Let me explain something to you, since you never log in. You get to see my posting history (anybody can). As a logged-in user, I receive notifications of responses made to my posts. Starting a couple of weeks ago, every time I've posted, I've got a message in my account's Message Centre informing me of an AC reply to that post shortly thereafter. For EVERY post I've made during that span, there's been at least one AC reply from you. Sometimes more than one. None of these replies have had anything to do with the topic at hand, but they've all contained all manner of personal attacks against me.
This is known as "harassment". It might also qualify as "stalking".
I don't "claim to be a writer", I AM a writer and have been one for most of the last 20 years. For the last 9+ years, I've helped write and maintain thousands of pages of documentation for one of the world's most widely-used pieces of Open Source software. But apparently my jokes go straight over your head. Assuming you even have a sense of humour, which it doesn't appear that you do.
Just like with the "multiple personality" joke, which you also didn't get (and keep claiming says something different from what it does), so let me spell it out for you:
AC: I don't care about Identity theft... I suffer [sic] of multiple personality disorder, you clod! Me, in response to AC: I don't have multiple personality disorder, I *am* multiple personality disorder!
That's borrowed from Salvador Dalí, the Spanish artist who did weird paintings of clocks melting and suchlike. When asked whether he obtained inspiration for such pieces by using psychedelics, he replied I don't do drugs. I am drugs. It's a pretty well-known quote, actually.
BTW, don't think I didn't notice how you went searching through my posting history to dig that up and try to twist it into "evidence" that I suffer from MPD. Which I do not now, nor have I ever.
But--since we're on the subject--MPD has certainly impacted my life, and if you had any idea just how much (and you were something like a normal person capable of empathy), you'd be able to see that (a) being able to joke about it now is actually a pretty big deal for me, and (b) when I say that I've dealt with toy surprises in my breakfast cereal that are scarier than you, I'm not really joking.
In any case, that's just one example of your many mischaracterisations of me (and others).
But that's to be expected since you're a stalker, a bully, a liar, and a coward.
How can I follow you around (not that I would want to)? You never log in, and thus you've no posting history to track.
If you are not a troll/stalker/bully, you can prove it by immediately ceasing to respond with trolls/attacks every single time I post.
But you won't, because that's what you are--not just here, but on other sites as well. It's all right there, for anyone with access to Google, and a brain.
I dare say careysub's got a better idea of what "libel" means than you do.
You don't need to be an optometrist to be able to tell that someone is near-sighted. And you don't need to be an expert in the social or behavioural sciences to be able to tell when someone's behaviour is sociopathic.
If it wasn't you, then it was somebody pretending to be you. As I've mentioned before, your modus operandi leaves you wide open to impersonation. Which is, quite frankly, not my problem.
Let's get something absolutely straight, right now, AlexAndy--If you're talking about the nasty accusations made by some AC that I refused even to quote--I summarise here what I said there in response to that AC post: -That post was not made by me. -I have no knowledge whatsoever of who did make it (in all honesty, I can't even hazard a reasonable guess), -I do not appreciate whoever it was attempting to "help" me by doing that, and -I asked them not to do it again.
I think that response makes these things extremely clear.
I absolutely do consider you a crank, a spammer, a troll, a bully, a liar, and a bit of a nutjob; and on those points--as I've stated elsewhere--I think your record speaks for itself.
You may well be one of those hobbyist programmers who actually knows a bit about what they're doing. I've not used Windows on a regular basis in nearly a decade and have forgot most of what I once knew about Windows programming, all those MS certs I got ca. 1996-2001 notwithstanding. So I'm not very qualified to judge on Windows specifics, and you'll notice that I've not tried to do so.
But none of this changes the fact that you seem hell-bent on proving the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory at least a couple of times a day. Regardless of whatever qualifications that you do or do not have, you can't alter the trail of absolutely unconscionable behaviour you've left all over the Internet for most of the last ten years, nor the fact that you refuse to be held accountable for any of it.
