to help others, it’s not being stolen from me, I am accepting it as a way of life that MY money MAY help others, so it’s being taken with permission. I could always move away or vote against these issues should I really want to, I could get Canadian citizenship and cast my vote if I thought I needed to.

          I don’t permit the government to take anyone else’s money, they can vote against or for my decision if they choose to and have an even larger voice than I. So if they elect a Liberal government, then they rae also accepting that THEIR money will go to aide others.

          If they hated the whole prospect they could always move south and vote and then support every bill they wanted to to try to achieve what they deem a fair government. We have choice, that’s democracy. I am not a slave here either, I choose to live here and accept the laws that are imposed on me as a resident of where I prefer to be.

          I understand your view, I just don’t feel I am being imposed upon or stolen from by not agreeing with you, fair enough?

        • #3187321

          Sad but true

          by beads ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          America has had a great number of ‘liberal’ presidents. It wasn’t till the ’60s that liberal came to mean communist, tree-hugging, environmentalist, et. al.

        • #3282120

          James had it right

          by kiltie ·

          In reply to Define Liberal

          So many of the responses at this level indicate a political stance.

          Here in the UK, liberal means “middle of the road”

          NOT wishy washy, but a balanced viewpoint.

          While I may agree with some of the points made from the extreme right, and also agree with some of those made from the extreme left, it DOES NOT mean that I agree with all of their manifestos.

          Even in the middle-of-the-road politics I do not I do not agree with everything, I feel that I need to be balanced.

          Extremism leads to fanaticism, and so sadly, in modern days to terrorism.

          ………………sigh………………..

          If this needs to be discussed in TR, please start a new topic to discusssssss politics

          A PLEA: let’s not distract from the excellent points JD is making………. this thread needs to be preserved because of that, so avoid politics please.

          (no my lips are not chafing)

    • #3178645

      Re: new posters

      by dbertsche ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      You stated: “Being new to computers and the proper ways to conduct themselves in discussions they will often make mistakes in their posting that will offend and alienate existing members who often would have bent over backwards to lend a hand, are now just bent on your distruction.”

      It would seem to me that “veterans” should therefore be a little more tolerant of newcomers instead of getting so easily offended and alienated.

      This is part of the problem for some folks who work in IT. They don’t remember what is was like when they were new. I agree with the rest of your post about being respectful and doing your homework but I have encountered what I would call the “IT Prima Donnas” and to be blunt you don’t have to do much to offend some of these people.

      I think if someone is trying to resolve some kind of an issue and makes a post here they’re also entitled to some respect as they at least displayed some inititive in posting.

      • #3178634

        It is a give and take

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Re: new posters

        But remember a big part is if you go up to someone else expecting them to do something for you for FREE, you should be the one making an effort.

        True, some are a little shorter tempered than others but the people here are a LOT more forgiving than in many other tech boards.

        This post is a prime example of an improper post.
        http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11189-0.html?forumID=82&threadID=171950&start=0

        While the poster was given a “ribbing”, he was never flamed which would not be the case many other places.

        Remember, it is the poster who is asking for YOU to give them something. If someone comes up to YOU in your office and is rude to you, how likely are you to go out of your way to help that person?

        And the purpose of this post WAS to help, not to chastise.

    • #3178641

      Re: new posters

      by dbertsche ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      You stated: “Being new to computers and the proper ways to conduct themselves in discussions they will often make mistakes in their posting that will offend and alienate existing members who often would have bent over backwards to lend a hand, are now just bent on your distruction.”

      It would seem to me that “veterans” should therefore be a little more tolerant of newcomers instead of getting so easily offended and alienated.

      This is part of the problem for some folks who work in IT. They don’t remember what is was like when they were new. I agree with the rest of your post about being respectful and doing your homework but I have encountered what I would call the “IT Prima Donnas” and to be blunt you don’t have to do much to offend some of these people.

      I think if someone is trying to resolve some kind of an issue and makes a post here they’re also entitled to some respect as they at least displayed some inititive in posting.

      • #3178626

        Rule No. 4 : Don’t Double Post.

        by deepsand ·

        In reply to Re: new posters

        Yes, I do know that the response time re. Posting here has been slow today.

        The solution is not to re-click on “Submit,” but to wait.

        If in doubt, copy your post to Notepad, or some such, & return to the discussion to see if your post shows up.

        If not, simply paste the copy into a new post.

        The Voice of a Veteran Double Poster

        • #3178622

          Double and delayed posts

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Rule No. 4 : Don’t Double Post.

          I think the posts that take an hour to show up are more frustrating than the double posts! And it always the ones where I actually CHECK my spelling and everything…..

          Let he/she without double posts throw the first virtual stone!

        • #3178454

          Having been stoned, in more ways than one, …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Double and delayed posts

          is why I closed my prior post with

          “The Voice of a Veteran Double Poster”

        • #3178445

          I’ve managed to avoid double posts

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Having been stoned, in more ways than one, …

          by being careful

        • #3178397

          Split personality?

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to I’ve managed to avoid double posts

          ?

        • #3178444

          I’ve managed to avoid double posts

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Having been stoned, in more ways than one, …

          by being careful!

        • #3178396

          Or merely of 2 minds.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to I’ve managed to avoid double posts

          Now, there’s a scary thought.

        • #3178442

          So much for being a smart Alec!

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Having been stoned, in more ways than one, …

          Damn site won’t let me submit two identical posts!

        • #3178427

          Take me you brute!

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to So much for being a smart Alec!

          Well, maybe not, but GREAT timing on the wit. Delivery IS half of the charm you know!

          🙂 B-) ]:) ;\

        • #3099597

          And here I thought…

          by jessie ·

          In reply to Take me you brute!

          well… maybe I wasn’t thinking and that’s what got me into all that trouble… but I was thinking that delivery WASN’T charming at ALL… it was actually somewhat painful… I think I won’t do that again. 😀

        • #3099827

          you can’t fool me

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Take me you brute!

          the secret is out that child birth is actually a pleasant feeling and it realy gets women off!

          you just PRETEND so that guys will feel guilty and wait on you hand and foor! :O

        • #3099755

          You figured it out!!

          by maecuff ·

          In reply to Take me you brute!

          Now, just push a water melon out of your anus and you can share that incredible joy. And I swear, if you do, I’ll wait on you hand and foot. For a predetermined amount of time.

        • #3099751

          The common Aubergine or Eggplant

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Take me you brute!

