Congratulations, I'm truly impressed. You've achieved what I wouldn't have thought possible - you've become even MORE incoherent.
What defeat? Ah yes - you're back in your fantasy world again, aren't you. Yes, you'll be safe there - don't worry about the facts, they'll only inconvenience you. I hope your analyst is on danger money. (And if you're not in therapy, you really need to be.)
> Your attempts to insult me here Now THAT's the pot calling the kettle black
> (and unwillingness to tell me where you're from, which makes me think you really are in the USA) I love the "logic". I promise you that I don't live in the USA. But hey, don't concern yourself with FACTS here.
> The "Your whole country is bad because it had the KKK" attitude Can you show me EXACTLY where I said that? Or is that your own insane fabrication?
> I aint that emotionally involved. That's why your spending so much time on this, instead of with your girlfriend.
> You all assume I want my phone to ring audibly in theater. I never said nor implied that. You all assume I want to talk on the phone during a movie. I never said nor implied that.
On the other hand, if SO many people ("You all") have interpreted what you said in that way, don't you think its just possible that maybe you were just a little unclear in what you originally said? Or are you suggesting that the entire of the rest of slashdot's readership are morons?
> Personally I think that my mentioning that I had a GF to keep an eye on rubbed a few people the wrong way How could such a comment possibly "rub people up the wrong way"? Would it "rub you up the wrong way"? I guess so. I feel sorry for the poor girl.
> Before you take personal offense at that, You're too funny to offend me. I feel sorry for you.
> You said earlier that they are. "they are" what? If you're going to attribute statements to me, please write in complete scentences.
> (Let's face it, if they were, there'd already be strong attempts to stop it.) I've seen people asked to leave the theatre for allowing a cell phone to ring twice. Presumably that's not strong enough for you. What would youy suggest, lyching? Car wreck?
> I want to annoy people at theaters I'm glad you admit it. Oh look - It's very easy to twist the meaning when you quote out of context, isn't it?
> you are a bigot to boot. You don't know me, you're in no position to call me a bigot. But since you did, I'll call you a Nazi and have done with it.
> 've been saying ALL ALONG that there is no need to jam cell phones. There's no need to jam cell phones WHEN PEOPLE TURN THEM OFF VOLUNTARILY.
> I got from you was "I want cell phones jammed in theaters because they bug me They bug me - and most of the rest of the audience - when they ring. I've been to the cinema in the US, and heard ringing phones. I'm not the only one it bugs (otherwise you wouldn't have posted so many attacks at so many people who would like your phone switched off whilst WE (not I, WE) watch the movie)
> even though I just said that people are polite enough to turn them off. But of course, not everyone IS polite enough to turn them off.
> I am the self centered one? I'm not the one crying because I'm worried about my precious movie. It's not JUST my "precious movie", it's everyone-in-the-theatres'-precious movie. You're thinking about yourself, I'm thinking about a roomful of people. You're the self centred one. I'm thinking of myself AND OTHERS.
> Wow, I can't believe you self destructed your own argument I can't believe you're so dumb you needed a picture painted.
> So let me ask you something: Where are you from, anyway? Outside America. Which means that as far as/. is concerned, it doesn't exist.
> Is it a common trait over there to make extremist assumptions about somebody you don't even know Well, the KKK doesn't exist here if that's what you mean. ASk yourself this: How come you're spending SO MUCH time making SO MANY posts to SO MANY people who don't agree with you. Could it, perhaps, be, that you're WRONG?
> And as for misunderstanding the story, I did read it If it's any consolation, A lot of people seem to have missed that point:-)
> I'm also fascinated by people posting to really old stories. kudos:) I often do it - if I have an hour or so to spare whilst "She who thinks she must be obeyed" is getting ready to go out and I'm sitting waiting for her:)
> they made the sound of someone's phone ringing - to the point that it was VERY realistic, and had people in the cinema groaning in annoyance. I remember this - and I remember a HUGE number of people scrabbling around because they thought it was THEIR phone ringing:-)
> I'm surprised that no one mentioned this yet They have. You just didn't bother reading the previous posts. And they're wrong for the reason you are - the technology in question is NOT a jamming device.
> I'm shocked that with all of these posts no/. readers have pointed out that use of such communication jamming devices isn't kosher with the old FCC. Actually, a large number of people HAVE pointed it out. And they've been just as wrong as you are for exactly the same reason you are. Have a nice day.
> I believe there are FCC regs or _something_ that prohibit jammers Now, this is newsworthy - somebody posted without reading either the article OR any of the previous comments. Oh, wait - this is Slashdot. Sorry.
