RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated - OS2

This is a discussion on RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated - OS2 ; Hail Eris! On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed: > Art Deco writes: > > * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable. > > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim. > > > * No one cares about IBM's ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 84

Thread: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

  1. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Hail Eris! On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator"
    tholed:
    > Art Deco writes:
    > > * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.

    >
    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    > > * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.

    >
    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    > >* There is no longer anything for which to advocate.

    >
    > Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
    >
    > > * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.

    >
    > You mean carrying your and your kook friends' postings to it, Deco.


    Nervous, Davie?

    Snarky


  2. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    >>>>> Art Deco wrote:


    >>>>>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
    >>>>>> remove comp.os.os2.advocacy
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the unmoderated
    >>>>>> newsgroup comp.os.os2.advocacy.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> RATIONALE: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.
    >>>>>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.
    >>>>>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.
    >>>>>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> HISTORY:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The newsgroup comp.os.os2.advocacy was created in the 1990s when OS/2
    >>>>>> was already headed toward oblivion.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> CHARTER:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I cannot find an official charter for this group.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> DISTRIBUTION:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> comp.os.os2.advocacy (unmoderated)
    >>>>>> news.groups (unmoderated)
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> PROPONENT:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Art Deco
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> CHANGE HISTORY:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 2007-09-29 1st RFD


    >>>>> Mr. Deco, as a regular of news.groups I must advise you that your RFD
    >>>>> is not valid until posted to news.announce.newgroups.


    >>>> You forgot to mention that his RFD isn't even true, Aratzio.


    >>> Your comment is irrelevant


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    > Quite easily established, as I demonstrated.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    >>> and nonsensical,


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    > Quite easily established


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > and substantiated by your own foolish efforts.


    Classic illogic on your part, Aratzio; it is not foolish to point out
    that OS/2 is, in fact, still available, contrary to Art Deco's claim.
    It is also not foolish to point out that somebody obviously cares
    enough to port Firefox, Thunderbird, and Seamonkey to OS/2, contrary
    to Art Deco's claim that no one cares about OS/2 any longer. In other
    words, it's your effort and Art Deco's effort that is foolish, which
    is rather ironic, considering the statement you just made, Aratzio.

    >>> Tholen, since I was not writing as to the veracity nor the validity of
    >>> the proposal,


    >> Irrelevant, given that I never said that you were, Aratzio.


    > Yes, correct, your non sequitur had nothing to do with what was
    > written,


    Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.

    > glad you realize that.


    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    >>> simply the correct method of submission.


    >> A correct method should include factual information, Aratzio, something
    >> that Art Deco failed to do, and something that you failed to mention.


    > Fallacious


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > and ignorant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > Since you obviously have no understanding of
    > the RFD submission process as developed by the Big-8 management board.


    How ironic, coming from someone who apparently believes that false
    information is part of the RFD submission process.

    > Will you be correcting the Big-8 management boards on their published
    > procedures or will you accept that a submission evaluated after it is
    > posted in NAN.


    Will you be correcting Art Deco's false information, Aratzio?

    >>> Please take your off-topic commentary elsewhere.


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition of off-topic commentary.


    > Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    > defintion of off-topic.


    Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual statements.

    > Please relieve your ignorance


    Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.

    > and learn the proper procedures for
    > posting of RFDs before continuing.


    Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2 before
    continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete fool?


  3. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Cross-Poster For Goddess writes:

    > Hail Eris!


    Why should readers hail a Kuiper belt object, Snarky?

    > On Sep 29, 12:34 pm, "Tholenator" tholed:


    Who is "Tholenator", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using
    that alias. And what was allegedly endured while writing, Snarky?

    >> Art Deco wrote:


    >>> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.


    >> Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.


    >>> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.


    >> You mean carrying your and your kook friends' postings to it, Deco.


    > Nervous, Davie?


    Who is "Davie", Snarky? There is nobody in this newsgroup using that
    alias.


  4. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >it is not foolish to point out
    >that OS/2 is, in fact, still available


    One more time for the really slow kid. Whether or not it is available
    has no bearing upon an RFD. Will you be posting continuous ignorance
    or will you recognize that fact?

    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  5. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    >facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.


    They had nothing to do with the facts I wrote and to which you
    responded. Which makes it a non sequitur. Do I need to give you a
    dictionary to understand you are wrong?


    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  6. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >> Will you be correcting the Big-8 management boards on their published
    >> procedures or will you accept that a submission evaluated after it is
    >> posted in NAN.

    >
    >Will you be correcting Art Deco's false information, Aratzio?