          Not that this has got very much to do with the topic, but I think it’s a good story.

          A good friend of mine is a Senior Radiographer at one of London’s main teaching hospitals. She was on duty one night when they sent a guy over from A&E (the ER) who was walking rather strangely and had great difficulty getting on the CAT scan table. It eventually turned out that he had the largest eggplant that she’d ever seen stuffed up his bum so that only the tip of the stalk could be seen. I suspect that the removal of said vegetable was likely to bring him closer to an appreciation of childbirth than most of us fellas ever get.

        • #3098985

          Well Neil

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Take me you brute!

          I would say this man should learn to chew his food better? 😀 After all, how ELSE could he end up in such a situation? ;\

          Mae, passing one through anus. sorry, that is an exit only. :O

        • #3178395

          But, it’s easily tricked into allowing 2 to LOOK alike.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to So much for being a smart Alec!

          Simply add a NULL character (ASCII 255) at the end.

        • #3179056

          I had the same problem

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to So much for being a smart Alec!

          Had to go back in and add the second identical post. Maybe TechRepublic put in some code to prevent the dreaded “double post”.

        • #3179060

          I agree

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to Rule No. 4 : Don’t Double Post.

          Don’t Double Post. Also, do not use no double negatives. Also, ending sentences with propositions pisses me off!!

        • #3179058

          I agree

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to Rule No. 4 : Don’t Double Post.

          Don’t Double Post. Also, do not use no double negatives. Also, ending sentences with propositions pisses me off!!

        • #3187465

          Prepare to be pissed

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to I agree

          What did you say that the sentence with the most prepositions at the end was ‘What did you bring that book that I don’t want to be read to from out of about “Down Under” up for?’ for?

        • #3187281

          Yep

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to Prepare to be pissed

          Now you have done it!!!

    • #3177577

      No thread-jacking

      by wordworker ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      Good list – add a rule that says don’t hijack a thread. Remember that most people want to read what TR members have to say to the original question posted and don’t have time to wade through the off-topic comments.

      • #3177572

        “most people want”

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to No thread-jacking

        We know that is what you want, but how did you come about that MOST people want this?

        There have been a few people that have commented on this aspect, very few.

        I guess this can go back to the pros and cons discussion where you didn’t have a single entirely on-topic post at all. I did. Should someone have banned you?

        And like I have pointed out to other people, it doesn’t take long to see the off-shoots and ignore them if you chose as well as the people that are likely to go off on a tangent.

        I am guilty of doing this myself, but like in the pro/con discussion I DID at the root give a completely on-topic reply. You should go back to that discussion and do ONE completely on-topic post yourself.

        • #3177376

          say what?

          by wordworker ·

          In reply to “most people want”

          >I guess this can go back to the pros and cons discussion where you didn’t have a single entirely on-topic post at all. I did. Should someone have banned you?< JD, if you read closely you'll see my first post was entirely on topic. I talked about having started with DOS, Win3x, and so on. Get your facts straight, dude.

        • #3179205

          Straight fact, I DID read closely “dude”

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to say what?

          You ended your FIRST post with this RANT. Quite off-topic. Or don’t you recognise YOU discussion a linux desktop as off topic from the posted question about WINDOWS systems?

          [i]
          “While I accept and understand the ‘n*x world’s share of the server market, until there’s a human-friendly Linux desktop, I won’t bother putting an open source box in my home lab. (Gee talk about being designed by geeks for geeks.) No need to, as all my consulting clients use Wintel.

          You might as well try to convince the business world to stop driving gasoline-driving cars as to convince them to give up Wintel machines. Maybe, just maybe, the open source world will someday produce a desktop that’s as powerful and stable as an Apache server AND easy to use. But until then, Wintel is where the money is.

          Again, just my two cents. Edited for spelling.”
          [/i]
          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11183-0.html?forumID=89&threadID=176449&messageID=1795044

        • #3179197

          uh oh

          by jck ·

          In reply to Straight fact, I DID read closely “dude”

          hmmm…someone needs some jaeger and 18 holes.

          jd…chill…and…reply to my damn mail!!! 🙂

        • #3179193

          yeah.

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to uh oh

          read his mail. read my blog. chill out. don’t let this idiot try to work you up.

        • #3179192

          That wasn’t calm?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to uh oh

          All I did was post HIS message, so how is that anything BUT calm?

          Was I incorrect in the facts or was he?

          (and I DID reply to your damn mail!)

        • #3179183

          hmmm…

          by jck ·

          In reply to That wasn’t calm?

          it wasn’t totally, calm…had some bad attitude with it…but, I guess we all have our days.

          I didn’t read all the thread leading up to it…I’d rather talk about beer and Victoria’s Secret and having a girlfriend walking around in my dress shirts in the morning and stuff.

          I don’t have time to chase facts…they change too much.

          (AND I REPLIED TO YOUR REPLY!!! :p)

        • #3179171

          The fact that they are WALKING in your shirt

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to That wasn’t calm?

          shows you didn’t do something right.

          When I am done, it is closer to a crawl!

          BWAAHAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAA!

          (and i replied to your reply of my reply)

        • #3179166

          um…just call me chef

          by jck ·

          In reply to That wasn’t calm?

          cause man…if I have a woman…I don’t wanna disable her, brother…I make sweeeeet lovin…no use in using a girl like a kitchen board for tenderizing your meat on.

          That way…me and a girl can go…well…if the situation is right…3-5 days straight with drink and food in the house for us.

          Plus…I just like that anticipation thing Carly Simon sang about…hehehehe

          “Drawing creativity from diversity.” – Disneyworld recruiting slogan

          “I draw creativity from perversity!” – jck intimacy ethos ]:)

        • #3179188

          how convenient

          by wordworker ·

          In reply to Straight fact, I DID read closely “dude”

          >>I started out with the very first DOS machines, IBM brand, two-floppy drive dinosaurs. I have seen and used them all since then. Windows 95 was fairly fast but did crash more often than I thought it should have. W98 was a decent improvement over 95. I wouldn’t touch ME with a 10-foot pole when it came out and still won’t. I use and support Windows 2000 as the desktop and network OS in a shop with over 30,000 WAN users and over 1,000 Wintel servers and it runs like a charm. Prior to migration to W2K server we ran 98 and W2K desktops with NT4 server. NT4 was pretty stable but W2K is much, much better. We only reboot servers when we apply patches – they almost never BSOD on us. (Admittedly we patch more often than we’d prefer in an ideal world, but MS is slowly but surely getting there.) Apparently some of the whiners in this thread have never heard about GPO or they wouldn’t have to worry about end users performing “admin” on their boxes. I run XP on my home machines, haven’t applied any SPs and haven’t had any performance problems whatsoever. I ceased using Internet Explorer nine months ago and moved to FireFox exclusively and will never go back to IE.<< How convenient of you to extract only that from my post that fits your rant. I tacked on my response to the off-topic discussion, yes, but I answered the question about Win OS first. Save your fighting strength for the custody battles and get off my back already.

