Hi,

I subscribed to this newsgroup 2 years ago. What did I read here at that
time ? David Stes and Luc Heinrich fighting each other ! So I
unsubscribed, sad not to be able to find someone to help me with
ojbective C.
2 weeks ago: I subscribes again... what do I read ? the same fightings.
With more people.
Unbelievable ! (J'y crois pas ! J'hallucine !)

Aren't you all ashamed ? so childish ?

If you do not agree with someone, you reply ONCE to him.
Then, there is no reason to go on.

If you don't agree with Christian, then don't reply to him.
If you don't agree with David, then don't reply to him.
But DO reply to people asking questions !
I'll be VERY happy to get answers from Luc, David and Christian,
and I'm sure I'll be able to sort the answers out all by myself.

If you wanna insult someone, please do it on your personal webpage.

I have posted one single simple question.
The day after, nobody has answered my simple question and the fight has went on for about ten new messages.
I understand why you are the only one to talk... er... fight here.

Do you like Objective-C ? then please help Objective-C by helping
the wanna-be... not by insulting each other.
--
Samuel Hornus

From:	Doc O'Leary
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:30:06 -0600

In article <20041128234750.3776568f@isobel.taket.org>,
Samuel Hornus wrote:

> I subscribed to this newsgroup 2 years ago. What did I read here at that
> time ? David Stes and Luc Heinrich fighting each other ! So I
> unsubscribed, sad not to be able to find someone to help me with
> ojbective C.

You ran away because you couldn't bother learning how to use a kill
file? Kinda wimpy, I think.

> I have posted one single simple question.
> The day after, nobody has answered my simple question and the fight has went
> on for about ten new messages.

Hint: there are such things as stupid question, along with a whole slew
of other categories of questions people don't feel compelled to answer.
Some of us are more than happy to not bother with Stes *in addition* to
not answering your questions. Happy?

From:	silverdr
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:19:13 +0100

Doc O'Leary wrote:

>
>>I subscribed to this newsgroup 2 years ago. What did I read here at that
>>time ? David Stes and Luc Heinrich fighting each other ! So I
>>unsubscribed, sad not to be able to find someone to help me with
>>ojbective C.
>
>
> You ran away because you couldn't bother learning how to use a kill
> file? Kinda wimpy, I think.
>
>
>>I have posted one single simple question.
>>The day after, nobody has answered my simple question and the fight has went
>>on for about ten new messages.
>
>
> Hint: there are such things as stupid question, along with a whole slew
> of other categories of questions people don't feel compelled to answer.
> Some of us are more than happy to not bother with Stes *in addition* to
> not answering your questions. Happy?

Isn't it you who should now be proud and happy?! You just smoked that
stupid wimp who dared to say his mind and have a point...

From:	Samuel Hornus
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:19:05 +0100

Sherm wrote:
> The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or
> apply only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't
> exist, or have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what
> most folks are using.
>
> So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.

Maye, but if his reply has to be corrected, then it should be corrected
AS a reply to the newbie, not as a (time consuming) reply to David.

> > I have posted one single simple question.
> > The day after, nobody has answered my simple question
>
> Sorry - I saw your question and would like to help, but I mostly use a
> Mac. I've ported my own project to GNUStep, but I'm pretty new to its
> makefile macros myself.

OK, thanks anyway.

> Correcting David's nonsense *is* helpful to the wanna-be.

Yes, if you answer *to* the wanna-be ;-)
--
Samuel Hornus

From:	David Stes
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:06:57 GMT

Samuel Hornus wrote:
> Sherm wrote:
>>
>> So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.
>
> Maye, but if his reply has to be corrected, then it should be corrected

The religious dimension of "correcting" should not be underestimated.

Just like members of a sect, Apple fans have a vocation to convert the world
to Apple.

Therefore they think it is their holy task to "correct" the non-believers,

From:	Samuel Hornus
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:12:15 +0100

Doc wrote:
> You ran away because you couldn't bother learning how to use a kill
> file? Kinda wimpy, I think.

Well, as a matter of fact, I don't (didn't) know what a kill file is.
google just told me what it is. Good. My "General comments" was written
in (relative, of course) anger, as I was *very* surprised to rediscover
the low low activity of this newsgroup, maybe due to some fruitless
threads discouraging newbies.

(Besides, I did not "ran away" because of the "fights" goin' on there.
That was more like a "rhetorical" argument)

> > I have posted one single simple question.
> > The day after, nobody has answered my simple question and the fight
> > has went on for about ten new messages.
>
> Hint: there are such things as stupid question, along with a whole
> slew of other categories of questions people don't feel compelled to
> answer. Some of us are more than happy to not bother with Stes *in
> addition* to not answering your questions. Happy?

