On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:54:46 +0100
Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>
wrote:

> On 08/01/15 21:15, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > so maybe it's better to ask me and/or try to figure out my behavioral patterns before telling me that i'm alienating newcomers? maybe i have a solid reasons for acting like this...
> 
> Thing is, you weren't obliged to reply to him at all, and it's not like he was singling out as the target of his question.
> 
> If you've decided you don't like him or his question, why not just leave it be, let others reply as they will, and not spend any of your time on it?
am i fobidding someone to reply? O_O

but yes, i want to create an impression that timewasters are not welcome.

On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 20:56:40 +0000
Tobias Pankrath via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 20:15:50 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > but i can't see any reason to try to help someone who doesn't
> > even know
> > what he wants, and didn't take time to ask a proper question.
> > been
> > there, seen that. trying to refine such questions and/or answer
> > to 'em
> > is just a waste of time, he will make everyone who's trying to
> > figure
> > out what he *really* wants sick and then he will go away.
> >
> 
> I'd prefer if you would respond to such people by staying quiet. This has several advantages:
> 
>      • No one accuses you of scaring newbros away
>      • It does not take any of your time
>      • You won't get sick
>      • Only people that spend to much time here in the first place
> will invest in answering the question*
> 
> Disadvantages: None.
i read your opinion. and happily ignored it.

On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 21:03:09 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 20:56:40 +0000
> Tobias Pankrath via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 20:15:50 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> > but i can't see any reason to try to help someone who doesn't even know
>> > what he wants, and didn't take time to ask a proper question. been
>> > there, seen that. trying to refine such questions and/or answer to 'em
>> > is just a waste of time, he will make everyone who's trying to figure
>> > out what he *really* wants sick and then he will go away.
>> >
>> 
>> I'd prefer if you would respond to such people by staying quiet. This has several advantages:
>> 
>>      • No one accuses you of scaring newbros away
>>      • It does not take any of your time
>>      • You won't get sick
>>      • Only people that spend to much time here in the first place will invest in answering the question*
>> 
>> Disadvantages: None.
> i read your opinion. and happily ignored it.

just gtfo ketmar... just do it.

On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:11:47 +0000
market via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 21:03:09 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 20:56:40 +0000
> > Tobias Pankrath via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 20:15:50 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >> > but i can't see any reason to try to help someone who
> >> > doesn't even know
> >> > what he wants, and didn't take time to ask a proper
> >> > question. been
> >> > there, seen that. trying to refine such questions and/or
> >> > answer to 'em
> >> > is just a waste of time, he will make everyone who's trying
> >> > to figure
> >> > out what he *really* wants sick and then he will go away.
> >> >
> >> 
> >> I'd prefer if you would respond to such people by staying quiet. This has several advantages:
> >> 
> >>      • No one accuses you of scaring newbros away
> >>      • It does not take any of your time
> >>      • You won't get sick
> >>      • Only people that spend to much time here in the first
> >> place will invest in answering the question*
> >> 
> >> Disadvantages: None.
> > i read your opinion. and happily ignored it.
> 
> just gtfo ketmar... just do it.
hello, honey! i really miss you! i hope you're ok. please, don't leave me for such a long time...

On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 23:02:26 +0200, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:

> but yes, i want to create an impression that timewasters are not welcome.

Ironically this is exactly why I'm putting you on my ignored authors list.

--Justin

On 08/01/15 22:02, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> am i fobidding someone to reply? O_O
>
> but yes, i want to create an impression that timewasters are not
> welcome.

Well, it's one thing if you make that decision about people who are in contact with you personally.  It's a bit different if you are unilaterally deciding to make that decision as a member of a collective forum of people, because in that case it's a bit of an imposition on the rest of us.

i.e. just because _you've_ decided that he's a timewaster, doesn't make it OK for you to try and make him feel unwelcome in a forum that belongs to a wider community.

Also, I don't know if you've ever had any contact or experience of this person in some other online space, but if not, it seems a bit harsh to jump to such judgement straight away, even if you've previously had bad experiences with people asking questions in a similar style.

On 1/8/15 1:25 PM, Justin Whear wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 23:02:26 +0200, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
>> but yes, i want to create an impression that timewasters are not
>> welcome.
>
> Ironically this is exactly why I'm putting you on my ignored authors list.

Ironically you're replying to the message you weren't supposed to see :o).

All, especially market and ketmar and those who like to get into diatribes: please help maintain a civil atmosphere on this group. We've kept a really nice atmosphere for a long time now, and it's sad to see it's become quite a bit less so in recent times.

If you can't suffer someone's posts, please use your newsreader's filtering features to not see their posts. I know it's not perfect, but by and large it does improve things.

I'd like to attract your attention to a much more important AND urgent matter. The dpl-generated docs are now the default on dlang.org. Sadly the conversion is imperfect and there are still quite a few issues that stay unresolved, most of them trivially simple and embarrassingly parallelizable. Please join those of us who are chipping in to fix them.


Thanks,

Andrei

On 1/8/15 4:32 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> The dpl-generated docs are now the default on dlang.org.

I don't know what "dpl-generated" means. I'm not seeing any differences.

-Steve

On 08/01/15 22:11, market via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> just gtfo ketmar... just do it.

Sorry, no.  Not acceptable either.

On 1/8/15 1:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 1/8/15 4:32 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> The dpl-generated docs are now the default on dlang.org.
>
> I don't know what "dpl-generated" means. I'm not seeing any differences.

Oh, sorry. They aren't the default yet, but they'll be soon :o). -- Andrei