I'ma Well Versed UNIX User But This Baffles Me:

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 00:00:51 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Actually what he, and others such as yourself, are demonstrating is
>> how immature you are. The sad part is that you think your making a
>> fool out of me when you're really making fools of yourselves by acting
>> like children over something so trivial. Any mature person can see
>> this. But I'm sure you're blind to it because, as I said, mature
>> people can see it.[/color]
>
>I wouldn't take it too hard. SGI guys are a fun lot![/color]

Most of them are. Others, such as yourself, are just a bunch of
immature children who are so insecure with yourself that you have to
belittle people in order to feel good about yourselves.

Starting a thread mocking what I said? Don't you have anything better
to do with your time?
[color=blue]
>You'll see for yourself if you stick around long enough.[/color]

Perhaps you should take your own advice and do a little research
before assuming things. I've been here for a while...I know the
group...well I thought that I did.
[color=blue]
>And when one is on Usenet, one is almost guaranteed to get busted at one
>point or another.[/color]

Busted on what? For asking a question?

The sad thing is that you think that this is acceptable behavior. You
prefer to mock people instead of helping them out. Why is that?
[color=blue]
>(Arrogant attitude is like a catalyst in those situations.)[/color]

You should know...you display a sickening degree of it.

Josh

> Most of them are. Others, such as yourself, are just a bunch of[color=blue]
> immature children who are so insecure with yourself that you have to
> belittle people in order to feel good about yourselves.[/color]

I wish I was a child; but if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
[color=blue]
> Starting a thread mocking what I said? Don't you have anything better
> to do with your time?[/color]

Once again, you're not paying attention to detail. I did not start this
thread.
[color=blue]
> Perhaps you should take your own advice and do a little research
> before assuming things. I've been here for a while...I know the
> group...well I thought that I did.[/color]

Yes, that comes out clearly in your posts. Whatever.
[color=blue]
> Busted on what? For asking a question?[/color]

No, for being arrogant (like you, for example.)
[color=blue]
> The sad thing is that you think that this is acceptable behavior. You
> prefer to mock people instead of helping them out. Why is that?[/color]

Would you actually be able to point out one single line I wrote anywhere
that's mocking? I don't believe I have. Not only did I not mock anybody, but
I also made an effort to explain some concepts to you, that you should have
learned on your own anyway (docs are freely available), thereby investing my
time and effort for your benefit. You haven't actually shown any gratitude,
all you've done so far is berate (not that I expected any gratitude to begin
with).

Also, you may have noticed all the other posters get help without any
mockery or condescension. Why do you feel you've been singled out (not by
me though), more importantly, why do you believe that is?
[color=blue]
> You should know...you display a sickening degree of it.[/color]

If you can show me one line where I wrote that I really know UNIX/IRIX, that
I'm well versed in it, or that I'm superior, I will publicly apologize; for
I have no problem with being humble.

> Yep. I realize I'm fighting a losing battle. You can't hold a mature[color=blue]
> discussion with immature people such as yourself.[/color]

I propose you put aside that attitude and, if you're really interested in
IRIX, start contributing to the group.
If you have questions about IRIX that you can't find a clear answer to, or
cannot find an answer at all, then I for one will be happy to answer,
provided the answer is known to me. And my guess is, others will too,
however I do not wish to write in their name.

> That's what makes it sad idiot.

Please, there is no need for personal insults. Insinuations or no, nobody
here has called you names or personally insulted you. On the other hand,
you've allowed yourself the freedom to call participants immature, childish,
needing professional help, and having complexes. Now it's onto names. There
is no need for that, and the above remark was uncalled for (all the OP did
was write an observation).

> Where do I click to get a directory listing? I'm baffled too. Point me in[color=blue]
> the direction of control pannel[/color]

Control panel? Uh-oh. You'll need the operator chair then too!

