|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#981
November 29th 03, 10:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Should I wear a helmet?
|
| Ads |
|
#983
November 29th 03, 10:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
On 29 Nov 2003 02:19:54 -0800, (Chalo)
wrote: Chalo Colina "strutting and gobbling like a real r.b.t turkey since 1995" rec.bike.turkeys? -- Rick Onanian
|
|
#984
November 30th 03, 03:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
(Chalo) wrote in message . com... -snip- OTOH I found nothing to indicate that any of the following personae are anything other than rhetorical contrivances, freshly minted so that they could participate he "augustacycling" "jasonaut" "theallanfamily" "jharte" "chaffsk" "martynspeck" They might in fact be actual participants, but the weight of the evidence I could find (that is, none outside this thread) suggests otherwise. I'm not convinced one way or the other, but at this point they look to me like shoots sprung from the same rhizome, if you will. -snip- quote of earlier posts: (Trent Piepho) wrote: This is smelling more and more like an astro-turf campaign. All these cyclingforums posts are probably from some firm doing "viral marketing" on the behalf of bell sports. Chalo Colina:You ain't kidding. I had heard of those dirty *******s, but I think you are right that they are now in our midst. I think the weasels at bell sports should be locked into their stupid hats 24/7 until they perish of athlete's head. Carl Fogel wrote: That's what you really think, Chalo--why are you hiding it now? What does it say about your credibility? I for one still think that 'viral marjeting' is a reasonable explanation of the suspect posts. Chalo's credibility appears intact from here. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
|
#985
November 30th 03, 07:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
A Muzi wrote in message ...
(Chalo) wrote in message . com... -snip- OTOH I found nothing to indicate that any of the following personae are anything other than rhetorical contrivances, freshly minted so that they could participate he "augustacycling" "jasonaut" "theallanfamily" "jharte" "chaffsk" "martynspeck" They might in fact be actual participants, but the weight of the evidence I could find (that is, none outside this thread) suggests otherwise. I'm not convinced one way or the other, but at this point they look to me like shoots sprung from the same rhizome, if you will. -snip- quote of earlier posts: (Trent Piepho) wrote: This is smelling more and more like an astro-turf campaign. All these cyclingforums posts are probably from some firm doing "viral marketing" on the behalf of bell sports. Chalo Colina:You ain't kidding. I had heard of those dirty *******s, but I think you are right that they are now in our midst. I think the weasels at bell sports should be locked into their stupid hats 24/7 until they perish of athlete's head. Carl Fogel wrote: That's what you really think, Chalo--why are you hiding it now? What does it say about your credibility? I for one still think that 'viral marjeting' is a reasonable explanation of the suspect posts. Chalo's credibility appears intact from here. Dear Andrew, I think that where we disagree is on whether it is a reasonable or possible but completely unproven explanation. Chalo is now shuffling and boasting of his bigotry. First, he told us that people from cycling forums were liars and cheats and frauds because they disagreed with him and "barged in," as he later put, where their kind isn't wanted, "the dirty *******s." Only after that did he look for evidence. Unsurprisingly, he made a jackass of himself, given his obvious prejudice. He found some screwed-up signatures and spat and snarled at everyone involved that this proved that they were liars and frauds and cheats. The explanation, of course, was that there was a clearly visible bug--cycling forum posts without signatures erratically pick up signatures still lying in buffers when they appear in rec.bicycles.tech. Examples of such bugs appeared at different times in different threads and obviously have nothing to do with who's posting them--I listed half a dozen examples in the signature bug thread. A number of them attached Dave Ornee's signature, probably because he posts often in this area. Chalo also made a jackass of himself because he was unfamiliar with how internal cycling forums posts are invisible to outside searches. Many of the posters turned out to be posting frequently in cycling forums. I listed over 70 of them and their post counts. Other posters from cycling forums will not turn up even internally, now that the sole thread to which they posted (and were greeted with a bucket of **** in their faces by the friendly rec.bicycles.tech bigots) has been removed from cycling forums. Interestingly, cycling forums marks posts from other places like rec.bicycles.tech as coming from "guests"--rather courteous of them. Anyway, given Chalo's approach of calling names first, leaping to asinine conclusions about a signature bug, and doing a half-assed inquiry later to justify himself, do you think that any of the 25,000+ cycling forums would give him much credibility? You and I have both made jackasses of ourselves here in rec.bicycles.tech and will undoubtedly do so again. You've shown that you have the character to apologize, which gives you enormous credibility. Consider a computer class taught by Frank Krygowski with Chalo enrolled. A number of Nigerian students apply to take the class and disagree with Frank and Chalo that the C programming language is the best way to write programs. Those dirty *******s, barging in here--how dare they! It must be a viral marketing campaign from Microsoft! We've both been doing this since 1994! They have a poor command of English! They're simple-minded and so are their arguments! Isn't it suspicious that they all suddenly flood in here, talking about how Visual Basic is so good! Nigerians are all known to write scam letters! They've never tried to enroll all at once before like this! I once caught two students cheating in another class! Their student ID cards have something that looks funny! Oh, the registrar screwed up? Well, never mind, they're still liars, cheats, and frauds--no one could honestly prefer Visual Basic! And now the Nigerian government won't pay for them to enroll in this class! And the Nigerian government won't answer our questions now or even talk to us! I can't find a few of them after I spat in their faces, so they must all be liars, frauds, and cheats! And neither of us is a racist bigot because it's all possible! And where did I ever call them liars, cheats, and frauds--I've lost my records, it isn't important, no one cares, and you'd better be specific when you accuse me! Substitute helmets for programming and cycling forums for Nigeria, and that's a fair description of their arguments in the helmet thread. All I did was summarize their drivel, point by point. Why, you and I can recall one cycling forum poster being accused of being a fraud because he wasn't curt enough to be a credible police officer--but you had the grace to take a second look at what you were saying, decided that your accusation was unfair, and said so. Note that Chalo is concerned about being "compelled" to apologize. No apology worth making is compelled. (Does anyone think that I can "compel" Andrew Muzi to apologize by tapping on a keyboard?) It's a question of admitting that you wronged someone and wish that you hadn't. Whether there was a "viral marketing campaign" is not really the question. What matters is how we act and how we treat other posters. We can all afford arrogance and nastiness. Unfortunately, character and courtesy are more expensive. Again, I hope that I'll be able to imitate your behavior on the inevitable day when I hear that loud popping noise as my head comes out of my ass again and I realize that I've behaved shamefully and owe people an apology. I'm afraid that it's getting harder and harder for Frank and Chalo to do that. It has nothing to do with helmets, or even whether someone might have lied. Of course there "may" have been a fraud--but there's no doubt about who has been acting like a pack of vicious bigots. Carl Fogel
|
|
#986
November 30th 03, 08:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
(Carl Fogel) wrote:
(Chalo) wrote: I think the weasels at bell sports should be locked into their stupid hats 24/7 until they perish of athlete's head. That's what you really think, Chalo--why are you hiding it now? I've not changed my mind about the weasels at Bell Sports-- only about my previous supposition that the entire anonymous flock from cyclingforums were acting on their behalf. When this thread started, there had not been enough volume of postings here from cyclingforums.com for me to have taken note of that domain. So when folks from there began piling into this thread by the baker's dozen, without any history on Usenet, sporting obviously forged sigs, just to say what had already been said scores of times, why was it unreasonable of me to assume them to be frauds? Those of us who have continued to follow this thread now recognize that most of the clues by which the questionable participants can be judged fraudulent are due to the idiosyncrasies of the cyclingforums user and Usenet interfaces. When I say that cyclingforums is not sufficiently well-managed to be cross-posted here, I am referring to the fact that it is not feasibly possible, using their user interface, to determine what points have already been addressed in a large thread, or to maintain any reasonable order to the discussion beyond direct replies to the OP. Anybody using a newsreader or Deja-Google can do better than that, and already expects better than that from newsgroups that have developed communities around them, such as r.b.t. Chalo Colina
|
|
#987
December 1st 03, 06:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
(Chalo) wrote in message . com...
(Carl Fogel) wrote: (Chalo) wrote: I think the weasels at bell sports should be locked into their stupid hats 24/7 until they perish of athlete's head. That's what you really think, Chalo--why are you hiding it now? I've not changed my mind about the weasels at Bell Sports-- only about my previous supposition that the entire anonymous flock from cyclingforums were acting on their behalf. When this thread started, there had not been enough volume of postings here from cyclingforums.com for me to have taken note of that domain. So when folks from there began piling into this thread by the baker's dozen, without any history on Usenet, sporting obviously forged sigs, just to say what had already been said scores of times, why was it unreasonable of me to assume them to be frauds? Those of us who have continued to follow this thread now recognize that most of the clues by which the questionable participants can be judged fraudulent are due to the idiosyncrasies of the cyclingforums user and Usenet interfaces. When I say that cyclingforums is not sufficiently well-managed to be cross-posted here, I am referring to the fact that it is not feasibly possible, using their user interface, to determine what points have already been addressed in a large thread, or to maintain any reasonable order to the discussion beyond direct replies to the OP. Anybody using a newsreader or Deja-Google can do better than that, and already expects better than that from newsgroups that have developed communities around them, such as r.b.t. Chalo Colina Dear Chalo, It don't wash, buddy. If you ever wanted any credibility in this thread, you managed to choose exactly the way to undermine it completely. That, however, is no coincidence. Anybody who believes your crap probably answers those emailed money-making opportunities from Nigeria too. Just get out of here. We don't need you stinking up the place with your deceit. (In case you don't remember, that's actually a quote from one of your typical posts before you began to wriggle. This is what you're proud of? You owe no apology to the cycling forum posters for this and the rest of your behavior?) Carl Fogel
|
|
#988
December 1st 03, 10:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
|
|
#989
December 2nd 03, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
|
|
#990
December 2nd 03, 02:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Should I wear a helmet?
