From ... Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!kibo.news.demon.net!demon!newsfeed.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.brutele.be!nmaster.kpnqwest.net!nreader2.kpnqwest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: How do you organize your source code? References: <3CD673FA.7BB80FB8@attbi.com> <86lmaw5h9j.fsf@gondolin.local.net> <87elgo7y55.fsf@noetbook.telent.net> <86adrb55kx.fsf@gondolin.local.net> <4g010rqvc.fsf@beta.franz.com> <3230067718916717@naggum.net> Mail-Copies-To: never From: Erik Naggum Message-ID: <3230115794872622@naggum.net> Organization: Naggum Software, Oslo, Norway Lines: 53 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 14:23:18 GMT X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@KPNQwest.no X-Trace: nreader2.kpnqwest.net 1021126998 193.71.199.50 (Sat, 11 May 2002 16:23:18 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 16:23:18 MET DST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:33208 * Stefan Schmiedl | You once replied to a message with "Don't post your beliefs as facts". Yes, and it appears to be in strong need of repeating to some people. | This does not need to be such a black and white decision, you know. Maybe you should apply some of your gray matter, then. | I think that you have both deep and broad knowledge of all things | concerning Lisp. But I do not think that you have patience enough to | explain things to people starting from different premises. I'm missing the part where you explain why I should care what you think. > The reason these people ask for references is that it is, precisely, a > hostile move on their part, but those who are not particularly bright, > believe it is some useful academic ritual, the failure to comply to which > is some sort of technical defeat, and so the requestor scores a point > with the leering dumb guys in the audience. Why this is valuable to > these people, I have yet to understand. "All these stupid people agree > (or laugh) with me, so I must be right"; to coin a term for this, let me > call it dumbocracy. | This last paragraph is once again a rhetorical rehearsal of your | opinion that everybody not agreeing with you is stupid. But that is not my opinion, you fucking idiot. Of course, you are so monumentally stupid that you think you can legitimately "disagree" what somebody else's opinion is, right? The one person you would never listen to is the person you have made up your mind what thinks, right? Such is the nature of the stupidity that I have a very strong distaste for, yet you guys are so fantastically retarded that you are not even aware of your stupidity. Anyone intelligent enough to read, knows that your crap here is only your own lack of intellect showing through, because I disagree with you _and_ because you _are_ unintelligent. These are quite unrelated facts. The need for you retards to keep repeating this point makes me believe that it is a powerful self-defense mechanism. "No, no, I'm not stupid, I'm just disagreeing with gravity and physics in general." | Only if you live in a hostile environment. You _are_ the hostile environment around here. Please die, Stefan. And, please, make as little noise about your exit as possible. That, too, is off-topic here, you see. The other option, to start thinking, is of course completely irrelevant to even _suggest_ to something like you. -- In a fight against something, the fight has value, victory has none. In a fight for something, the fight is a loss, victory merely relief. 70 percent of American adults do not understand the scientific process.