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:10:52 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Most of them are. Others, such as yourself, are just a bunch of
>> immature children who are so insecure with yourself that you have to
>> belittle people in order to feel good about yourselves.[/color]
>
>I wish I was a child; but if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
>[color=green]
>> Starting a thread mocking what I said? Don't you have anything better
>> to do with your time?[/color]
>
>Once again, you're not paying attention to detail. I did not start this
>thread.[/color]

I would hope that you were intelligent enough to know that I was
speaking from a figurative point of view and that "you" was referring
to a collective group of people and not you specifically. But if you
want to insist on being pedantic:

Where did I say that you, specifically, started this thread?
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Perhaps you should take your own advice and do a little research
>> before assuming things. I've been here for a while...I know the
>> group...well I thought that I did.[/color]
>
>Yes, that comes out clearly in your posts. Whatever.
>[color=green]
>> Busted on what? For asking a question?[/color]
>
>No, for being arrogant (like you, for example.)[/color]

How have I been arrogant?
[color=blue][color=green]
>> The sad thing is that you think that this is acceptable behavior. You
>> prefer to mock people instead of helping them out. Why is that?[/color]
>
>Would you actually be able to point out one single line I wrote anywhere
>that's mocking?[/color]

Certainly:

"...he's taking a stab at a certain inDUHvidual..."
[color=blue]
> I don't believe I have.[/color]

I'm not surprised.
[color=blue]
>Not only did I not mock anybody, but I also made an effort to explain some
>concepts to you,[/color]

Yes you did. And you continue to act as if I didn't learn anything
from your explanations.
[color=blue]
>that you should have learned on your own anyway (docs are freely available),[/color]

I'm sure they are. But this newgroups is freely available too. Why is
it so wrong to post a question here? I know, I know...I've been
through this with the Sun guys (though I wasn't the one asking the
question).
[color=blue]
>thereby investing my time and effort for your benefit.[/color]

Do me a favor next time. Either answer the question without the
commentary or don't answer it at all.
[color=blue]
> You haven't actually shown any gratitude, all you've done so far is berate
> (not that I expected any gratitude to begin with).[/color]

Why would anyone express gratitude towards someone who belittles them?
[color=blue]
>Also, you may have noticed all the other posters get help without any
>mockery or condescension. Why do you feel you've been singled out (not by
>me though), more importantly, why do you believe that is?[/color]

Because they're will to be humble and get down on their knees and
worship the l33t, k3wl d00dz where I will not?
[color=blue][color=green]
>> You should know...you display a sickening degree of it.[/color]
>
>If you can show me one line where I wrote that I really know UNIX/IRIX, that
>I'm well versed in it, or that I'm superior, I will publicly apologize; for
>I have no problem with being humble.[/color]

Once again you're not paying attention to the detail. Where did I
claim you did any of this?

Josh

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:16:43 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Yep. I realize I'm fighting a losing battle. You can't hold a mature
>> discussion with immature people such as yourself.[/color]
>
>I propose you put aside that attitude and, if you're really interested in
>IRIX, start contributing to the group.[/color]

You mean the attitude where I refuse to bow down on my knees to stroke
your ego? Sorry, it's not going to happen.

Josh

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:20:18 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> That's what makes it sad idiot.[/color]
>
>Please, there is no need for personal insults.[/color]

What did you say earlier, oh yeah:

"There were no insults, just obervations."
[color=blue]
>Insinuations or no, nobody here has called you names or personally insulted you.[/color]

That all depends on your point of view. I already claimed that you
insulted me but you passed them off as "just observations".
[color=blue]
>On the other hand, you've allowed yourself the freedom to call participants immature, childish,
>needing professional help, and having complexes.[/color]

That's the behavior that I've observed. If that weren't the case then
the responses I've received to a simple question would not have been
belittling. They would have, as wave++ did, just answered the question
without the condescending commentary.
[color=blue]
>Now it's onto names.[/color]

Just making observations.
[color=blue]
>There is no need for that, and the above remark was uncalled for (all the OP did
>was write an observation).[/color]

Then it's a good thing that I'm just making observations and not
insults.

Josh

> You mean the attitude where I refuse to bow down on my knees to stroke[color=blue]
> your ego? Sorry, it's not going to happen.[/color]

No, the one where you're arrogant. As for myself, I would be a pathetic
individual if I needed some virtual personality to stroke my ego.

Give it a rest already. You could do us all a favor and be polite, unless
you think that's above you, or not in your repertoire.

> I would hope that you were intelligent enough to know that I was[color=blue]
> speaking from a figurative point of view and that "you" was referring
> to a collective group of people and not you specifically. But if you
> want to insist on being pedantic:
>
> Where did I say that you, specifically, started this thread?[/color]

Yes, I'm pedantic. It was unclear.
[color=blue]
> How have I been arrogant?[/color]

"UNIX is old hat to me"
"All you want is for someone to stroke your ego"
....