Carl Fogel wrote:
Dear Frank, Here's the rest of your post, since you seem to be wriggling: Carl, I though you said you were an English teacher. Although my field is much different, I can often spot cheating this way: when two or more students turn in work with the same weird mistake. I think this is what we've seen from Cyclingforums. Not every post, true, but _many_ of the posts had the same poor command of English. For example, are you claiming Cyclingforums has a bug that somehow prohibits the use of paragraphs? I'll concede that the duplicated "logic" ("I know a guy who rode dumb and hit his head, so _everybody_ should _always_ wear a helment") could result from a sort of chain-reaction inspiration ("Hey, I know a dumb guy too!"). But even if someone were inspired to copy the logic, why would they copy the deficient writing style? Why would they punctuate badly in the same ways? Last year, two of my students turned in almost perfectly identical computer programs, line by line. They claimed it was coincidence. I didn't buy that story, either. Are you really claiming that this does not accuse "_many_ of the posts" of being liars, frauds, and cheats? What did you mean when you likened the cycling forums posts to a pair of students who turned in identical programs and you didn't buy their story that it was coincidence? Carl, I was, and am, suspicious that many of those posts were not genuine. I realize that you are completely convinced that each and every one was posted by a unique helmet missionary, but I am not. No, I can't prove that some posts were "sockpuppets" (a term I never heard until this discussion); but IMO, you have not proven that none of them were. What we're left with is a discussion about suspicions. When I stated my suspicions, and I explained them with suitable care. You may disagree, but I suspect you and I disagree on other matters as well - for example, on whether you are the final arbiter of Usenet etiquette. However, in my book, a suspicion is not an accusation; and I've seen no evidence that anyone feels I've somehow wronged them. If someone feels that way, I assume they'll let me know without hiring you as a verbose intermediary. Here's what you wrote on November 6th: I realize that post came from cyclingforums, and is therefore almost certainly another sockpuppet example. What did you mean to imply if not that the post was written by a fraud, liar, or cheat? If you want the name of the poster, please look it up yourself through google.groups. You apparently have a _very_ large amount of time available for Usenet research. I have other priorities. But I'll note that your list of Cyclingforums posters contains a rather large number that were "conceived" since this thread started. Of those, quite a few posted once and were gone. Was my post, which you quoted, referring to one of them? Then it may, indeed, have been correct speculation. Was it referring to someone you've indicated was "real"? Then my speculation was probably in error. If my speculation was in error, must I apologize? Again, I see no evidence I've hurt anyone's feelings. If that changes, I'll act as I deem appropriate. That may include an apology - but it may not. Usenet is a tough crowd, and its customs differ from most other forums. In any case, the matter will be between me and the offended person. You need not be involved. Here's what you wrote on November 23rd: My guess is that the poorly-disguised sockpuppet posts are not some company's conspiracy. My guess is that they're the product of one (or a few) safety zealots who think they're doing the world some good. We've seen this before. A couple years ago, there was one pro-helmet guy who had two or three accounts. He was a regular poster, but never signed his name. Eventually, he was caught "agreeing with" his own posts - that is, posting a follow up from another account saying how perceptive his previous post was. Missionary zeal leads to some strange behavior indeed. The lies are all white lies, in the missionary's view; they're all for a higher cause. If you aren't calling the cycling forums posters liars, cheats, and frauds, what are you calling them with your "guessing," your example of a fraud (unnamed as with all your posts in thismatter) caught years ago pretending to be several different people, and your talk of "lies"? When you say "calling the cycling forums posters liars, cheats and frauds", you state that without qualification. I take that to mean you're referring to _all_ such posters. You (should) know perfectly well that my suspicions were, and are, directed at a subset of those posts and their authors - or their author. Don't overstate your case, weak as it is. And yes, I have seen this behavior before. Should I post the name of the person who was caught posting from multiple accounts and "agreeing with" his own posts? Well, it would take me some research time to find the name. But if I did, it seems obvious that you'd then accuse me of slander - and probably do hours of your own web research hoping to exonerate that person. While it's tempting to set you on another quest, it seems to me that exposing that person's name to further shame does no public good. I don't believe he posts to rec.bike anymore, anyway. In summary: I'll acknowledge that your detective work exonerated some apparent sockpuppets. Others remain suspicious. Stating that they remain suspicious is not equivalent to the offenses you wrongly accuse me of - "calling someone a fraud, liar, or cheat." And if anyone is offended, it's a matter between them and me. You hold no position of authority. Drop the matter. -- Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Reports from Sweden | Garry Jones | General | 17 | October 14th 03 05:23 PM |
| Reports from Sweden | Garry Jones | Social Issues | 14 | October 14th 03 05:23 PM |
| Winter hat to wear under a helmet? | Sanjay Punjab | General | 9 | September 4th 03 03:47 AM |
| How I cracked my helmet | Rick Warner | General | 2 | July 12th 03 11:26 AM |
Linear Mode