> I might actually be able to have a meeting without being disturbed them. If I'm in a meeting when someone's phone rings, if they answer it I quietly pick up my stuff and walk out of the room - if anyone asks why, I reply "Cliff {or whoever} seems to have more important things to do that to be here. I have more importat things to do than listen to his conversation." It's a surprisingly effective technique. I once did this when the CEO of a very large client answered the phone - he apologised to me and the whole meeting, and now ensures that people in 'his' meetings leave their phones outside. Just because they guy's the boss, doesn't mean you can't point out that he's an a55hole.
> The US has one lawyer for every 300 people. So what you're saying is that from an average sample of 301 Americans, 300 are people and the other one is a lawyer?
> "I could have been with my gf at the hospital over an hour ago if the fucking theater didnt, out of pettiness, block my signals."
You could have been there over an hour ago if YOU hadn't gone to the movies. The theatre isn't blocking the phone out of pettiness, it's out of consideration for the rest of their customers. Every movie theatre I've been to in the last few years has displayed a full-screen request before each movie asking you to switch off your cell phone - and most people in the theatre are polite enough and considerate enough to do so. These theatres don't need to "jam" phones, because their clientele are not as rude and self-centred as you. But that's hardly surprising, since you're an American.
> No hospitals in Boston do. All the hospitals in the original Boston (the one in Lincolnshire) do, since cell phones can interfere with the equipment that's keeping people alive. I've seen people physically ejected from hospitals for refusing to switch off a cellphone.
> take perfect pristine water You mean the stuff without caffine? Blech!
> why do people drink decaf?!?! People don't drink decaf - MORONS drink decaf. I mean, what's the point? Coffee with no caffine? You might as well drink "perfect pristine water":)
> At work we use IM as our primary means of communication We have a much better technique, although it seems a little outmoded these days. What we do is "talk to each other". Give it a try sometime
Slashdot Mirror
Congratulations, I'm truly impressed. You've achieved what I wouldn't have thought possible - you've become even MORE incoherent.
What defeat? Ah yes - you're back in your fantasy world again, aren't you. Yes, you'll be safe there - don't worry about the facts, they'll only inconvenience you. I hope your analyst is on danger money. (And if you're not in therapy, you really need to be.)
> I couldn't win the argument, so I'll fling insults at you instead.
No, you already tried that technique and it didn't work.
> Your attempts to insult me here
Now THAT's the pot calling the kettle black
> (and unwillingness to tell me where you're from, which makes me think you really are in the USA)
I love the "logic". I promise you that I don't live in the USA. But hey, don't concern yourself with FACTS here.
> The "Your whole country is bad because it had the KKK" attitude
Can you show me EXACTLY where I said that? Or is that your own insane fabrication?
> I aint that emotionally involved.
That's why your spending so much time on this, instead of with your girlfriend.
> You all assume I want my phone to ring audibly in theater. I never said nor implied that.
You all assume I want to talk on the phone during a movie. I never said nor implied that.
On the other hand, if SO many people ("You all") have interpreted what you said in that way, don't you think its just possible that maybe you were just a little unclear in what you originally said? Or are you suggesting that the entire of the rest of slashdot's readership are morons?
> Personally I think that my mentioning that I had a GF to keep an eye on rubbed a few people the wrong way
How could such a comment possibly "rub people up the wrong way"? Would it "rub you up the wrong way"? I guess so. I feel sorry for the poor girl.
> Before you take personal offense at that,
You're too funny to offend me. I feel sorry for you.
> You said earlier that they are.
"they are" what? If you're going to attribute statements to me, please write in complete scentences.
> (Let's face it, if they were, there'd already be strong attempts to stop it.)
I've seen people asked to leave the theatre for allowing a cell phone to ring twice. Presumably that's not strong enough for you. What would youy suggest, lyching? Car wreck?
> I want to annoy people at theaters
I'm glad you admit it. Oh look - It's very easy to twist the meaning when you quote out of context, isn't it?
> you are a bigot to boot.
You don't know me, you're in no position to call me a bigot. But since you did, I'll call you a Nazi and have done with it.
Bored now.
> 've been saying ALL ALONG that there is no need to jam cell phones.
/. is concerned, it doesn't exist.
There's no need to jam cell phones WHEN PEOPLE TURN THEM OFF VOLUNTARILY.
> I got from you was "I want cell phones jammed in theaters because they bug me
They bug me - and most of the rest of the audience - when they ring. I've been to the cinema in the US, and heard ringing phones. I'm not the only one it bugs (otherwise you wouldn't have posted so many attacks at so many people who would like your phone switched off whilst WE (not I, WE) watch the movie)
> even though I just said that people are polite enough to turn them off.
But of course, not everyone IS polite enough to turn them off.
> I am the self centered one? I'm not the one crying because I'm worried about my precious movie.