        • #3179178

          are you stupid?

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to how convenient

          He said it was from the end of your post, to show that you do indeed go off topic. Sorry that he showed you that you were wrong, but that’s no reason to get all bent. Maybe you need to relax. And it’s really mature that you have to pull his kids into this. Grow up.

        • #3179175

          uh oh…

          by jck ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          another one joins…I’m going to hide under my rock!!!! 😉

        • #3179170

          Girli !!!!

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          It is always a ray of sunshine in my day when you come around! 😀

        • #3179133

          You go…

          by cortech ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          JCK – You can hide under your rock…I’ll hide under Girli… :^O 😉

        • #3179123

          I guess

          by jck ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          that’s the benefit of being small, CorTech…

          I really couldn’t hide under anything, other than like…those tarps they roll out at a baseball field…or…a Terex truck.

          Plus, ITgirli wouldn’t let me under her if I was the only chance she had of saving her own life.

          After all, what good are swill? 😉

        • #3179120

          jck-

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          you got that right!

        • #3179115

          well that’s okay

          by jck ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          you’ll just never know what kinda real nice guy I am then…

          BTW…my beer should be done by mid-July 🙂

        • #3179111

          you know what?

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          that’s a chance I’m willing to take.

        • #3179107

          Jeez…

          by cortech ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          You guys are harsh. :^O

        • #3179106

          I can tell

          by jck ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          I’m glad you have your motivations in life.

        • #3179103

          I’m not harsh

          by jck ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          I’m irritating 😉

        • #3179099

          now girli that is just…

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          down right mean,talking to a man that hasn’t had a woman in almost a decade like that.
          The way I see it all you would have to do is disrobe and he would go into spasms, you wouldn’t even have to get horizontal. 🙂

          It would be over before it even begins, well except for drinking the required Guinness afterwards.

        • #3187918

          Just like the Kevin Bloody Wilson song

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to are you stupid?

          “And it was over, before it began.”

          Gotta dig that CD out, it’s a good one for a rippin’ laugh.

          Read the lyrics you’ll have a chuckle, his melodies carry the tune well though so I don’t know if it will be as good without knowing the music.

          CAUTION: THESE LYRICS ARE TOO HOT FOR TR!

          http://www.songlyrics.com/song-lyrics/Kevin_Bloody_Wilson/Miscellaneous/Kev_s_Lament_%28It_Was_Over%29/61510.html

        • #3179177

          Only showed the RELEVANT part

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to how convenient

          but still linked to the post so it would be easy to see the whole context.

          That was the whole point though.

          Half your post was off topic. You didn’t have a single post that was completely on topic.

          I did.

          Point, set, match.

          Now I have to run to go hijack a discussion.

          Have a grand day!

        • #3179172

          can I help?

          by jck ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          I like hijacking discussions and turning them into beer talk.

          Did I mention my beer kit should be at my house?

          SWEET!!

        • #3179140

          Point, set, match ??????

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          I don’t think so. Not from the way I’m scoring this tangent.

          In fact, you’ve hardly even served up anything of substance that can be returned. Your tires are flat on the starting line. Your ball is deflated. Your slice got hooked. You’re drowing before the first lap. You need to check your mate. Your…….

          By the way, what game are you playing? If you think you’ve won the “point, set and match”, define both the game and the rules? What’s the desired outcome of this game? and more importantly, can I play?

        • #3179109

          did I hear someone…

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          say beer,jck must be close by.
          Did santa deliver you gift yet jck.

          Hijacking is only illegal if you get caught.

        • #3179100

          santa

          by jck ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          might have come…I gotta go check my front doorstep…probably going in a bit to do so.

          Yes, I did mention beer…but, how could you tell it was me?????? 😀

        • #3179098

          I could tell by the…

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          smell,beer drinkin swill have their own aroma 🙂

          I need a drink!

        • #3179067

          anykey??-

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          everything is only illegal if you get caught.

        • #3179065

          ITgirli

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          exactly, those are words to live by 😉

          well that and DENY,DENY,DENY even if they have video 😉

        • #3187570

          Jeez jck, you didn’t buy one of those Mr Beer kits did you???

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          Say it isn’t so!!! Kit beer is kind of like having gay sex. It might feel okay but do you really want your friends and neighbors doing it???
          If you really want to make home brewed suds, haul your baggy a$$ into a wine makers shop, they usually sell all the paraphalia for making your own beer. They also sell ingredients and have recipes as well. They will probably have the fixings for assorted styles, including a very passable equivalent of Guinness. BTW the quantity you will be making is 5 Gal. not a pissant 2.5 Gal, enough even for [b]YOU[/b] to get through a weekend. Duplicate a few items and you might make it through a long weekend. The difference between Mr Beer suds and properly done homebrew is the difference between a good winw and a great wine or in my case a good blended Scotch and a single malt.

          [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

        • #3185428

          Kits, live and learn

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Only showed the RELEVANT part

          A fellow has to start somewhere and you don’t always get started in the [b]RIGHT[/b] direction.

          Where were you when he first started this Dawg? He needs to have the [b]RIGHT[/b] advice to get him going in the [b]RIGHT[/b] direction.

          I want to make some Kaluha and some whiskey this winter! “wine is fine but whiskeys quicker”.

          A while ago a bud of mine made some beer but had his ingredients mixed up so as soon as you cracked the cap it would keep foaming out until the bottle was empty. Had to take a drink and them put your thumb over the top till you were ready for the next drink. Too funny! Think he used BAKING yeast…. :^O

        • #3179135

          Don’t you just love it. . . . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to how convenient

          .
          …..when someone who is probably 20+ years your junior tells you to “grow up”?

          Gee, how did you manage to get such a “following”? I didn’t think you ever rankled anyone’s feathers. Way to go!