The only thing we know... [unprovable allegations which I am not even going to quote, lest they be misattributed to me]
No, we do *not* know any such thing.
I want to make it 100% clear that:
(a) I did *not* post this
(b) I *completely and utterly disavow* any statements contained therein that are not *a matter of public record*.
(c) I have no need or desire to make any false accusations against APK or anyone else. His record on the public WWW already speaks quite loudly for itself and thus there is no need for fabrication.
(d) I *completely and utterly disavow* any calls to harass APK (or anyone else) IRL. In fact, I am going to change my sig now, because I think I've made my point, and I do not want to be seen as inciting or encouraging such behaviour.
Perhaps you meant well, but *please* do not do this again. You are crossing an ethical and possibly legal line here, and you are *not* doing me any favours by doing so. The truth is already there to be seen by anyone who cares to look. And I do *not* want to be associated, directly or indirectly, with any allegations regarding APK's behaviour that cannot quickly and easily be proven by anyone with an Internet connection and a brain.
Looks to me like more of your spamming. (And don't bother speaking of yourself in the 3rd person when it's obviously you, Sparky.)
It's pretty obvious that this is what it is when you post a 300+ word 'response' to a 1-line comment less than 15 minutes later, and this 'response' is about 90% the same as a bunch of your other posts.
Basically, you have this long, drawn-out screed that you've already written and keep handy, looking for opportunities to spam discussions with. And you do, repeatedly.
Anybody who's ever administered an online forum can recognise this pattern quite easily.
If you pulled this crap on the forums that *I* help administer? Well, I have a very special button on my admin page just for such occasions. One click, and you, your account (we don't allow anonymous posting there, gee I wonder why), and all your posts would be gone. *poof* Not going to tell you which one because I don't want you showing up there.
(BTW, I know even more about you and your activities at Ars Technica, Wikipedia, and a couple of other places than remains available on the Web, because... Guess what? *I know people who work at these places and I've asked them*. But to keep things fair I'm citing *only* stuff that anybody can find online for themselves.)
Oh, I'm sorry. I guess I'm a bit unusual in this regard, so let me explain: Unlike a lot of the males inhabiting this site, I *like* women, even without having to pretend to myself that I'm going to get to fuck them. This is due in no small part to the fact that I have this annoying tendency to regard women as *people*.
I strongly suspect that the reasons for which there aren't more of them in technical fields is due to women being actively discouraged from them and being subtly discriminated against once they're in them, just as I've seen time and time again with my wife (a mechanical engineer) and most of my female colleagues (software developers). I don't think it's quite as bad as it used to be, but IMO it'll probably take another generation before women have something like a truly level playing field.
So, yes, I think it's perfectly okay for companies to make donations to a program specifically intended to encourage women to further their careers in software dev, which appears to be exactly what happened with OPW.
I can only recall the libxml2 and it isn't the most popular xml library.
Popular or no, a quick check of my system dependencies shows roughly a thousand apps/other libs that depend on it. And I run KDE--don't even have the Gnome desktop installed.
(Note that my usage might not be entirely typical, as a large portion of my daily work involves lots and lots of XML processing.)
Slashdot Mirror
Let me explain something to you, since you never log in. You get to see my posting history (anybody can). As a logged-in user, I receive notifications of responses made to my posts. Starting a couple of weeks ago, every time I've posted, I've got a message in my account's Message Centre informing me of an AC reply to that post shortly thereafter. For EVERY post I've made during that span, there's been at least one AC reply from you. Sometimes more than one. None of these replies have had anything to do with the topic at hand, but they've all contained all manner of personal attacks against me.
This is known as "harassment". It might also qualify as "stalking".
Your reputation as a troll? That's all over the Net, and it wasn't me who put it there.
Whooooosh
I don't "claim to be a writer", I AM a writer and have been one for most of the last 20 years. For the last 9+ years, I've helped write and maintain thousands of pages of documentation for one of the world's most widely-used pieces of Open Source software. But apparently my jokes go straight over your head. Assuming you even have a sense of humour, which it doesn't appear that you do.
