Bookmark this page:
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> >Well no, Sam.
> >I truly appreciate your attemps,
> >and I do feel that there is a place in a public forum
> >for announcements of general utility.
> >I truly appreciate your attemps,
> >and I do feel that there is a place in a public forum
> >for announcements of general utility.
>
>
> Ah, there's your problem.
>
> A pointer to the newsgroup charter would be an announcement of general
> utility.
>
> The paper at issue here was not a "general announcement". It is
> material of specific relevance to those who are interested in the
> science and engineering that underlie GPS and similar systems.
>
> Ah, there's your problem.
>
> A pointer to the newsgroup charter would be an announcement of general
> utility.
>
> The paper at issue here was not a "general announcement". It is
> material of specific relevance to those who are interested in the
> science and engineering that underlie GPS and similar systems.
Yes, that's what I said. Such announcements may be appropriate,
if some care goes into making them.
Or are you deliberately misreading?
'General' of course refers to the readership of this forum, in general.
> >However, I also think that whoever does so
> >should respect his audience,
> >and take some trouble selecting, editing, and explaining
> >why the posting maybe of use.
> >should respect his audience,
> >and take some trouble selecting, editing, and explaining
> >why the posting maybe of use.
>
>
> It is the reader's responsibility to assess his own levels of interest
> and expertise and decide for himself what information posted here is
> relevant to his needs and within his understanding. Authors are not
> obligated to make sure every reader has the prerequisite knowledge to
> understand the content or relevance of each and every post.
>
> It is the reader's responsibility to assess his own levels of interest
> and expertise and decide for himself what information posted here is
> relevant to his needs and within his understanding. Authors are not
> obligated to make sure every reader has the prerequisite knowledge to
> understand the content or relevance of each and every post.
Author's of announcements of this kind shouldn't just dragandrop.
They should bother to evaluate what they are announcing,
and indicate briefly for the benefit of their readers
in a few lines what it is about,
and why the announcement may be particularly interesting.
You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
would you?
> With your first reply in this thread, you clearly identified yourself
> as *not* part of the intended audience of the paper in question. The
> appropriate response would have been to ignore it, just as untold
> numbers of other readers are doing right now, or *ask* why it's
> relevant rather than argue about it. Sam is *really good* at
> answering questions.
> as *not* part of the intended audience of the paper in question. The
> appropriate response would have been to ignore it, just as untold
> numbers of other readers are doing right now, or *ask* why it's
> relevant rather than argue about it. Sam is *really good* at
> answering questions.
You apparently failed to notice that my first comment
is a meaningful reflection and comment
upon the content of the paper in question.
(which may be of use to others who haven't looked at the paper yet)
That some of the noisybodies here will start shouting
at any occasion that presents itself isn't my responsibility.
Best,
Jan
On Mon, 9 May 2005 09:41:53 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
>which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>would you?
>which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>would you?
If they are on-topic according to the newsgroup charter, they're
welcome here. Personally, I'd be more likely to read them than
another one of the "which unit should I buy" threads.
But what I "[would or] wouldn't want" is irrelevant. I don't own this
newsgroup or set its rules. Neither do you, but you can always
initiate your own RFD to change the charter. I wouldn't expect much
support if I were you, but at least that would be the appropriate
first step in demanding that writers here submit messages that meet
with your satisfaction.
If I'm obfuscating the issue by being too civil, please let me know.
>You apparently failed to notice that my first comment
>is a meaningful reflection and comment
>upon the content of the paper in question.
>is a meaningful reflection and comment
>upon the content of the paper in question.
We can certainly agree on that. You should expect that failure of
mine to continue for quite some time (see
--
Chuck Taylor
http://home.hiwaay.net/~taylorc/contact/
> On Mon, 9 May 2005 09:41:53 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
>
> Lodder) wrote:
>
> >You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
> >which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
> >would you?
> >which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
> >would you?
>
>
> If they are on-topic according to the newsgroup charter, they're
> welcome here.
>
> If they are on-topic according to the newsgroup charter, they're
> welcome here.
On that we disagree.
Not everything that can be posted should be posted.
(And fortunately it isn't)
> Personally, I'd be more likely to read them than
> another one of the "which unit should I buy" threads.
> another one of the "which unit should I buy" threads.
On that we agree.
There is relatively little 'sci.geo' left in this group.
Much of the content there is would be better placed
in one of the alt...gps... groups.
Perhaps the Followup-To: should be set more often.
But I don't think that haphazardly dumping in
an abstract of a paper every now and then
is the cure.
> >You apparently failed to notice that my first comment
> >is a meaningful reflection and comment
> >upon the content of the paper in question.
> >is a meaningful reflection and comment
> >upon the content of the paper in question.
>
> We can certainly agree on that. You should expect that failure of
> mine to continue for quite some time (see
> We can certainly agree on that. You should expect that failure of
> mine to continue for quite some time (see
I've seen it when you posted it,
and noted that you tried to make your point
by creating a false impression
by snipping the relevant line of my posting.
Therefore I didn't think it useful to react,
for I doubted your willingness to debate fairly.
Best,
Jan
On Tue, 10 May 2005 10:27:30 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>> On Mon, 9 May 2005 09:41:53 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
>> Lodder) wrote:
>>
>> Lodder) wrote:
>>
>> >You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
>> >which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>> >would you?
>> >which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>> >would you?
>>
>>
>> If they are on-topic according to the newsgroup charter, they're
>> welcome here.
>>
>> If they are on-topic according to the newsgroup charter, they're
>> welcome here.
>On that we disagree.
>Not everything that can be posted should be posted.
>(And fortunately it isn't)
>Not everything that can be posted should be posted.
>(And fortunately it isn't)
>> Personally, I'd be more likely to read them than
>> another one of the "which unit should I buy" threads.
>> another one of the "which unit should I buy" threads.
>On that we agree.
>There is relatively little 'sci.geo' left in this group.
>Much of the content there is would be better placed
>in one of the alt...gps... groups.
>Perhaps the Followup-To: should be set more often.
>But I don't think that haphazardly dumping in
>an abstract of a paper every now and then
>is the cure.
>There is relatively little 'sci.geo' left in this group.
>Much of the content there is would be better placed
>in one of the alt...gps... groups.
>Perhaps the Followup-To: should be set more often.
>But I don't think that haphazardly dumping in
>an abstract of a paper every now and then
>is the cure.
What qualifies a non-contributor like you to critique Sam's
postings? Often they're quietly accepted and considered without
comment. Far more often than not, they begin a chain of comments,
criticisms and general analysis of the contents. It hasn't happened
here (or in some oher instances) because you, with your infantile,
control-freak rants, have completely hijacked the thread for your own
purposes.
Quit being so childish and go sit in your room until you can
come out and make an adult contribution.
>> >You apparently failed to notice that my first comment
>> >is a meaningful reflection and comment
>> >upon the content of the paper in question.
>> >is a meaningful reflection and comment
>> >upon the content of the paper in question.
>>
>> We can certainly agree on that. You should expect that failure of
>> mine to continue for quite some time (see
>> We can certainly agree on that. You should expect that failure of
>> mine to continue for quite some time (see
>I've seen it when you posted it,
>and noted that you tried to make your point
>by creating a false impression
>by snipping the relevant line of my posting.
>Therefore I didn't think it useful to react,
>for I doubted your willingness to debate fairly.
>Best,
>Jan
>and noted that you tried to make your point
>by creating a false impression
>by snipping the relevant line of my posting.
>Therefore I didn't think it useful to react,
>for I doubted your willingness to debate fairly.
>Best,
>Jan
On Mon, 9 May 2005 09:41:53 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>> On Sun, 8 May 2005 10:55:52 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
>> Lodder) wrote:
>>
>> Lodder) wrote:
>>
>> >Well no, Sam.
>> >I truly appreciate your attemps,
>> >and I do feel that there is a place in a public forum
>> >for announcements of general utility.
>> >I truly appreciate your attemps,
>> >and I do feel that there is a place in a public forum
>> >for announcements of general utility.
>>
>>
>> Ah, there's your problem.
>>
>> A pointer to the newsgroup charter would be an announcement of general
>> utility.
>>
>> The paper at issue here was not a "general announcement". It is
>> material of specific relevance to those who are interested in the
>> science and engineering that underlie GPS and similar systems.
>>
>> Ah, there's your problem.
>>
>> A pointer to the newsgroup charter would be an announcement of general
>> utility.
>>
>> The paper at issue here was not a "general announcement". It is
>> material of specific relevance to those who are interested in the
>> science and engineering that underlie GPS and similar systems.
>Yes, that's what I said. Such announcements may be appropriate,
>if some care goes into making them.
>Or are you deliberately misreading?
>'General' of course refers to the readership of this forum, in general.
>if some care goes into making them.
>Or are you deliberately misreading?
>'General' of course refers to the readership of this forum, in general.
>> >However, I also think that whoever does so
>> >should respect his audience,
>> >and take some trouble selecting, editing, and explaining
>> >why the posting maybe of use.
>> >should respect his audience,
>> >and take some trouble selecting, editing, and explaining
>> >why the posting maybe of use.
>>
>>
>> It is the reader's responsibility to assess his own levels of interest
>> and expertise and decide for himself what information posted here is
>> relevant to his needs and within his understanding. Authors are not
>> obligated to make sure every reader has the prerequisite knowledge to
>> understand the content or relevance of each and every post.
>>
>> It is the reader's responsibility to assess his own levels of interest
>> and expertise and decide for himself what information posted here is
>> relevant to his needs and within his understanding. Authors are not
>> obligated to make sure every reader has the prerequisite knowledge to
>> understand the content or relevance of each and every post.
>Author's of announcements of this kind shouldn't just dragandrop.
>They should bother to evaluate what they are announcing,
>and indicate briefly for the benefit of their readers
>in a few lines what it is about,
>and why the announcement may be particularly interesting.
>You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
>which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>would you?
>They should bother to evaluate what they are announcing,
>and indicate briefly for the benefit of their readers
>in a few lines what it is about,
>and why the announcement may be particularly interesting.
>You wouldn't want the summaries of all papers in geophysics
>which happen to have the letters GPS in them posted here,
>would you?
>> With your first reply in this thread, you clearly identified yourself
>> as *not* part of the intended audience of the paper in question. The
>> appropriate response would have been to ignore it, just as untold
>> numbers of other readers are doing right now, or *ask* why it's
>> relevant rather than argue about it. Sam is *really good* at
>> answering questions.
>> as *not* part of the intended audience of the paper in question. The
>> appropriate response would have been to ignore it, just as untold
>> numbers of other readers are doing right now, or *ask* why it's
>> relevant rather than argue about it. Sam is *really good* at
>> answering questions.
>You apparently failed to notice that my first comment
>is a meaningful reflection and comment
>upon the content of the paper in question.
>(which may be of use to others who haven't looked at the paper yet)
>That some of the noisybodies here will start shouting
>at any occasion that presents itself isn't my responsibility.
>Best,
>Jan
>is a meaningful reflection and comment
>upon the content of the paper in question.
>(which may be of use to others who haven't looked at the paper yet)
>That some of the noisybodies here will start shouting
>at any occasion that presents itself isn't my responsibility.
>Best,
>Jan
More passive-aggressive BS.
- Opinion about buying a Gps
- Garmin GPS
- 2009-12-15
- 8 Free GPS eBooks Download
- Magellan GPS
- 2008-07-08
> Lodder) wrote:
>