    Non sequitur, tholen, I have nothing to do with the veracity of Mr.
    Deco's RFD. Nor do I care what is your argument is with Mr. Deco. That
    is between the two of you. I am simply advising on the proceedure for
    the posting of an RFD. Are you too stupid to grasp that, Tholen?

    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  7. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >> Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    >> defintion of off-topic.

    >
    >Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    >Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual statements.


    Prove that my statement with respect was fallacious? You post had zero
    content that directly addressed the statement to which you responded.
    Since it was not related to my statement and to which you responded,
    you posted a non sequitur.

    Non sequiturs are off-topic in news.groups.


    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  8. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >> Please relieve your ignorance

    >
    >Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.


    You do not understand the big-8 management boards procedures, ergo you
    are ignorant.

    Do I need to explain that lack of knowledge is ignorance?

    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  9. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:

    >> and learn the proper procedures for
    >> posting of RFDs before continuing.

    >
    >Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2 before
    >continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete fool?


    What does OS2 have to do with a procedural issue of correct news
    groups for the posting of an RFD, THolen?

    OS2 is off topic. RFD is on topic. Learn the difference.

    --

    Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?

    Aratzio - Usenet ruiner #2

  10. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:f0auf3pqrahdueatlfrh0h2l7o6rpmaeh5@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>it is not foolish to point out
    >>that OS/2 is, in fact, still available

    >
    > One more time for the really slow kid.


    Classic failure to comprehend the point.

    > Whether or not it is available has no bearing upon an RFD.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

    > Will you be posting continuous ignorance or will you recognize that
    > fact?


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "You have no clue how stupid you sound, do you?" - Edmo in an echo
    chamber.

  11. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:raauf3p5nvchv9o4t992m61pib4scjkp6b@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>> Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    >>> defintion of off-topic.

    >>
    >>Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    >>Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual
    >>statements.

    >
    > Prove that my statement with respect was fallacious?


    Illogical.

    > You post had zero content that directly addressed the statement to
    > which you responded.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

    > Since it was not related to my statement and to which you responded,
    > you posted a non sequitur.


    Classic inconsistency.

    > Non sequiturs are off-topic in news.groups.


    Classic inappropriate analogy.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "I have still lost no accounts. I simply have a life that needs
    interacting with." -Ed, still having trouble with reality.

  12. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:feauf3hb2is0nt1vv6lo36nth40svebm8i@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>> Please relieve your ignorance

    >>
    >>Classic erroneous presupposition of any ignorance on my part, Aratzio.

    >
    > You do not understand the big-8 management boards procedures, ergo you
    > are ignorant.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

    > Do I need to explain that lack of knowledge is ignorance?


    Classic pontification.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "I have a "bit of education", that's why I don't fall for spinic crap
    like yours." - Ed showing off his education but not his diplomas.

  13. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:43auf39cf404vcj782d7dcm295ue2mu2dv@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    >>facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.

    >
    > They had nothing to do with the facts I wrote and to which you
    > responded.


    You're erroneously presupposing that it's a fact.

    > Which makes it a non sequitur.


    Classic pontification.

    > Do I need to give you a
    > dictionary to understand you are wrong?


    Classic failure to comprehend the point.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "So what does that make you? A stalker who stalks an asshole for 7
    years now trying to convince others how bad he is?" - Ed the asshole

  14. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:ggauf3lrumiomlsp64p2jn4skefrkve09k@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>> and learn the proper procedures for
    >>> posting of RFDs before continuing.

    >>
    >>Practice what you preach, Aratzio, and learn the facts about OS/2
    >>before continuing. Or do you really prefer to look like a complete
    >>fool?

    >
    > What does OS2 have to do with a procedural issue of correct news
    > groups for the posting of an RFD, THolen?


    How ironic.

    > OS2 is off topic.


    Liar.

    > RFD is on topic.


    Classic inappropriate analogy.

    >Learn the difference.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "Are you REALLY this extreme of a dumb bitch!? It's ON TOPIC THE WAY IT
    IS." - Edmo charms another woman.

  15. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition of a non sequitur. In reality, the
    >> facts I presented have everything to do with what was written.


    > They had nothing to do with the facts I wrote


    They had everything to do with the lies Art Deco wrote, Aratzio.

    > and to which you responded.


    I'm well aware that I responded to Art Deco, Aratzio. No need to
    tell me about it. You also responded to Art Deco, Aratzio, and
    you failed to point out his lies.

    > Which makes it a non sequitur.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > Do I need to give you a dictionary to understand you are wrong?


    Classic erroneous presupposition.