        • #3179142

          I read WordWorker’s post as on-topic

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Straight fact, I DID read closely “dude”

          I thought that was very much “on-topic”, especially since the originator of that thread pretty much left it wide-open for the variety of replies he was bound to get.

          It appears to me that WordWorker is kinda’ being picked on here. He made some valid points in both discussions.

        • #3187957

          Score according to his own rules

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I read WordWorker’s post as on-topic

          Greetings Max, let me TRY to clear this up.

          This all started in the “Pros and Cons of Windows” discussion.

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11183-0.html?forumID=89&threadID=176449&messageID=1792956

          It was a post asking for oppinions on Windows OS’s.

          As often happens, there were off-topic side discussions taking place.

          WordWorker came in and made a HALF on-topic post and a HALF off-topic post complaining about the off-topic posts.

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11183-0.html?forumID=89&threadID=176449&messageID=1795044

          Every post he made after that was an off-topic post complaining about off-topic posts. He didn’t have ONE post that was completely on-topic.

          I on the other hand DID have a completely on-topic post LONG before he made his post.

          While he was on-topic in this discussion, he was off-topic in his disaproval of people being off topic in the other discussion.

          From there it was just a difference of opinion on proper behavior in a discussion. Some like it matter of fact and serious and others enjoy the social interaction.

          This is his preference and there isn’t anything that I could do to change this, just like there isn’t anything he could do to make me and other holligans from straying from the topic at hand.

          Last I saw it, we just agreed to disagree about something that doesn’t make a difference on how either of us will get through the day.

          I am kind of hoping though to be a bad influince and lead him and anyone else to the dark side of not being afraid to step off the path and have a conversation or two.

          Does that clear things up? It was never intended to go nearly as far as it did, but that is how it goes sometimes.

          Peace to both you and the worker of words!

        • #3187934

          jdclyde – It just seemed to me. . . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Score according to his own rules

          …..that you (and others) were violating your very own rule number one, and as a result were ripping wordworker a new one for absolutely no reason.

          Your rule:

          “First, be respectful. Don’t read a few posts and ASSUME to feel it is your duty to set everyone straight. Lurk for a little bit to get the feel of the land……Be respectful, friendly, and helpful and don’t take ANYTHING too seriously.”

          Wordworker’s been around here much too long (under various handles) and has helped too many people to be raked over the coals like some of you did. (And I certainly know “raking over the coals” — from both the giving and taking perspective.) I just don’t think anything he posted warranted such a vicious flaming session.

          Quite frankly, if I were referee, I’d give him the match as a win based simply on the poor sportsmanship of his opponents.

          So there ya’ go. I just felt compelled to go “off-topic” and support the guy who’s against off-topic tangents.

        • #3187932

          Well, I guess I would ask for arbitration then

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Score according to his own rules

          If you read JUST his and my posts, I may have gotten a little snippy near the end but wouldn’t go so far as to say I flamed him.

          If anything, it was more poking at him with his own stick to get him to loosen up.

          “I’m just a soul who’s intentions are gooooooood.
          Oh lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood……”

      • #3179157

        Left Wing or Right Wing

        by maxwell edison ·

        In reply to No thread-jacking

        Who do you think hijacks these threads more, left-wing thinkers or right-wing thinkers? And don’t you just cringe when some people have to interject politics into everything? Who does it more, left-wing or right-wing? I think it’s the left-wing folks because they always have to distract from the real subject at hand. What do you think?

        • #3179153

          Left v. right

          by wordworker ·

          In reply to Left Wing or Right Wing

          Not into wings – I’m more of a breast and thigh man, myself, Max. I guess what worries me most is that if we don’t nip these thread-jackers in the bud, next thing you know they’ll be using threads as WMD. And then what will come of the Internet?

        • #3179096

          what do you mean begin?

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to Left v. right

          EL is on it’s way to overtaking the universe.it began a long time ago.

        • #3179145

          I cringe

          by jck ·

          In reply to Left Wing or Right Wing

          When people try to cast social molds on social problems.

          All sorts of people do wrong things…no matter their ethos, age, ethnicity or ability.

          Personally…I think it’s disinterested people like me who hijack em most.

          Wanna try my beer when it’s done? 😉

        • #3179095

          YES, I do

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to I cringe

          I’ll pay the shipping.

        • #3187265

          Me, too

          by dmambo ·

          In reply to YES, I do

          Set ’em up, barkeep!

        • #3187865

          I’ll check

          by jck ·

          In reply to YES, I do

          to see if it’s legal for me to ship it to you. I know I can *give* it to you, I just can’t *sell* it to you.

        • #3187583

          But you CAN

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I’ll check

          cover your costs, just can’t make a PROFIT is the way I understand this.

          Also, you can CHARGE for “shipping and handling” which is where most of the $19.99 specials on TV make all their money.

          I personally need to wait to make sure they don’t find you on your kitchen floor foaming from the mouth before I hit you up for some! :^O
          [b]
          Now, get out of this discussion and put this in a blog where it belongs! Copy and paste the relevant steps you have done in this indevor!
          beginning to end!

        • #3187921

          speaking of beer

          by absolutely ·

          In reply to I cringe

          if it’s SWEET you’re doing it wrong, swill!

        • #3187860

          uh…

          by jck ·

          In reply to speaking of beer

          it depends on if you’re doing a cider or not, lepton :p

          Actually, I have done my reading on the beer making process for stouts and porters…and if I need to know something, I can call 9 hours a day m-f and ask either a rep or the brewmaster at Mr. Beer.

          – I’ll make sure that the yeast settles, with a very slight foam on top
          – I’ll make sure the cloudiness is gone
          – I’ll make sure it’s not *too* sweet, but it might have some (especially since I used extra maltodextrin) for boost to the abv
          – I’ll make sure not to fill bottles too full or put too much sugar in when bottling for carbonation.

          so…don’t worry about me…I know the steps…and any questions I have, the company is more than willing to answer them. 🙂

        • #3187847

          Wow

          by dmambo ·

          In reply to uh…

          You’re a regular Adolphus Busch (original brewer of Budweiser) ]:)

        • #3187709

          BLASPHEMY!!!

          by jck ·

          In reply to Wow

          I strive to the the American equivalent of Arthur Guinness… 😉

          (no, I haven’t got to leave work yet 🙁 )

        • #3179141

          Not a fair question

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Left Wing or Right Wing

          As there are MORE left leaning people in this global group, the odds are with them that they would of course be doing more off topic posts.

