http://qs1969.pair.com?node_id=1113278


in reply to Re^6: RAM: It isn't free . . . (Mike "sundialsvc4" Robinson spams himself)
in thread RAM: It isn't free . . .

That’s clearly never been what’s going on. The exact opposite is what’s been achieved all considered.

Sometimes I wonder if some a’y’all nameless monks have ever met real persons in real life with real intrapersonal dynamics, idiosyncrasies, quirks, messy motivations, and histories. It’s one thing to be irritated or have technical reasons to complain/refute. It’s another to drop identity, culpability, empathy, and any sense of grace just to snipe.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: RAM: It isn't free . . .
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jan 14, 2015 at 22:56 UTC

    Without drawing conclusions, I'd point you first to this extract from his homepage:

    (If you’re staring at thousands of lines of unfamiliar and unreliable Perl ... that was written by a long-gone individual, Mike can help you.)

    And then this node.

    And point out that in most courts of law, "I didn't know" nor "I didn't mean it"; is not a defense; and given his history, he must be aware that his understanding of modern computing in general, and Perl in particular, is (or would be, were it a laughing matter) a joke.

    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
[reply]

      As I said, there is no argument possible against technical refutations; it’s part of why we’re here. The participation over time that we are discussing clearly destroys any possible market value of the associated publicity. And being ruthless about stating it or ganging up about it just seems cruel when it’s not on *a* specific point of a thread. To simplify it in terms I wouldn’t really pick myself but I feel will be understood: there is no upside to trolling a troll.

[reply]

        The participation over time that we are discussing clearly destroys any possible market value of the associated publicity
        Though I personally agree, I was taken aback at the "any publicity is good publicity" opinions expressed recently in Re^3: Stop Using Perl.

        After performing a casual google search just now, it seems plausible to me that a non-PM-insider would find only sundialsvc4 -- which shows 16,251 experience points spread across 3606 writeups, alongside a splendid CV. Impressive.

        Remember that a non-PM-member does not see a node's rating, even a member doesn't see it until they have voted. So unless the casual searcher stumbles upon Worst Nodes, or takes the time and trouble to examine a considerable number of postings and replies in detail, they may come away with a favorable impression.

[reply]
        there is no upside to trolling a troll.

        The only way to deal with Rogue Traders, is to draw attention to their lies and double dealings, so that people don't fall for their snake-oil, golden hammers and silver bullets.

        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
[reply]

In Section Meditations