  16. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio wrote in
    news:46auf3ppvlureea36ae9p10pbnig25llng@4ax.com:

    > On 30 Sep 2007 03:47:33 GMT, in the land of news.groups,
    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation for writing:
    >
    >>> Will you be correcting the Big-8 management boards on their
    >>> published procedures or will you accept that a submission evaluated
    >>> after it is posted in NAN.

    >>
    >>Will you be correcting Art Deco's false information, Aratzio?

    >
    > Non sequitur, tholen, I have nothing to do with the veracity of Mr.
    > Deco's RFD.


    Irrelevant.

    > Nor do I care what is your argument is with Mr. Deco.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, laced with invective, as
    expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.

    > That is between the two of you. I am simply advising on the proceedure
    > for the posting of an RFD.


    Classic inconsistency.

    > Are you too stupid to grasp that, Tholen?


    Note: no Response.

    --
    Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
    in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych.
    COOSN-266-06-01895 - Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.****nozzles
    Winner of the 8/2000 & 2/2003 HL&S award & July 2005 Hammer of Thor.
    Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - Dec. 2005
    "You must mean every time I type? I get 100 dollars an hour to open my
    mouth and convey my truth." - Eddieee, wondering why nobody calls him.

  17. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Hail Eris! On Sep 29, 6:40 pm, Tholenator wrote:
    > Meat Plow writes:
    > > Art Deco wrote:
    > >> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) to remove the unmoderated
    > >> newsgroup comp.os.os2.advocacy.

    >
    > >> RATIONALE: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy

    >
    > >> * The operating system OS/2 is dead and unavailable.
    > >> * No one cares about IBM's OS/2 any longer.
    > >> * There is no longer anything for which to advocate.
    > >> * Removal would free news servers from the burden of carrying it.

    > > All excellent reasons to remove it immediately.

    >
    > Classic illogic. Those reasons apply to all OS/2-related newsgroups,
    > yet Art Deco, and now you, are interested in only removing one of
    > them.


    What, you mean like comp.binaries.os2?

    > How transparent can you be, Plow?


    I dunno, how thick can you be, Tholenator?

    Snarky


  18. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >>> Will you be correcting the Big-8 management boards on their published
    >>> procedures or will you accept that a submission evaluated after it is
    >>> posted in NAN.


    >> Will you be correcting Art Deco's false information, Aratzio?


    > Non sequitur, tholen,


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > I have nothing to do with the veracity of Mr. Deco's RFD.


    Precisely, Aratzio. You failed to point out his lies.

    > Nor do I care what is your argument is with Mr. Deco.


    The issue is your failure to have an argument with Art Deco, Aratzio.
    You should have pointed out his lies.

    > That is between the two of you.


    Your failure to point out Art Deco's lies is between me and you,
    Aratzio.

    > I am simply advising on the proceedure for
    > the posting of an RFD.


    The proceedure [sic] shouldn't involve the use of false information,
    Aratzio. You failed to advise Art Deco about that.

    > Are you too stupid to grasp that, Tholen?


    Classic erroneous presupposition. Rather ironic, coming from someone
    too stupid to recognize Art Deco's lies.


  19. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >> it is not foolish to point out
    >> that OS/2 is, in fact, still available


    > One more time for the really slow kid.


    As you wish, Aratzio:

    It is not foolish to point out that OS/2 is, in fact, still available.

    Now, go work on getting a little faster, Aratzio.

    > Whether or not it is available
    > has no bearing upon an RFD.


    Whether or not it is available has plenty of bearing on the
    validity of Art Deco's claim, Aratzio.

    > Will you be posting continuous ignorance


    Classic erroneous presupposition. I'm the one who knows that OS/2 is
    still available, Aratzio. Art Deco is the ignorant one, Aratzio.

    > or will you recognize that fact?


    Classic erroneous presupposition of a fact.


  20. Re: RFD: remove comp.os.os2.advocacy unmoderated

    Aratzio writes:

    > tholen@antispam.ham got double secret probation


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > for writing:


    >>> Your postting of a non sequitur to a factual statement is the very
    >>> defintion of off-topic.


    >> Classic erroneous presupposition of a factual statement on your part,
    >> Aratzio. In reality, I'm the one who has been making factual statements.


    > Prove that my statement with respect was fallacious?


    Simple: my posting was not non sequitur, Aratzio.

    > You post had zero
    > content that directly addressed the statement to which you responded.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > Since it was not related to my statement and to which you responded,


    Classic erroneous presupposition.

    > you posted a non sequitur.


    Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

    > Non sequiturs are off-topic in news.groups.


    Irrelevant, given that I didn't post a non sequitur, Aratzio.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast