Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.
4897 messages in 209 discussions
Latest 6/19/20 by Jenifer (Zarknorph)
826 messages in 15 discussions
Latest Nov-18 by ElDotardo
17319 messages in 771 discussions
Latest Nov-2 by Finkel Media (mahjong54)
G=G+1 for already explaied. However for those with blinders and/or short attention span. If someone goes to the trouble of posting to me (or pretends to for the benefit of others) it is considered polite to respond, and not just ignore it as you seem to do by focusing on some trivia while avoiding the message (example by definition your use of "euphenism" to make a negativ more negative is a misues of the word - by point which you still hav not responded to, inspite of all the posts you have sent to me that miss the point which is if <EU>phenism is 180º wrong, then the logical opposit would be <<CACA>>phnism, two recognized Greek prefixes meaning good and bad. So insead of wasting my time repeating previous responses to such posts, I save myself the necessity of repeating myself the "G" post which is only a negative if you don´t challenge it by justifying your post to which it is a response -- try it some time you might learn something. When it comes to associating "insult" to my macro, you are ignoring the fact that I said it is not, but just a message giving you an opportunity, instead of playing the poor me, I choose to be insulted game. No, I don´t have to have known because my secrety knows what I have posted, therefor knows that your response does not connect. She hits the macro to save me time. Yes, if you responded to the macro it would mean you consider yourself right, but without justifying your opinion, with evidence or facts, you have faile to negate the "G=G+1" by getting a "G=G-1" which lowers your G score.
You have stated that G=G+1 is an automated response.
That is SPAM.
I have said in the rules that SPAM will be deleted on sight.
I have amended those rules to include your annoying macro.
SPAM will be deleted on sight. This includes "automated responses". Your macro system may be ingenious to you, but it's SPAM to everyone else.
You are not qualifiaed to speak for your imaginary everybody else. In addition, as per usual, your language skills are lacking because my definition of "spam" supported by a dictionary is very different then yours. Example: unsolicited usually commercial messages (such as e-mails, text messages, or Internet postings) sent to a large number of recipients or posted in a large number of places (Webster). So lets analyze my "G=G+1" it is solicited because it is a responce to a post from you, it is not comercial. It is sent to you not to a large number of people. Just because it is an automatic response, does not make it spam because it is motivated by your post. If you enter "cheap (airline) tickets" you get an automatic response based on your entry e.g. this is not spam. Even if later "cheap tickets" advertises some special deal, it is not spam because it is motivated by your initial entry.
G=G+1, with a potential more "G"´s to come because I doubt if you can respond to my request for your definition supported by anything but your weak language skills and imagination.
OK lets here your definition to see how your opinión matches up with reality.
Goss is a teacher - with his spelling I would not send my dead hamster to be taught by him , what does he teach other than to talk bollocks for which I am sure he can show several diplomas
I will do the democratic thing and take a poll.
If you lose, your macro is banned.
If you win, be as pedantic and insufferable as you want.
The poll is here.
There is nothing necessarily democratic about a poll. As such it may have validity if the terms are clear to a valid sample of a given population.
As such, your poll does not meet this criteria. So the results eitherway are not valid as its use by you to act as censor. What you are doing is attempting to ban
free speech, based on the fact that you <<CHOOSE>> to feel insulted by what is in effect a response to negative posts, from yourself. in fact far more negative
and insulting. If this was the real world where you were a judge, you would have to recuse yourself because you are setting yourself up as a judge, prosecutor, and plaintif.
Actually, I am doing what you asked.
You said other people being annoyed was a figment of my imagination.
As it is impossible for me to vote twice in one poll, this will prove either you correct, or me.
And censorship happens all throughout Delphi.
The default settings of this forum prohibit certain words, because it is commonly considered that they are offensive to people.
I simply wish to add your Macro to the list of filtered words.
You are simply a name, the others without names are imaginary.
Your problem is not my macro it is the fact that the majority of your posts to me are invalid and I am calling you on it.,
To justify "G=G+1" to be filtered, you have to respond to one "G" to prove why it is an inappropriate response.
Still waiting for you to do so - try "euphenism" used as an example of its opposite.
I agree that macroer is very aggravating, self-important, arrogant and "smirky". However, my personal opinion is that it's not right to ban someone from the forum simply for being a jerk. If you did that, you'd lose at least 2 more members (maybe me included).
By the same standard, her arrogance in her responses, would get her banned by the same criteria.
Examples: the Word "euphenism" suggests a nicer way of saying something not so nice, but when I commented that to put a thing in a worse light, she only responded by saying, incorrectly, that my example included a Word that was not a Word. When I explained the difference between unique and uniquely (which she objected to as invalid), she ignored my response, and returned with an off topic response. In both cases this is not only rude but negative. I only use the "G" response after I have already complained politely but am ignored as she repeats the same error. This is not an example of arrogance or self-importance, it is merely the way a childish person should be treated, when they repeat an offence after having having its inappropriateness explained to them.
As an example, have I ever sent a "macroer" to you? If so what was it in response to?