Subject: Re: looking for books on scraping and flaking

From: [email-masked] (Alan Frisbie)
Date: 26 Jan 96 13:49:53 PST

In article <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked] writes:

<lots of totally unjustified attacks on Dale deleted>

I find it odd that the only posts justifying the anti-social
behavior of Mr./Ms. Lbliao are from two people who have never
posted anything else to rec.crafts.metalworking, nor appear
to have even read the very helpful technical postings in this
group.   Also, the most recent one is the first anonymous posting
ever made (two times, identically) to this group, making it
entirely possible that it is the same person.

Given that, I think it is safe to simply ignore them until they
demonstrate an honest interest in the actual craft of metalworking,
and in a pleasant manner.   If we all refuse to reply to 
impolite postings, we can keep this group as one of the
shining examples of what Usenet *can* be.

I am always happy and willing to help anyone (including these
people) who actually *participates* in this group in a polite,
socially acceptable manner.   But I am far too busy to help those
with a "gimme, gimme, gimme" attitude, or who make attacks like
we have just seen.   Someday they will learn that they can get
far more by being nice to others than by being obnoxious.

I wonder if Mr./Ms. Lbliao ever bothered to read my posting
about machine tool rebuilding classes?   That would certainly
have given him/her all the training in hand scraping that
anyone could ever hope for.

--  Alan E. Frisbie               [email-masked]
--  Flying Disk Systems, Inc.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 12:14:03 UTC

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Dale A. Keltie )
writes:
>
>In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (A. Abid)
>writes: 
>>
>>In article <[email-masked]>,
>
>>I don't see what problem you have with the posts of this person. THere
>are
>>so many ads on this news group, that are commercial in nature, that I
>do not
>>see any problem. There is much greater bandwidth taken by postings in
>other
>>news groups such as alt.sex etc. It is perhaps the person did not get
>any
>>reply. It is also possible that you or other people want to suppress
>certain
>>kind of Info to be distributed publicly, probably your proprietary
>info.
>>
>>Any way shut up this childish nonsene and get on with your life.
>>
>>abid
>
>
>Adid -
>
>Does Cal. Tech. offer a course in common manners?  Do they offer group
>rates on tuition?  If so, perhaps you and your pal lbliao should
>consider an (apparently) new academic adventure.

Mr. Keltie, on the contrary do you have any manners? The way you are
spewing out this unintelligible verbiage full of assumptions tells us
something about you. Who appointed you to be the policeman or priest
of this newsgroup?

>One of the objectives of newsgroups such as this is the interchange of
>information and opinion of interest to all who participate.  Much of

I contacted the person by email, and they did not receive any responses.
You then posted about the number of times the person posted the message.
If what you say above is your intention, then you should be thankful for
the multiple postings, because that is getting answers.

>that information, especially that acquired in the experience of those
>posting responses to technical questions, can be damned difficult, time
>consuming, and expensive to obtain from other resources.  Responses to
>questions posed (or in lbliao's case, ill-posed) 

who are you to decide the ill-posedness? I think that you should be able
to understand a simple english phrase, "looking for books on 
scraping and flaking" and the subsequent message, if you had primary
school education in the US. Or, is the standard of education too low?

>here are generally
>posted here, rather than e-mailed, so all participants can benefit from
>those responses and the ad hoc forum, albiet temporary, thus created. 

I agree, but can you understand that a poster can only reply when he/she
gets a reply. Further, many people do not have internet posting access, as
I do not. You can always send email to any original poster to see if they
got any replies.

>I suspect 

This word probably characterizes you. Not everyone thinks like you.

>lbliao simply posts (and re-posts) his questions here, as
>well as to at least one other technically oriented newsgroup I read,
>and then, somewhat arrogantly I think, expects an e-mail overflow of
>response.  As opposed to the persom whom you chose to attack (a
>frequent CONTRIBUTOR to this newsgroup), I have never seen a newsgroup
>post from lbliao, here or in sci.engr.mech, that I would regard as

again you are making a grave assumption. I do not know about your IQ, but
many people do not have posting facility. Further, many people like to 
help privately. I do reply to many people privately. Most of the people
posting are what I would call "agents", (a too strong term) of the businesses
that profit from these newsgroups. These are junk sellers, selling eg many old
books for exorbitent prices for the quality of the material; auctioneers
who benefit from gathering as many people as possible. If any one of them
denies/lies they have no business interest, then there is no way to prove it.
But I do not know how these people are supporting themselves when they have
so much time for posting. They are trying to create a false enthusiasm about
a field, that is a very old art. Now, I would not say this about a newsgroup
like the one on TeX, which has genuinely useful information posted, and
is virtually free for anyone who has ftp access. Most people there are
those who are writing their thesis, and share information in the way of
this occupation.

>contributory in nature.  He doesn't even take the time to clarify an
>ill-posed question when the confusion generated by that question would
>be readily apparent to a reader of attempted answers (e.g., that
>"flats" thing; I don't think anyone really knows what the Hell he was
>babbling 

your language tells your character

>about even now).  That, I believe, is because he doesn't
>trouble himself to read the generally numerous articles that other
>people troubled themselves to write in response to his questions. I
>think you and lbliao should trouble yourselves to go back several days
>in this newsgroup, and in sci.engr.mech, and look at the number of
>responses to lbliao's most recent question.  No Adid, you needn't
>expend the effort to read them, just count 'em.  Then ask yourselves
>just how perfectly idiotic 

masterpiece!

>your remarks must seem to people who have
>read those responses, and especially to the people who took the time to
>post one.
>
>Cal. Tech. has one of the most prestigious engineering libraries on the
>face of the earth by the way, have you or lbliao ever seen it?  Check
>it out (go inside).
>
>Regards, Dale  

Well you might want to post a little about their libraries, since I plan
to go there for grad school.

No Regards, as long as you try to be the policeman in this group!
Lennart Johnson
--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION***
Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED.
Please, report inappropriate use to                [email-masked]
For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to    [email-masked]
If you have any problems, address them to          [email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Russ Kepler)
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 19:53:25 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>shining examples of what Usenet *can* be.

I came to that conclusion about only one poster to date (you can guess
which) and hope that I'll not have to again.

>far more by being nice to others than by being obnoxious.

I'm afraid that as long as people like that can find a new group to
victimize they'll always consider themselves a winner.

>anyone could ever hope for.

I only wish such a class would be given locally (New Mexico).  I'm
about to start looking for a retired rebuilder to hit with questions.

-- 
Russ Kepler posting from home  [email-masked]

                      Please don't feed the Engineers