Sure, I understand and acknowledge that my question is (somewhat)
stupid, as I realized later that a GNUmakefile is also, simply, a
Makefile, and I do know how to manage subdirectories with Makefile. (the
include $GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT)/XXX was misleading me :-)

regards,
--
Samuel Hornus

From:	Doc O'Leary
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:01:22 -0600

In article <20041130011215.56d02df6@isobel.taket.org>,
Samuel Hornus wrote:

> Well, as a matter of fact, I don't (didn't) know what a kill file is.
> google just told me what it is. Good. My "General comments" was written
> in (relative, of course) anger, as I was *very* surprised to rediscover
> the low low activity of this newsgroup, maybe due to some fruitless
> threads discouraging newbies.

The low traffic is because ObjC isn't a particularly complex language to
learn. The big hurdles are in learning various object libraries, and
those questions are better suited for other newsgroups.

> Sure, I understand and acknowledge that my question is (somewhat)
> stupid, as I realized later that a GNUmakefile is also, simply, a
> Makefile, and I do know how to manage subdirectories with Makefile. (the
> include $GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT)/XXX was misleading me :-)

GNUstep questions belong in gnu.gnustep.* newsgroups. That, more than
stupidity, is why I didn't give your question a second glance here.

From:	Luc Heinrich
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:36:39 +0100

Samuel Hornus wrote:

> I subscribed to this newsgroup 2 years ago. What did I read here at that
> time ? David Stes and Luc Heinrich fighting each other !

Yeah right, like I was the only one fighting the utter nonsense spread
by this dickhead. You surely did not spend enough time here to see that
I was not.

Point your finger elsewhere will you ?

> If you do not agree with someone, you reply ONCE to him.
> Then, there is no reason to go on.

That's all nice and stuff, I think I will enjoy looking at you trying
your beautiful theory on our local troll.

Have fun... :>

--
Luc Heinrich - lucsky@mac.com

From:	Sherm Pendley
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:49:29 -0500

Samuel Hornus wrote:

> If you don't agree with David, then don't reply to him.
> But DO reply to people asking questions !
> I'll be VERY happy to get answers from Luc, David and Christian,

The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't exist, or
have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what most folks are
using.

So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.

> I have posted one single simple question.
> The day after, nobody has answered my simple question

Sorry - I saw your question and would like to help, but I mostly use a
Mac. I've ported my own project to GNUStep, but I'm pretty new to its
makefile macros myself.

> Do you like Objective-C ? then please help Objective-C by helping
> the wanna-be... not by insulting each other.

Correcting David's nonsense *is* helpful to the wanna-be.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

From:	Reinder Verlinde
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:48:35 +0100

In article ,
Sherm Pendley wrote:

> The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
> only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't exist, or
> have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what most folks are
> using.
>
> So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.

To prevent newbies from being misled, a simple weekly FAQ-like post
explaining the genealogy of Objective-C should be sufficient (possibly
better: a short (automated?) reply to each of his posts linking to such
a FAQ). If that post would be phrased carefully, it might even be
possible to mention that a person named ..... .... is a strong advocate
of the statement that POC is the only real Objective-C without
triggering yet another 'discussion' that leads from nowhere to nowhere
squared.

Reinder

From:	Sherm Pendley
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:59:40 -0500

Reinder Verlinde wrote:

> To prevent newbies from being misled, a simple weekly FAQ-like post
> explaining the genealogy of Objective-C should be sufficient

One immediate problem with that idea is that ..... .... is already
posting such a FAQ, and the "answers" in it reflect his own bias on the
subject.

Sure, someone who's more informed and less biased could also post a FAQ
- but the presence of two FAQs would leave newbies even more confused.

I hate to say it, but ..... .... has essentially made this group useless
for serious discussion. I can't think of any effective means of banning
him or his FAQ from this group, so perhaps a new moderated group is
what's needed.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

From:	Tilo_Prütz
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:45:40 +0100

Sherm Pendley wrote:

> I hate to say it, but ..... .... has essentially made this group useless
> for serious discussion. I can't think of any effective means of banning
> him or his FAQ from this group, so perhaps a new moderated group is
> what's needed.
>

Good idea ... maybe Mr. dotdotdot will create one? ;)

greetz

>tilo

From:	Michael Ash
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:57:31 -0600

Sherm Pendley wrote:
> Samuel Hornus wrote:
>
>> If you don't agree with David, then don't reply to him.
>> But DO reply to people asking questions !
>> I'll be VERY happy to get answers from Luc, David and Christian,
>
> The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
> only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't exist, or
> have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what most folks are
> using.
>
> So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.

Anybody with a brain can see that Stes is completely nuts after a single
post. It does *not* help newbies to see a group filled with flames and not
a single useful post. If you really feel that you must correct him, reply
*once* and then don't reply to the followup, please. Stes has been ranting
for ten years, and it is obvious that he is incapable of seeing reality.
He may have an inability to learn about Apple, but the people who never
stop replying have an inability to learn about him. Trolls don't go away
when you feed them.

From:	Ben Golding
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:14:38 +1100

In article <1101711451.392558@nfs-db1.segnet.com>,
Michael Ash wrote:

> Sherm Pendley wrote:
> > Samuel Hornus wrote:
> >
> >> If you don't agree with David, then don't reply to him.
> >> But DO reply to people asking questions !
> >> I'll be VERY happy to get answers from Luc, David and Christian,
> >
> > The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
> > only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't exist, or
> > have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what most folks are
> > using.
> >
> > So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.
>
> Anybody with a brain can see that Stes is completely nuts after a single
> post.

For reasons that are beyond me, he's the moderator of this group and
that position alone carries some weight. In spite of that, I would
hazard to say his posts have done more to alienate potential users of
the language than all other deterrents combined.

His lack of interest in the broader Objective C community leaves me
wondering if there shouldn't be a comp.lang.objective-c.poc where he can
rant and pontificate with his user, leaving the rest of the community to
get on with meaningful discussions of the language.

That would mean replacing him as moderator which, unfortunately, I can't
volunteer myself for family reasons. I don't even know what the process
is of replacing him if he doesn't want to go quietly [and that would be
a first].

The real solution to his carping and intolerance is to give it a voice
where it has a place; the broader Objective C community isn't it. After
ten years of his whining here, it'd be nice to see some change because
it won't come from him, and see this newsgroup become a forum where
information can be exchanged freely.

Ben.

From:	Michael Ash
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:05:05 -0600

Ben Golding wrote:
> In article <1101711451.392558@nfs-db1.segnet.com>,
> Michael Ash wrote:
>
>> Sherm Pendley wrote:
>> > Samuel Hornus wrote:
>> >
>> >> If you don't agree with David, then don't reply to him.
>> >> But DO reply to people asking questions !
>> >> I'll be VERY happy to get answers from Luc, David and Christian,
>> >
>> > The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
>> > only to POC. He tries to pretend that Cocoa and GNUStep don't exist, or
>> > have only a handful of users, when in fact those are what most folks are
>> > using.
>> >
>> > So his gibberish needs to be corrected so that newbies aren't misled.
>>
>> Anybody with a brain can see that Stes is completely nuts after a single
>> post.
>
> For reasons that are beyond me, he's the moderator of this group and
> that position alone carries some weight. In spite of that, I would
> hazard to say his posts have done more to alienate potential users of
> the language than all other deterrents combined.
>
> His lack of interest in the broader Objective C community leaves me
> wondering if there shouldn't be a comp.lang.objective-c.poc where he can
> rant and pontificate with his user, leaving the rest of the community to
> get on with meaningful discussions of the language.

Stes only rarely responds to posts that aren't directed at him, except for
the first post or so in a thread. By continually responding to him, we
give him a forum to air his craziness. He evidently has plenty of time to
write posts, so you can't very well just wait until he gets tired of
posting. None of these drastic measures that are being discussed are
necessary; just don't click Reply! If you can't bear not to respond, put
him in a killfile and be done with it. This business of protecting newbies
is, at best, an incredibly weak excuse.

From:	Ben Golding
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:49:25 +1100

In article <1101737104.981588@nfs-db1.segnet.com>,
Michael Ash wrote:

> He evidently has plenty of time to
> write posts, so you can't very well just wait until he gets tired of
> posting. None of these drastic measures that are being discussed are
> necessary; just don't click Reply! If you can't bear not to respond, put
> him in a killfile and be done with it.

Respectfully, I must disagree. To be silent about something that you
know to be wrong is tacit agreement and is indistinguishable from
agreeing with it. The howling errors that plague his postings need to
be discussed so that people can learn and see them for what they are,
even if it does make for repetitive reading.

The notion of waiting "until he gets tired of posting" isn't going to
work. He's been posting the same rubbish for ten years and obviously
dissuaded many potential Objective C programmers from using this as a
discussion forum in that time. I've been one of them.

Really, what he does in this newsgroup is little more than censorship:
we either talk about Objective C as he wants it to be or he muddies the
water with his nonsensical Apple bashing and/or refusal to support his
assertions until the discussion stops. Again.

Ben.

From:	Michael Ash
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:28:51 -0600

Ben Golding wrote:
> In article <1101737104.981588@nfs-db1.segnet.com>,
> Michael Ash wrote:
>
>> He evidently has plenty of time to
>> write posts, so you can't very well just wait until he gets tired of
>> posting. None of these drastic measures that are being discussed are
>> necessary; just don't click Reply! If you can't bear not to respond, put
>> him in a killfile and be done with it.
>
> Respectfully, I must disagree. To be silent about something that you
> know to be wrong is tacit agreement and is indistinguishable from
> agreeing with it. The howling errors that plague his postings need to
> be discussed so that people can learn and see them for what they are,
> even if it does make for repetitive reading.

That's bizarre. Agreeing is agreement. Being silent is just being silent.
On a typical newsgroup, the lurker/poster ratio is probably 10:1 or 100:1.
Does that mean that these tens or hundreds of lurkers tacitly agree with
every bizarro assertion made in the group? That makes no sense.

> The notion of waiting "until he gets tired of posting" isn't going to
> work. He's been posting the same rubbish for ten years and obviously
> dissuaded many potential Objective C programmers from using this as a
> discussion forum in that time. I've been one of them.

Well, what do you propose? My method will work. It is the only proven way
of getting rid of trolls. Packing up and moving the group is a stupid
idea. There is no reason to let one man ruin it.

> Really, what he does in this newsgroup is little more than censorship:
> we either talk about Objective C as he wants it to be or he muddies the
> water with his nonsensical Apple bashing and/or refusal to support his
> assertions until the discussion stops. Again.

Stop helping him. David Stes alone cannot ruin the group. Those who reply
to him, alone, cannot ruin the group. The combination of both is what
ruins the group. Since we can't change Stes, I propose changing what we
can control; stop replying to him.

As I said, this entire "save the newbies!" argument is a really weak
excuse. There are two alternatives. One, we can keep things as they are,
where 99% of the traffic is flames. This is not newbie-friendly. Two, we
can stop replying to the troll and occasionally have an interesting
discussion, which is accompanied with a few remarks from Mr. Bizarro.
Anybody who reads usenet quickly learns how to detect a troll, and Stes is
eminenntnly detectable. Stes is not going to corrupt any newbies, and
nearly every reply to him is just a repetition of what's been said before.
Replying him in some naive attempt to protect the group is simply
destroying the village in order to save it.

From:	Sherm Pendley
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:30:13 -0500

Ben Golding wrote:

> For reasons that are beyond me, he's the moderator of this group and
> that position alone carries some weight.

Minor nit - he maintains a FAQ and posts it here regularly, but the
group is unmoderated.

> His lack of interest in the broader Objective C community leaves me
> wondering if there shouldn't be a comp.lang.objective-c.poc where he can
> rant and pontificate with his user, leaving the rest of the community to
> get on with meaningful discussions of the language.

That's a great idea, but I can't imagine he'd just quietly leave, and
this being an unmoderated group I can't think of a way to kick him out.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

From:	Joe Shimkus
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:09:53 -0500

In article ,
Sherm Pendley wrote:
> That's a great idea, but I can't imagine he'd just quietly leave, and
> this being an unmoderated group I can't think of a way to kick him out.

Kill files. If you don't see him, he doesn't exist. Yes, that doesn't
prevent the newbie from seeing him so we'd have to be proactive in
educating the newbie in regard to him. Perhaps we can get an entry in
the FAQ? :-)

--
PGP Key (DH/DSS): http://www.shimkus.com/public_key.asc
PGP Fingerprint: 89B4 52DA CF10 EE03 02AD 9134 21C6 2A68 CE52 EE1A

Windows has always aspired to be Mac-like without Microsoft ever really
understanding what that even means. - Robert Cringely

From:	David Stes
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:04:32 GMT

Sherm Pendley wrote:
>
> The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
> only to POC.

Talk for yourself. I said that SELF Blocks should be evaluated in LIFO
order, while Objective-C Blocks do not have that restriction.

This simple fact can be readily verified by trying out SELF.

Objective-C Blocks can be stored in other objects, after the creating function
has exited.

This is fact, not nonsense.

From:	Sherm Pendley
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:38:45 -0500

David Stes wrote:

> Sherm Pendley wrote:
>
>>The problem is that David's "answers" are often total nonsense, or apply
>>only to POC.
>
> Objective-C Blocks ...

.... apply only to POC.

Thank you for proving my point.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

From:	David Stes
Subject:	Re: General comments
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2004 08:03:00 GMT

Samuel Hornus wrote:
>
> Do you like Objective-C ? then please help Objective-C by helping
> the wanna-be... not by insulting each other.

Samuel, unfortunately I think many subscribers here do not like so much
Objective-C;

They believe in Apple. Not in Objective-C.

Or in Objective-C merely because they sheepishly follow Apple.

That is a different thing; if Apple migrates to Java tomorrow, then the
Apple believers are gone, and so will the flame wars.