Just like with the "multiple personality" joke, which you also didn't get (and keep claiming says something different from what it does), so let me spell it out for you:
AC: I don't care about Identity theft ... I suffer [sic] of multiple personality disorder, you clod!
Me, in response to AC: I don't have multiple personality disorder, I *am* multiple personality disorder!
That's borrowed from Salvador Dalí, the Spanish artist who did weird paintings of clocks melting and suchlike. When asked whether he obtained inspiration for such pieces by using psychedelics, he replied I don't do drugs. I am drugs. It's a pretty well-known quote, actually.
BTW, don't think I didn't notice how you went searching through my posting history to dig that up and try to twist it into "evidence" that I suffer from MPD. Which I do not now, nor have I ever.
But--since we're on the subject--MPD has certainly impacted my life, and if you had any idea just how much (and you were something like a normal person capable of empathy), you'd be able to see that (a) being able to joke about it now is actually a pretty big deal for me, and (b) when I say that I've dealt with toy surprises in my breakfast cereal that are scarier than you, I'm not really joking.
In any case, that's just one example of your many mischaracterisations of me (and others).
But that's to be expected since you're a stalker, a bully, a liar, and a coward.
How can I follow you around (not that I would want to)? You never log in, and thus you've no posting history to track.
If you are not a troll/stalker/bully, you can prove it by immediately ceasing to respond with trolls/attacks every single time I post.
But you won't, because that's what you are--not just here, but on other sites as well. It's all right there, for anyone with access to Google, and a brain.
I dare say careysub's got a better idea of what "libel" means than you do.
You don't need to be an optometrist to be able to tell that someone is near-sighted. And you don't need to be an expert in the social or behavioural sciences to be able to tell when someone's behaviour is sociopathic.
If it wasn't you, then it was somebody pretending to be you. As I've mentioned before, your modus operandi leaves you wide open to impersonation. Which is, quite frankly, not my problem.
WTF? I posted in that thread roughly 14 hours before you did, APK.
You are still a crank, a troll, and a bully.
Let's get something absolutely straight, right now, AlexAndy--If you're talking about the nasty accusations made by some AC that I refused even to quote--I summarise here what I said there in response to that AC post:
-That post was not made by me.
-I have no knowledge whatsoever of who did make it (in all honesty, I can't even hazard a reasonable guess),
-I do not appreciate whoever it was attempting to "help" me by doing that, and
-I asked them not to do it again.
I think that response makes these things extremely clear.
I absolutely do consider you a crank, a spammer, a troll, a bully, a liar, and a bit of a nutjob; and on those points--as I've stated elsewhere--I think your record speaks for itself.
You may well be one of those hobbyist programmers who actually knows a bit about what they're doing. I've not used Windows on a regular basis in nearly a decade and have forgot most of what I once knew about Windows programming, all those MS certs I got ca. 1996-2001 notwithstanding. So I'm not very qualified to judge on Windows specifics, and you'll notice that I've not tried to do so.
But none of this changes the fact that you seem hell-bent on proving the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory at least a couple of times a day. Regardless of whatever qualifications that you do or do not have, you can't alter the trail of absolutely unconscionable behaviour you've left all over the Internet for most of the last ten years, nor the fact that you refuse to be held accountable for any of it.
Right, everyone on the Internet who doesn't agree with you must be a sock-puppet.
Hey! Whaddaya know? Here's someone who'd probably really like discussing this novel theory of yours with you, at length. Enjoy!
Demonstrate your support for APK today: Change your sig to "I AM ZONTAR AND TOM AND TOM AND BARB AND OPPORTUNIST AND..."!
TFTFY. :D
(oh for pity's sake. here's a few more words that aren't uppercased. happy now?)
Also, you appear to contradict yourself pretty badly in that post, and I'm interested to see how you resolve that.
