Subject: Re: 3 Lisps, 3 Ways of Specifying OS
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:25:21 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Message-ID: <3212771120829985@naggum.net>

  This message was obviously mis-sent to me by mail, so I post it on behalf
  of the poster:

Return-Path: <rsi@panix.com>
Received: from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.0.212])
	by naggum.no with ESMTP id <f9MKCoDh024580>
	for <erik@naggum.net>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 20:12:52 GMT
Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [166.84.1.2])
	by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736BC48766
	for <erik@naggum.net>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:12:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from rsi@localhost)
	by panix2.panix.com (8.11.3nb1/8.8.8/PanixN1.0) id f9MKCi826485;
	Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:12:44 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200110222012.f9MKCi826485@panix2.panix.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: panix2.panix.com: rsi set sender to rsi@panix.com using -f
Sender: rsi@panix.com
To: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.net>
Subject: Re: 3 Lisps, 3 Ways of Specifying OS
References: <18e1cdb3.0110152113.1cb2e998@posting.google.com>
	<87pu7noko1.fsf@balder.seapine.com>
	<MPG.1635df64aafbe8d79896c5@news.dnai.com>
	<87hesznkj6.fsf@balder.seapine.com> <3212277220965737@naggum.net>
	<4n12qwxty.fsf@beta.franz.com> <3212342927708991@naggum.net>
	<%0nz7.7335$W61.626365@news20.bellglobal.com>
	<87k7xtm69r.fsf@balder.seapine.com>
	<U%5A7.10228$3v.1915821@news20.bellglobal.com>
	<873d4dtifz.fsf@photino.sid.rice.edu>
	<n7ylmi47orb.fsf@panix2.panix.com> <3212689347044644@naggum.net>
	<n7yitd87hjm.fsf@panix2.panix.com> <3212703023718136@naggum.net>
	<n7yhessb7g1.fsf@panix1.panix.com> <3212737311524746@naggum.net>
	<n7y3d4bveb4.fsf@panix2.panix.com> <3212769195955123@naggum.net>
From: Rajappa Iyer <rsi@panix.com>
Date: 22 Oct 2001 16:12:44 -0400
Reply-To: rsi@panix.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.net> writes:

> * Rajappa Iyer
> | On the contrary, Erik, you are the one that doesn't have a clue.
> 
>   You admit to being vague because all this is two years old (what have I
>   been saying about your "experiences" and the dishonesty of using stale
>   painful experiences to _continue_ to post negative comments about
>   something?) and that you have no specific examples to back up your claim.
>   I already knew that, but it is good to see that you admit to this.
> 
>   This leaves us with a very simple, straightforward conclusion: There is
>   absolutely no reason to believe anything you say.  You are simply too
>   much of a dishonest person to have any credibility at all.  Until and
>   unless you can show us exactly what you did and exactly what happened,
>   your whole set of experiences falls in the category of "idiot operator
>   error".  Blame whoever you want, every honest person has to conclude that
>   it was your own goddamn fault.  _No_ system can be so fool-proof that a
>   self-destructive, lying, angry fool cannot find something to blame it for.
> 
>   Only good thing is it was a Linux and not a Common Lisp system that you
>   mistreated so badly that your hatred was misdirected towards Common Lisp.
>   There have been enough dishonest lunatics just like you who have been so
>   angry about their failure to understand what they are doing in Common
>   Lisp that they publish books about it.  It is fortunate for Debian that
>   you are unlikely to be capable of such demanding intellectual endeavors.

Do you do this to embarass your parents?

rsi
-- 
<rsi@panix.com> a.k.a. Rajappa Iyer.
	They also surf who stand in the waves.