          Now, if you could figure out the ratio of lefts vs rights and then break it down by the percentage of posts……..

          Oh who am I kidding.

          The left are freaken NUTS! LOL!

        • #3179132

          I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Not a fair question

          with his 10,000 posts. Especially if – like me – you regard him as right-wing!

          😉

        • #3179128

          Neil

          by jck ·

          In reply to I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          Even tho I’m swill, I still regard you as a fellow beer lover…is that okay?

          BTW, I am going to apply at Guinness in Dublin as a quality assurance tester…hoping to get to taste Guinness all day 🙂

        • #3179114

          Of course it’s OK

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Neil

          The pint is still on offer for near my birthday in February!

          Serious true story, just to warn you – In between jobs just after graduating, I got a job as a Research Chemist for a wine and spirits company. They made Smirnoff Vodka and Baileys amongst others. I was part of the Red Wine, Gin and Whisky Tasting Panels for quality control. I gave the job up after seven months. We could smuggle out more booze that you could DREAM of! [b]BUT[/b], trust me, when you have a hangover from a night on the beer you CANNOT remain objective about the smell of Gin or rough red wine. You cannot even stomach the idea of tasting single malts!

          To this day, 20 years on, I cannot drink gin in any form!

          Stick to Guinness as a hobby. Get good at it! Go to the source! But keep it as a hobby!

          Neil 😀

        • #3179108

          of course…a hobby

          by jck ·

          In reply to Of course it’s OK

          I love the stuff…I really can’t say why…but…true story…I did drink, my first night in Ireland, 14 pints in about…8 hours? My friend Andy was impressed.

          The next night in Wexford, I probably had about 7 or 8 at the club Andy was DJing at.

          Sunday night, I had about 9 more after the Rugby match.

          I can drink Guinness. It’s like nectar to me. If I could get a job just drinking Guinness, I’d only need to keep to a strict workout regiment.

        • #3179121

          Oz is both left and right

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          He’s not only left and right, but he’s often both right and wrong.

        • #3179118

          I’d like

          by jck ·

          In reply to Oz is both left and right

          some tea with my no tea please, Marvin.

        • #3179113

          LOL

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Oz is both left and right

          😀

        • #3179117

          Blasphemy!

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          😉

        • #3179062

          He may be right wing

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          But only from where you might be standing, mi amigo. 🙂

          Still enjoy your posts and his posts, even if we do not always agree.

        • #3187993

          Tell you, Tom! Since posting on TR

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to He may be right wing

          I am sliding inexorably to the right. Give it a couple more years and on a clear day we might catch sight of each other.

          😀

          I now find myself nodding sagely at some of Maxwell’s points but I’d not admit to that under oath.

        • #3187967

          Well wel well

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I think that Oz tends to skew the statistics

          Surfing around TR and I find a group of people taking such interest in my comments they have an aside about them.

          Hmmm, well it seems YOU are unable to peg me as left or right (must be horrible for Americans who NEED to isolate people based on political preference, what a headwrecker this must be for some of you), I don’t choose a side either as I don’t follow any specific SINGLE political affiliation in Canada.

          In Canada, I am often seen as a right wing, money grabbing bastard, living on the island, and centered when in Vancouver.

          IN the US I am a left wing, love the world, everyone is beautiful, peace pipe smoker.

          In England, I sit about centered, don’t trust the government but believe in getting every last dime I can, anyway I can, while looking out for others at the same time.
          It’s people against the institution there.
          In Canada, it’s people BEFORE the institution.
          In the US it SEEMS to be, well…. you are either WITH the institution or against it (sorry).

          I vote in England, I don’t vote in Canada or the US. I can take indivisual matters and voice personal preference on them without being for or against a chosen party. I think we need more of a centered party, best of both worlds kinda thing. As it is now, the center always leans left or right depending on the nation.

          Empathy,with an edge.

          I like my money and hope to make more of it than others I am working against and hope to have enough that I don’t need anymroe. BUT, I would also use that money to help others as well as myself.

          I guess instead of thinking ALL Liberal policies are great and all conservative or democratic policies are shite, I believe in isolating and forming opinions on an issue by issue basis. That way my personal feelings or ‘duties’ are not swayed toward my elected choices, regardless of their actions.

          I think Americans find this mindset just impossible to comprehend, as I have shown many times. People will support their party regardless of it’s actions as it’s their DUTY to do so if they voted for the party.

          There is no grey area, it’s left or right, and the other side is wrong no matter what they say.

          In Canada it is quite mnormal for people to agree with Liberal views if with a conservative or NDP twist. So I agree with SOME Liberal views and actions, I agree with SOME conservative views and actions and I agree with SOME (though fewer) Democrat views and actions.

          Over the last month, I signed an online petition for the music industry, regarding distribution rights, and also against an oil fired power plant proposed for Nanaimo. Which was effectively nixed.

          I have a voice on matters that concern me, without voting for a specific party.

          As for THIS forum. When I first started posting here, there wasn’t a left opinion to be found. The entire site was completely Republican favoured.

          Since the Iraq war has been going on a long time, GWB is seen globally as a nutcase and nobody can contest it, they have simply given up now. The LEFT views are more prominent these days by far, but it hasn’t always been so and mark my words; IF a democratic party is elected next in the US, teh Rpublicans will be here in droves shooting down every opnion ofr comment made by a Democrat and calling them lefty loonies without addressing th eissues at hand at all. I’ve seen it from both sides just as equally, the right had less to defend though, THEIR voice was the White House and that voice seems to supercede all others and any alternate opinion is easily cblown off as media BS. Once the LEFT has teh White Houise voice, it will be Righty Loonies that are hanging onto the media to counter what the WHite House is saying.

          You guys have been down this road SO many times as Americans and you STILL can’t see it?

          Walk in the other party’s shoes for a year, you’ll get it, but that constitutes you being a poor American for considering what the opponent had to say I’m sure.

        • #3187907

          Walk in the other party’s shoes for a year

          by neilb@uk ·

          In reply to Well wel well

          and you will, at least, have a free pair of shoes.

          Sorry, Oz. My fault that they’re talking about you again. A humerous little note about your 10K posts seems – as usual – to have developed a life of its own.

          Neil 😀

          Edited to remove TypOz

        • #3187483

          You know what it is?