No, I think it's on you to back up a rather sweeping claim that I've never heard made until now.
Well, for all intensive purposes...
No, I can't. I just can't...
What's with this revisionist nonsense?
English hasn't been spelt phonetically since the days of Chaucer.
The only thing we know... [unprovable allegations which I am not even going to quote, lest they be misattributed to me]
No, we do *not* know any such thing.
I want to make it 100% clear that:
(a) I did *not* post this
(b) I *completely and utterly disavow* any statements contained therein that are not *a matter of public record*.
(c) I have no need or desire to make any false accusations against APK or anyone else. His record on the public WWW already speaks quite loudly for itself and thus there is no need for fabrication.
(d) I *completely and utterly disavow* any calls to harass APK (or anyone else) IRL. In fact, I am going to change my sig now, because I think I've made my point, and I do not want to be seen as inciting or encouraging such behaviour.
Perhaps you meant well, but *please* do not do this again. You are crossing an ethical and possibly legal line here, and you are *not* doing me any favours by doing so. The truth is already there to be seen by anyone who cares to look. And I do *not* want to be associated, directly or indirectly, with any allegations regarding APK's behaviour that cannot quickly and easily be proven by anyone with an Internet connection and a brain.
THANK YOU!
I don't know for sure, but I suspect Tom just said that to get a rise out of you.
In any case, since I'm not in the habit of emailing myself, I'm pretty sure that he and I are not the same person.
Looks to me like more of your spamming. (And don't bother speaking of yourself in the 3rd person when it's obviously you, Sparky.)
It's pretty obvious that this is what it is when you post a 300+ word 'response' to a 1-line comment less than 15 minutes later, and this 'response' is about 90% the same as a bunch of your other posts.
Basically, you have this long, drawn-out screed that you've already written and keep handy, looking for opportunities to spam discussions with. And you do, repeatedly.
Anybody who's ever administered an online forum can recognise this pattern quite easily.
If you pulled this crap on the forums that *I* help administer? Well, I have a very special button on my admin page just for such occasions. One click, and you, your account (we don't allow anonymous posting there, gee I wonder why), and all your posts would be gone. *poof* Not going to tell you which one because I don't want you showing up there.
(BTW, I know even more about you and your activities at Ars Technica, Wikipedia, and a couple of other places than remains available on the Web, because... Guess what? *I know people who work at these places and I've asked them*. But to keep things fair I'm citing *only* stuff that anybody can find online for themselves.)
Oh, I'm sorry. I guess I'm a bit unusual in this regard, so let me explain: Unlike a lot of the males inhabiting this site, I *like* women, even without having to pretend to myself that I'm going to get to fuck them. This is due in no small part to the fact that I have this annoying tendency to regard women as *people*.
I strongly suspect that the reasons for which there aren't more of them in technical fields is due to women being actively discouraged from them and being subtly discriminated against once they're in them, just as I've seen time and time again with my wife (a mechanical engineer) and most of my female colleagues (software developers). I don't think it's quite as bad as it used to be, but IMO it'll probably take another generation before women have something like a truly level playing field.
So, yes, I think it's perfectly okay for companies to make donations to a program specifically intended to encourage women to further their careers in software dev, which appears to be exactly what happened with OPW.
Interesting abbreviation you've come up with for "Window Maker"....
Anybody ever tell you that you're a sexist dirtbag?
No? Well, then...
YOU'RE A SEXIST DIRTBAG.
Now someone has.
Thanks for digging this up.
Oh, puh-lease.
I'm a long-time KDE user, and detest the Gnome desktop, but there's no need to make shit up.
I can only recall the libxml2 and it isn't the most popular xml library.
Popular or no, a quick check of my system dependencies shows roughly a thousand apps/other libs that depend on it. And I run KDE--don't even have the Gnome desktop installed.
(Note that my usage might not be entirely typical, as a large portion of my daily work involves lots and lots of XML processing.)
Wow. Way to go proving one of my points before I'd even finished writing them.