It's not JUST my "precious movie", it's everyone-in-the-theatres'-precious movie. You're thinking about yourself, I'm thinking about a roomful of people. You're the self centred one. I'm thinking of myself AND OTHERS.
> Wow, I can't believe you self destructed your own argument
I can't believe you're so dumb you needed a picture painted.
> So let me ask you something: Where are you from, anyway?
Outside America. Which means that as far as
> Is it a common trait over there to make extremist assumptions about somebody you don't even know
Well, the KKK doesn't exist here if that's what you mean.
ASk yourself this: How come you're spending SO MUCH time making SO MANY posts to SO MANY people who don't agree with you. Could it, perhaps, be, that you're WRONG?
> And as for misunderstanding the story, I did read it :-)
:) :)
If it's any consolation, A lot of people seem to have missed that point
> I'm also fascinated by people posting to really old stories. kudos
I often do it - if I have an hour or so to spare whilst "She who thinks she must be obeyed" is getting ready to go out and I'm sitting waiting for her
> they made the sound of someone's phone ringing - to the point that it was VERY realistic, and had people in the cinema groaning in annoyance. :-)
I remember this - and I remember a HUGE number of people scrabbling around because they thought it was THEIR phone ringing
It'll make you feel great-er
I'll see you sometime later.
> as soon as cellphones are no status-symbol anymore,
Cellphone's aren't seriously considered a status symbol are they?
> I'm surprised that no one mentioned this yet
They have. You just didn't bother reading the previous posts. And they're wrong for the reason you are - the technology in question is NOT a jamming device.
> I'm shocked that with all of these posts no /. readers have pointed out that use of such communication jamming devices isn't kosher with the old FCC.
Actually, a large number of people HAVE pointed it out. And they've been just as wrong as you are for exactly the same reason you are. Have a nice day.
> I believe there are FCC regs or _something_ that prohibit jammers
Now, this is newsworthy - somebody posted without reading either the article OR any of the previous comments. Oh, wait - this is Slashdot. Sorry.
> At least my computer will still work so I can play Quake, Unreal Tournament :-)
But no online opponents? Man, life would be pretty empty
> I might actually be able to have a meeting without being disturbed them.
If I'm in a meeting when someone's phone rings, if they answer it I quietly pick up my stuff and walk out of the room - if anyone asks why, I reply "Cliff {or whoever} seems to have more important things to do that to be here. I have more importat things to do than listen to his conversation." It's a surprisingly effective technique. I once did this when the CEO of a very large client answered the phone - he apologised to me and the whole meeting, and now ensures that people in 'his' meetings leave their phones outside. Just because they guy's the boss, doesn't mean you can't point out that he's an a55hole.
Was this anything to do with you?
> The US has one lawyer for every 300 people.
So what you're saying is that from an average sample of 301 Americans, 300 are people and the other one is a lawyer?
> since payphones have a monopoly inside a theater, they'd have to pull out $1.50 in quarters.
In civilised countries, emergency calls are free.
> If a theater jams cell phone signals, I'm going to stop going to it.
That's fine - the rest of us can watch the movie in peace then.
> that would freak the hell out of the salesmen.
That's OK - the only truly useful role of any salesdroid is as on object of derision for techs anyway
> it simply doesnt make sense to say I am not able to be reached at all period for a couple hours
Do you NEVER sleep?
> Who would DO such a thing?
Probably somone with the word "manager" in their job title
> "I could have been with my gf at the hospital over an hour ago if the fucking theater didnt, out of pettiness, block my signals."
You could have been there over an hour ago if YOU hadn't gone to the movies. The theatre isn't blocking the phone out of pettiness, it's out of consideration for the rest of their customers. Every movie theatre I've been to in the last few years has displayed a full-screen request before each movie asking you to switch off your cell phone - and most people in the theatre are polite enough and considerate enough to do so. These theatres don't need to "jam" phones, because their clientele are not as rude and self-centred as you. But that's hardly surprising, since you're an American.
> No hospitals in Boston do.
All the hospitals in the original Boston (the one in Lincolnshire) do, since cell phones can interfere with the equipment that's keeping people alive. I've seen people physically ejected from hospitals for refusing to switch off a cellphone.
> take perfect pristine water
:)
You mean the stuff without caffine? Blech!
> why do people drink decaf?!?!
People don't drink decaf - MORONS drink decaf. I mean, what's the point? Coffee with no caffine? You might as well drink "perfect pristine water"
> Ham radio callsign. :). Nice try though
Nope
> At work we use IM as our primary means of communication
We have a much better technique, although it seems a little outmoded these days. What we do is "talk to each other". Give it a try sometime
> If they could somehow combine the chat windows into one, I'd go back to it. :)
You can - they're called containers. Go back to it