It could go on an on, but I'm done trying to teach etiquette.
[color=blue]
> Certainly:
>
> "...he's taking a stab at a certain inDUHvidual..."[/color]

Do you see "Josh McKee" anywhere in that sentence? Now, if you felt
attacked by that sentence, that's an entirely different matter.
[color=blue]
> Yes you did. And you continue to act as if I didn't learn anything
> from your explanations.[/color]

Well, I only go by what you exhibit. If you did in fact learn something,
I'm actually happy for you.
[color=blue]
> I'm sure they are. But this newgroups is freely available too. Why is[/color]

Yes they are, but not for abuse. When you don't do your homework and ask a
simple question that's been asked a million times and could have been looked
up easily in a few seconds, you're abusing other people's effort and time.
THAT is NOT what usenet is about, and if you think otherwise, you're sorely
mistaken.
[color=blue]
> it so wrong to post a question here? I know, I know...I've been
> through this with the Sun guys (though I wasn't the one asking the
> question).[/color]

I happen to be one of those "Sun guys", and comp.unix.solaris functions
really well because we abide by certain principles. And as a side effect
one can find tons and tons of extremely useful information that's not
available anywhere else because people post quality stuff instead of
questions that have been asked million-and-one times.
[color=blue]
> Do me a favor next time. Either answer the question without the
> commentary or don't answer it at all.[/color]

The ironic thing is, I'll do you a favor any time without question, so long
as you're polite.
[color=blue]
> Why would anyone express gratitude towards someone who belittles them?[/color]

I have not even made an attempt to belittle you or anyone else. Everything
that I wrote were just statements based on observation, no more, no less.
[color=blue]
> Because they're will to be humble and get down on their knees and
> worship the l33t, k3wl d00dz where I will not?[/color]

Sorry, that was 20 years ago.
[color=blue]
> Once again you're not paying attention to the detail. Where did I
> claim you did any of this?[/color]

By claiming that I'm arrogant.
Take it easy.

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:41:49 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> I would hope that you were intelligent enough to know that I was
>> speaking from a figurative point of view and that "you" was referring
>> to a collective group of people and not you specifically. But if you
>> want to insist on being pedantic:
>>
>> Where did I say that you, specifically, started this thread?[/color]
>
>Yes, I'm pedantic. It was unclear.[/color]

You were pedantic because you were attempting to fault me. Again.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> How have I been arrogant?[/color]
>
>"UNIX is old hat to me"[/color]

I see nothing arrogant about that statement. UNIX *is* old hat to me.
If you look on Google you'll see that I've been participating in UNIX
discussions for quite some time. Certainly enough to know that man
pages are available.
[color=blue]
>"All you want is for someone to stroke your ego"[/color]

If that's not correct then why the insistence that I be humble when
asking questions? It's not as if I was uncivil when I asked the
original question.
[color=blue]
>It could go on an on, but I'm done trying to teach etiquette.[/color]

And you would be wrong with those examples just as you are with the
two you've already provided.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Certainly:
>>
>> "...he's taking a stab at a certain inDUHvidual..."[/color]
>
>Do you see "Josh McKee" anywhere in that sentence? Now, if you felt
>attacked by that sentence, that's an entirely different matter.[/color]

I think it's clearly obvious who the OP was referring to and I think
it is clearly obvious who you were referencing. If I wasn't the one
that you were referring to then who did you have in mind when you made
that remark?

Please...don't add dishonest to your list of faults.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Yes you did. And you continue to act as if I didn't learn anything
>> from your explanations.[/color]
>
>Well, I only go by what you exhibit.[/color]

And what did I exhibit that indicated that I didn't learn anything?
[color=blue]
>If you did in fact learn something, I'm actually happy for you.
>[color=green]
>> I'm sure they are. But this newgroups is freely available too. Why is[/color]
>
>Yes they are, but not for abuse.[/color]

What's abusive about asking a question about IRIX in a newsgroup
dedicated to addressing problems with SGI systems?
[color=blue]
>When you don't do your homework and ask a simple question that's been
>asked a million times and could have been looked up easily in a few seconds,[/color]

Irrelevant. That's the way you want it to be. Sorry, but I do not
share your point of view. This is a public forum dedicated to
answering questions about SGI systems. Since the question was right on
topic for the newgroup there was nothing abusive about it.
[color=blue]
>you're abusing other people's effort and time.[/color]

You're free not to ignore the question. I've already suggested this.
It isn't hard.
[color=blue]
>THAT is NOT what usenet is about, and if you think otherwise, you're sorely
>mistaken.[/color]

That's not what YOUR view of usenet is about. Sorry, I don't share
your point of view. I'll decided when, where, and how I want to
perform my research. If I decide to post to usenet first then that's
what I will do.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> it so wrong to post a question here? I know, I know...I've been
>> through this with the Sun guys (though I wasn't the one asking the
>> question).[/color]
>
>I happen to be one of those "Sun guys", and comp.unix.solaris functions
>really well because we abide by certain principles. And as a side effect
>one can find tons and tons of extremely useful information that's not
>available anywhere else because people post quality stuff instead of
>questions that have been asked million-and-one times.
>[color=green]
>> Do me a favor next time. Either answer the question without the
>> commentary or don't answer it at all.[/color]
>
>The ironic thing is, I'll do you a favor any time without question, so long
>as you're polite.[/color]

I was polite. And I was belittled.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Why would anyone express gratitude towards someone who belittles them?[/color]
>
>I have not even made an attempt to belittle you or anyone else.[/color]

Sure you have. I already provided a reference to it.
[color=blue]
>Everything that I wrote were just statements based on observation, no more, no less.[/color]

That depends on how you interpret them. I found them to be insulting.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Because they're will to be humble and get down on their knees and
>> worship the l33t, k3wl d00dz where I will not?[/color]
>
>Sorry, that was 20 years ago.[/color]

And?
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Once again you're not paying attention to the detail. Where did I
>> claim you did any of this?[/color]
>
>By claiming that I'm arrogant.[/color]

You are arrogant. Your arrogant thinking that people should conform to
your point of view about when/where/how/why to post questions here.

Josh

The original problem: to determine the detailed
OS version number is different for each OS and
what you specifically mean by this "version" is
often different on each platform. Some command
line solutions include:

IRIX: uname -R
AIX: oslevel -r
rpm-based linux installed kernels: rpm -q kernel
linux currently running kernel: cat /proc/version
macosx: sw_vers
macosx underlying darwind release: uname -v

--
Daniel Packman
NCAR/ACD
[email]pack@ucar.edu[/email]

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:20:10 +0200, "UNIX admin"
<tripivceta@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> You mean the attitude where I refuse to bow down on my knees to stroke
>> your ego? Sorry, it's not going to happen.[/color]
>
>No, the one where you're arrogant.[/color]

How am I arrogant? By not bowing into your point of view?
[color=blue]
>As for myself, I would be a pathetic individual if I needed some virtual personality
>to stroke my ego.[/color]

By that criteria you are pathetic as you do need a virtual personality
to stroke your ego. Or was your birth name "UNIX admin"?
[color=blue]
>Give it a rest already. You could do us all a favor and be polite, unless
>you think that's above you, or not in your repertoire.[/color]

I was polite. And I requested the same in return. And this is the end
result. I suggest you heed your own advice, drop the insistence that
everyone conform to your point of view and move on.

Josh

Josh McKee wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 02:29:31 GMT, "<<>>" <cm007i@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >Josh McKee wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> The sad thing is that he's not.[/color]
> >
> >Mr. Syrix is a regular in the groups. Or at least I recall reading many
> >of his posts. His post is intended as a parody of yours, and with it he
> >is trying to mock you.[/color]
>
> That's what makes it sad idiot.
>
> Josh[/color]

this mudslinging would be a lot more fun if it had linux in it.

SkyWriter wrote:[color=blue]
>
>
> this mudslinging would be a lot more fun if it had linux in it.
>[/color]

That's what I was trying to get to, but it didn't stick...

Josh McKee wrote:
[color=blue]
> Yep. I realize I'm fighting a losing battle.[/color]

Then you're doubly stupid to continue.
[color=blue]
> You can't hold a mature discussion with immature people
> such as yourself.[/color]

We aren't having a discussion thank god. I haven't even posted to your
original thread. I thought maybe you'd shut up if someone told you to
chill. No big deal, it's not hard to ignore someone who is useless on
USENET. And the posts you are putting up are useless to others in this
group excepting those who want to make fun of you or still have a chip
on their shoulder from your first post.

Maybe you didn't start out as a troll but that's what you are now. And
you're the worst type of poster on USENET, the kind that has to have the
last word. So as a peace offering from the group, and my way of saying
*plonk*, I leave it to you. You can now have the last idiotic word, enjoy!

Regards,

--
#include <disclaimer.h>
Christopher Miller
[email]cm007i@hotmail.com[/email]

Let's look at this little exchange:

Josh McKee wrote:[color=blue]
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 02:29:31 GMT, "<<>>" <cm007i@hotmail.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> Josh McKee wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Michael J. Sherman wrote:
>>>> Assam Syrix wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anybody tell me which command to type to display the contents
>>>>> of a directory in a shell? [...]
>>>>
>>>> You must be joking.
>>>
>>>The sad thing is that he's not.[/color]
>>
>> Mr. Syrix is a regular in the groups. Or at least I recall reading
>> many of his posts. His post is intended as a parody of yours, and
>> with it he is trying to mock you. [...][/color]
>
> That's what makes it sad idiot.
>
> Josh[/color]

First it was sad ("the sad thing") that he *was not* joking.

Then the fact that he *was* joking is what "makes it sad".

And then a little insult, probably because you were feeling stupid right
about then.

Any how, these threads don't make you look very smart or coherent.
Seems like you attack anyone in the group who bothers to respond to you.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that you're the idiot here.

Regards,

--
#include <disclaimer.h>
Christopher Miller
[email]cm007i@hotmail.com[/email]

Josh McKee wrote:
[color=blue]
> That last sentence is sad, it really is. There's no reason for it
> except for a few l33t d00dz trying to "prove" how k3wl they are to the
> other l33t d00dz.[/color]

I'm sure you realise how old RFC1855 is -- you'll know that the concepts
of RTFM, trolling and flame wars predate k3wl l33t doodz by a few decades.

--
Alexis Cousein Senior Systems Engineer
[email]alexis@sgi.com[/email] SGI/Silicon Graphics Brussels
<opinions expressed here are my own, not those of my employer>
If I have seen further, it is by standing on reference manuals.

Hmmm, I have to admit that I'm coming in late to this, but I find it
very amusing. I went back and looked up Josh's original thread as
well. Very interesting, and it makes this thread even funnier.

I decided to take Josh up on his original suggestion and Google him,
in part to determine the answer to the question about what flavours of
UNIX he was familiar with that he refused to answer.

He cetainly does do a lot of posting. Here's a smattering of the
groups he's been posting to (sticking to the comp.* heirarchy):

comp.sys.mac.advocacy
comp.unix.misc
comp.sys.sun.admin
comp.lang.c++
comp.programming
comp.multimedia
comp.sys.sun.wanted
comp.os.linux.advocacy
comp.lang.pascal
comp.sys.sun.hardware
comp.unix.bsd.freebsd
comp.groupware.lotus-notes

Now, looking at the frequency of posting in a given newsgroup and the
nature of said posts, I'd make a few guesses about Josh. I freely
admit these are only guesses, based on limited knowlege.

1. Josh likes to argue. His... touchy... behavior here has been
consistent with his behavior on comp.sys.mac.advocacy ... Frankly, I
wish he wouldn't bring that style of discourse here, but that's really
his perogative, and it isn't like he hasn't been egged on.

2. Josh's primary UNIX experience is with Solaris. I'll note that
"uname -a" does what Josh expects under Solaris. Of course, as many
have pointed out, different version of of UNIX behave differently when
it comes to these things, and it only takes a second to check a man
page.

Why Josh was afraid to own up to his experience being mainly Solaris,
I dunno. He does seem to have some experience with the free UNIX
flavors like linux and Free BSD.

3. I was going to claim that Josh is obviously a Mac user given the
sheer number of posts on comp.sys.mac.advocacy, but, frankly, those
posts were so convoluted and nit-picking (in my humble opinion) that
it was tough to tell what Josh's opinion on a given issue was, other
than his opponents were idiots. See point 1. At least on
comp.sys.mac.advocacy, they seem to be used to Josh's... unique...
form of discourse.

I CAN conclude, however, that Josh does a bit of programming as part
of his job. In fact, if he primarily considers himself a programmer
rather than an administrator, that might explain his unwillingness do
actually check a man page, which strikes me as more of an
administrator's reaction to a problem.

I present all this not to lambast Josh so much as to provide some
context to Josh's behavior. Make of it what you will.

-Kirt

[color=blue]
> I decided to take Josh up on his original suggestion and Google him,
> in part to determine the answer to the question about what flavours of
> UNIX he was familiar with that he refused to answer.[/color]

Now that's what I'd call doing your homework on stuff. If you don't mind me
asking (I'll shut up if I'm asking too much), are you a sysadmin?

If your guesses are correct, a big ego + impatience + obvious lack of
willingness to study documentation would indeed fall into the "developer"
category.