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to Walk in the other party’s shoes for a year

          Everyone, male and female, all have this thing for Oz. I read in one post where jck was posting love letters to Oz. While we may never know what Oz looks like, he has enamored us all with his smooth talking, right/left debating, anti-Bush rhetoric.
          We love you OZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • #3187404

          Frequently

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Walk in the other party’s shoes for a year

          :^O

        • #3187385

          yes…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Walk in the other party’s shoes for a year

          If I were female, I’d try and seduce Oz…

          but I’m not, so I’ll stick to the humans with female parts 🙂

        • #3179130

          being a swill from the left

          by jck ·

          In reply to Not a fair question

          I think it’s quite wrong to say lefters are the nuts.

          I mean, look who you gave us as president…Commander-in-Chief Steams-from-ears

          Oh well…like I said…all sorts do wrong….all sorts of people also go nuts.

          Besides…the right-wing agenda seems more about controlling people…not teaching them self-control. Handcuffs and barb-wire, anyone?

        • #3179126

          No No No – It’s the left-wing agenda. . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to being a swill from the left

          .
          …..that presumes to control people.

        • #3179119

          Erm…

          by jck ·

          In reply to No No No – It’s the left-wing agenda. . . .

          that’s why the right-wing congress is trying to enhance laws to dictate personal action?

          Nah…it’s Frist and those other ultra-right kooks. Put McCain and other decently sensible guys who don’t have a preacher up their arse telling them what to do.

        • #3179104

          McCain?

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Erm…

          Do you mean the same John McCain that gave us the “all-controlling” new campaign finance rules? That campaign finance legislation that McCain pushed through Congress was about exercising MORE control, not less. Votes for tax increases are about exercising MORE control, not less.

          Any “legislation” is designed to control, whether it be left or right generated.

          Show me the guy who proposes anything close to repealing legislation, whether it be full or partial repeal, and I’ll show you the guy who is not about “controlling” other people.’

          (Personally, I propose repealing every bit of federal legislation that was enacted after the original constitution was adopted, and just start all over again. Let’s see em’ justify from the get-go some of the stuff they now get away with. Can you spell “camel’s nose?)

        • #3179093

          the key word you said is

          by jck ·

          In reply to Erm…

          campaign.

          Being in a campaign is totally optional. Not everyone is affected by campaign law. Just the people who run for office because they couldn’t accept most of that big PAC money they love.

          The fact is, the recent decision by a majority conservative supreme court to allow states to decide whether or not government under their watch can take personal property from the public to benefit private interest in the “interest of the public”. Gonna tell me it’s not control over the public being able to tell them they can’t live in a home they paid for?

          Seems hypocritical to me. Can’t take a dime out of millions from a politician, but you can take a guy’s home which is a result of a lifetime work from him in an effort to build a new resort or hotel or convention center.

          You’ll never see major hotels built in places like Bayhill in Orlando, or Westchase in Tampa. Know why? They’re the guys who make the big campaign donations happen.

          Now not only is the right-wing trying to get control of the law to do as they will to the public (via the Patriot Act), but also trying to make private development have precedent over personal hard work of the public at large.

          Face it…the laws they are passing are:

          1) dropping the amount of checks and balances law enforcement is held accountable to
          2) dropping the amount of rights people have in regard to working to build a better life

          If this was the 1860s, Bush would have been shot by now too. That’s the one thing they did right in the old west…they didn’t put up with bullshit.

          Right is right. Wrong is wrong. What ever happened to having the right to work hard and earn your keep?

          Friggin bunch crap.

          I’m going to check on my beer kit.

        • #3187954

          “take personal property”

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Erm…

          Better run back and take another look at that one jck.

          It was the judges CLINTON appointed that voted in favor of this.

          Brings back the whole “activist judges” story we were hearing about a year ago.

          Question, why is the political party that strongly believes in the “living, breathing document” that can be re-inturprited as the world changes is so strongly against AMMENDING the document as the world changes?

          Because it is a back door approach to changing the MEANINGS of the rules when they can’t change the rules.

        • #3187394

          Taking a look

          by jck ·

          In reply to Erm…

          I believe if you look at the judges, they are considered “conservative” and accepted as that much by the Republican party that carries the banner of “conservativism”.

          Also, Clinton appointed those couple of them because they are the ones that Newt Gingrich and his Republican constituency who controlled Congress for most of Clinton’s 2 terms would approve.

          Essentially, there’s no veto vote for a President to push through a Supreme Court nomination, so don’t try and pin that one on Clinton. That was House and Senate Republicans who coerced those nominees to be put forward…Clinton simply had to find the most moderate people he could that Congressional Republicans would approve.

          Nonetheless, it was *conservative* judges who gave the decision.

          I hope for your sake they never want to build an airport and hotels near your home, or you might be looking for a new house because they’re kicking you out.

          I just don’t get it…can’t earn your keep here in the USA anymore.

        • #3187259

          On Courts and Judges

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Erm…

          In my opinion, one of the biggest travesties, at least among the more recent travesties, of our judicial system is their support of various jurisdictions concerning their implementation of the states’ power of eminent domain. It used to be that the “state” could take (or buy for “fair market value”) private land that could be put to better use for the “public good”. This power was intended to be used primarily for the construction of public roads and such that might run through someone’s front yard or back pasture. Many of the Interstate highways, for example, were constructed on land that was taken (bought) by the government through the power of eminent domain.

          However, in recent years, many municipalities have been using their power of eminent domain to take private property (or buy for “fair market value”) so they can turn around and sell that land to a private developer who has intentions of building commercial, industrial, or retail businesses. The increase in tax revenue derived from a commercial business versus the relatively insignificant property taxes collected on a private residence served “the public good”, or so said the states’ arguments.

          There was a court case recently where a person challenged the government’s power of eminent domain when his local municipality wanted to take his home so a Wal-Mart could be built on that spot. (Increased sales tax revenue versus residential property tax revenue, the argument went, equals “for the public good”.) Balderdash, the home owner said. You can’t take my home to make room for a Wal-Mart, and I’ll take you to court to prevent it from happening. Well, not only did this particular case fail in court, but the practice caught on, and many different municipalities started doing the same thing.

          One such case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The question before the court was to consider if states and/or local municipalities really did have the power to take private land for the purpose of increasing tax revenues. (I’m paraphrasing the “question” put before the court.)

          How did the Supreme Court rule?

          They ruled, in a 5-4 decision, in favor of the municipalities rights to seize personal property for the “public good” as described as being for tax revenue increases and/or for job creation, etc.

          The supporting judges were:

          Justice John Paul Stevens
          Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
          Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
          Justice Stephen Breyer
          Justice David Souter

          The dissenting judges were:

          Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist

          Justice Antonin Scalia

          Justice Clarence Thomas

          Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

          Am I alone in seeing the dangerous precedent being established here? It this a travesty, or what?

          A developer in New Hampshire has filed the necessary papers, and it appears as though everything is in proper order, to have the state seize a private home that is situated in an area such that commercial development meets the criteria established as legitimate reasons to exercise the power of eminent domain. This developer plans to build a hotel on the property, and the local municipality will reap financial gains as a result — and financial gains equals “the public good”. After all, the Supreme Court established the power be put in the hands of a municipality/developer partnership to do so.

          But here’s the good part. The house in question is owned — lock, stock, and barrel — by Supreme Court Justice David Souter, who actually paved the legal way for a municipality/developer partnership to take it away. Let’s see how he likes the government taking his house away.

          Relevant Links:

          http://www.ij.org/pdf_folder/private_property/kelo/kelo-USSC-opinion-6-05.pdf

          http://www.ij.org/private_property/connecticut/

          http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-09-28-justices-property_x.htm

          And the good one:

          http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html

        • #3187193

          *** MAX that was too good for a sub thread ***

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Erm…

          Take that post and start a new discussion with it. More people need to see it.

        • #3186989

          JCK – The Supreme Court is not “conservative”

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Erm…

          Actually, to describe the Supreme Court Justices as either liberal or conservative isn’t exactly accurate. In theory, they don’t advance a political agenda (either liberal or conservative), but rather rule on law and/or lower court decisions as either constitutional or not.

          Therefore, they could be more accurately described as either a strict constructionist or an authoritative interpreter of the US Constitution. The former, usually favored by “conservatives” can be categorized that way because they tend to strictly adhere to the text of the constitution; while the latter, usually favored by “liberals” can be categorized as such because they tend to “loosely interpret” the US Constitution; and the latter is also what is referred to as judicial activism.

          For example, in the eminent domain case that I cited, it was the strict constructionists who dissented because there was no specific Constitutional authority to allow it. The authoritative interpreters, on the other hand, “read into” the Constitution and interpreted it to mean what they decided it meant (or wanted it to mean).

          By the way, I’ll bet a dollar to dirt that President Bush disagrees with and disapproves of the 5-4 decision to allow cities to take people’s homes to build retail stores.

          And the Supreme Court has been historically very “liberal”, at least for the past 30 to 40 years. A “conservative” court, for example, would never have ruled in favor of Roe versus Wade. And “conservative” lower courts would never rule that states MUST acknowledge gay marriages.

          Just what in the world are you using for support to claim that the courts are “conservative”? Don’t just say it, but support it with fact and reason. I suggest just the opposite, that the courts, in general, are “liberal” because they rule in an authoritative interpretation manner. Moreover, regardless of which way the Supreme Court has “tilted” over the years and decades, it’s usually been a 5-4 one way or the other, anything but an overwhelming majority.

          How I read the current supreme Court is as follows:

          The authoritative interpreters (judicial activists) are:

          Justice John Paul Stevens
          Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
          Justice Stephen Breyer

          The strict constructionists are:

          Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist
          Justice Antonin Scalia
          Justice Clarence Thomas

          Could go either way:

          Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
          Justice David Souter
          Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

          However, in her earlier years, Justice O’Conner tended to “interpret” (be liberal) a little more than she is now. Justice Kennedy also tends to “interpret” more than he used to. And Souter, even though he was considered a “conservative judge” when appointed, has been surprisingly liberal in his opinions.

          How do you “read” the current Supreme court justices, and what led you to describe them as “conservatives”? And what kind of court do you actually favor? I’ll go on the record as being in favor of strict constructionist judges. I want them to read what Jefferson and Madison really wrote, not some fairy tale interpretation of what they may or may not have meant. If there are any areas in the constitution that are too vague, then I’m in favor of constitutional amendments to clarify the real meaning.

        • #3186868

          How I align justices

          by jck ·

          In reply to Erm…

          It’s done by basing it on their general decision making on cases before them.

          Take for instance Judge William Rehnquist. He is considered by the other justices to be the “ultra-conservative”. In fact, it has been noted that Justice Kennedy quite often has to arbitrate between Rehnquist and other justices on those cases before them.

          Where do I draw this information from? Let’s see…

          News sources
          University law library briefs
          Legal newsletters
          etc etc

          I don’t have time to go back and look up every source I have drawn information from at this point, and I refuse to do it from my house (because I’m too busy doing yardwork and beerbrewing when I’m there) or take notes as I read or watch TV.

          I’ve never heard the court (as it stands now) be portrayed as a “moderate court”, a “liberal court”, or a “constructionist court”. Sure they stood with Roe v Wade, but that is one of the small percentage of cases in which the court upheld a decision that was not in conservatism’s favor.

          The “liberal court” era really left with Warren and Marshall, if I remember those guys correctly. Ford and Reagan began the regular appointment of more conservatively-aligned judges.

          I swear…I think I’m going to have to go back to college and become a lawyer so that I can spend my time focusing on providing you guys documented proof of everything I read, see, and hear having to do with the judicial and political system.

          That…or I need to go to work for Reuters.

        • #3179061

          The left wing agenda

          by montgomery gator ·

          In reply to No No No – It’s the left-wing agenda. . . .

          and their nanny state, and socialism, and government regulations, is what controls people.

        • #3187919

          Both Both Both

          by absolutely ·

          In reply to No No No – It’s the left-wing agenda. . . .

          The Leftists fixate on wealth.

          The Rightists fixate on God.

          Both are in office to legislate away your right to your own person, they’re just attacking from both “sides” so that centrists will find they have no ground left on which to stand.

        • #3179112

          handcuffs.

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to being a swill from the left

          sounds like my kind of thing!

        • #3179105

          I’ll send

          by jck ·

          In reply to handcuffs.

          the prison guards right over then!

        • #3179090

          as long as..

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to I’ll send

          they are all male.

        • #3179092

          now you’re talkin, who cares about…

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to handcuffs.

          right wing or left wing nutbags.
          Give me a woman who likes handcuffs and every thing else is of no importance

        • #3187953

          I’m there!

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to handcuffs.

          Like the old saying goes.

          “Try anything once. If it hurts, try it again!”

          That and

          “a little pain never hurt anyone”.

        • #3187384

          The only pain I want to feel…

          by jck ·

          In reply to handcuffs.

          is having sore jaw muscles and a sore lower back…

        • #3187920

          But a fair conclusion

          by absolutely ·

          In reply to Not a fair question

          The intellectual inferiority of leftists is [b]conclusively proven[/b] by their willingness to call their opponents [b]right![/b]

        • #3187480

          I never thought about that….

          by itgirli ·

          In reply to But a fair conclusion

          What a marvelous point.

      • #3179057

        I’ll tell you what…

        by anykey??? ·

        In reply to No thread-jacking

        I have YET to see a single thread stay completely on topic,and let me tell you I have read a bunch of them.

        The only threads that I have seen that are to unwieldy to get any good info from are in the MISC. section, and correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t that why there is a MISC.section to begin with.

        All of the threads that I have read in other sections are small enough that they can be sifted through very easily,or is just to much work for a person such as your self to even be troubled with.

        You might try reading some of the chit chat in the threads being jacked,you might learn something about your peers,and be able to help them out with an off topic problem, or you could just keep b!tching about it and we will keep doing it.

        If you are looking for specific tech info, do what I do, look in the TECH Q/A section, because if I’m not mistaken that is exactly what it is for.

        Oh and by the way you can **********************************************************************************************************************************************************you*************************************************************************************************************************************************I hope you ********************************************************************************************************************************************************************* 😉

        • #3188029

          you told me what…

          by wordworker ·

          In reply to I’ll tell you what…

          Whoo-whoo. You’re something else. The way you leaned on that assterisk key. Great work. Super job. Is your TPS report done yet?

          Edit: BTW, the “Windows pros and cons” was posted in Windows, not Miscellaneous.

        • #3187968

          I got your whoo-whoo right here mother****er

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to you told me what…

          The assterisks were a joke dumb*** or was that to ****ing obvious for you.

          What is it with people, I swear to god,I am a member of several sites covering several different topics that I’m interested in.On every single site there is someone just like yourself, saying **** like
          Quit hijacking my thread(boo hoo hoo)
          That is not the topic of this discussion(boo hoo)
          If you don’t quit I’ll have them kick you off the site (waa, I want my mommy)

          Are you ****ing 10 years old or what? Do you expect someone to start a new thread every time they have a idea go through their head as they are typing, that way they don’t hijack your oh so precious thread if so you are ****ing delusional.

          What is the problem with a post straying off topic anyway, to me it just makes them way more interesting, there are only so many ways you can say.
          Each os has it pros and cons, and fits into differents market segments in different ways. BLAH I have heard that so many ****ing time I could puke.

          I know all about the Windows pros and cons thread, even what area it is in, I read all of it,my statement was people ****ing *****ing about threads being hijacked even if they are in the MISC. area, BIG ****ING DEAL ****ING GROW UP.
          If that is to much to handle how do you even function in the real world

        • #3187933

          “Lighten Up” comes to mind. . . .

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to I got your whoo-whoo right here mother****er

          …after reading your post.

        • #3187502

          Well…

          by anykey??? ·

          In reply to “Lighten Up” comes to mind. . . .

          You could be right,I was so p!ssed I could hardly see straight after the day I had yesterday. That was probably not the best time for a reply.

          Let me try this again.
          I look at these threads just as if they were a conversation in the office.
          A conversation will start out on topic, and as the questions are answered and the different views are presented,the conversation tends to stray off course,even to the point of being a full blown BS session.So the way I see it if it works in the real world why not here, I just don’t see the big friggin deal.

        • #3187569

          Instead of the asterisk key try a bit of creative spelling to express……

          by sleepin’dawg ·

          In reply to Well…

          You could have told him to fok off or eff off. Unless something has changed recently this will blow right by the cencorship software as if I really give a sh|t. See???

          [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

    • #3179129

      Only my rules apply

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      My rules apply to the discussions in which I choose to participate. My rules, and my rules only. What exactly are “my rules”, you might ask? Well, I make them up as I go to fit whatever fancy I may have at the time. After all, how can one person possibly tell another person the proper way to “discuss” anything, especially in such a wide range of “discussions”?

      • #3179127

        Damn you, Max

        by jck ·

        In reply to Only my rules apply

        You’ll discuss the way I want, or I’m gonna have a tribe of pygmies come take over your basement and plant a carrot garden down there!!!! ]:)

      • #3187948

        Telling people what to do wasn’t the point

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Only my rules apply

        Trying to point out to new people that if YOU are asking someone else to do something for YOU, then there are ways to ask that will get you much better results.

        Many techs are fairly free with advice and help PROVIDED you have made a fair attempt at resolving the issue yourself first.

        If you are just looking for someone to spoon feed you an answer for something you could have gotten with a simple google search, your a lot less likely to get help.

        Also, there is a big difference between asking for help and asking for a “step by step” of a very complex issue that you will turn right around and make a big profit off of with no effort on your part.

        Was that so bad a thing to try?

      • #3187568

        Max, Max, how many times do I have to tell you???

        by sleepin’dawg ·

        In reply to Only my rules apply

        Wait for permission first!!! ROTFLMAO!!! You bloody liberals are always jumping the gun!!:^O

        [b]Dawg[/b] ]:)

    • #3099691

      Diffrent cultures have diffrent meanings of respect

      by nz_justice ·

      In reply to What everyone that joins in Discussions should know

      You could of told me about this thread (not that I would of read it anyway). I don’t now if what I type will disrespect a londona or a usaer or a japlander or an auslander etc… And here in the TR world, I feel I have the freedom to type anything I want, within reason of course.

      • #3099570

        sure, you are free to do as you wish

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Diffrent cultures have diffrent meanings of respect

        the funny thing about free speech, it has a price.

        If you say something stupid with your “right” to free speech, people will think your stupid.

        If you say something offensive, people will judge you again on this and chose to associate with you or not.

        Decide how you want to define yourself and act accordingly. No one will seek to silence you, but if you decide to exercise your “freedom” to be rude, offensive or down right stupid, people will either ignore you or they can chose to exercise THEIR freedom to take you to task.

        I have offered all I can. Do as you will. But your actions will determine if you will gain acceptance and respect or be just another troll.

        Choose wisely chicken spawn! 😀

Viewing 5 reply threads