Subject: Re: type safety in LISP From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> Date: 09 Dec 2002 16:04:28 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3248438668279148@naggum.no> * Pascal Costanza | Obviously, my mistake was to believe that you are capable of doing | so, or at least correct your mistakes when they are pointed out. Several other people here have now commented on your mistake, but I see nothing from you that could give me an indication of capability to correct mistakes, nor of actually understanding what you are asked to do, but you project this paucity of abilities onto others. Why do you so arrogantly assume that other people are just as deficient as yourself? Why do you treat other people as if they are what you fear most that you might be yourself? You hurl a number of really insane accusations at me about things you have no possible /means/ to know, further supporting an argument of mine that you do not understand that acquiring knowledge is work and requries directed, conscious effort. When you make such claims, I /know/ that you lack some /very/ fundamental argumentative and intellectual skills. I look at you and see a person who does not, even when it would save him, /think/ and /reflect/ and get a grip on himself. It is truly disturbing to watch. And over such an ickle thing as terminology and imaginary contradictions. Lamentable! One of the skills you lack is to limit your statements to what you /can/ know, and, in the words of Aristotle, to say about that which is that it is and about that which is not that it is not; he talked about /honesty/ and /intgrity/. Since this discussion is concerned with whether what you think is correct is indeed so, I look for clues in what other things you write that you obviously appear to think is correct, but you know what? I find that you make a number of utterly /unfounded/ claims, wild conjectures based on that hateful thing in emotionally disturbed people that demonizes their opponent so they do not have to treat them like human beings. You /make up/ things to accuse me of. This does not happen to people who retain their composure and are in control of themselves. It is a very strong symptom of complete mental breakdown. Why do you share this with the world. And when all that has been required of you is to tell me exactly, unequivocally, what would make you happy. You continue to tell the whole world how unhappy you are, but you do not make a single attempt to rectify the situation. Pathological! This whole unwillingness to curtail your fantasizing about me goes directly to your credibility and your /ability/ to distinguish what you believe from what is out there in reality. I have suspected that to you, there /is/ no such distinction, that you literally live in your own world where everything you say makes sense, but look at yourself, man! You make sweeping claims about other people in a way that strictly speaking is /insane/ -- what you say /cannot possibly/ all be true at the same time. That tether between your mind and reality has overextended itself. | It doesn't matter what concrete terminology I would personally | prefer, because we are not talking about personal opinions or | tastes, etc. Just use the correct and accepted terminology. Again, it appears that you are not even aware that in order to use "correct and accepted terminology" you need to know precisely what you are talking /about/. There is no point in knowing what the "correct and accepted terminology" is unless you also know what it means. The point of asking /you/ what would make /you/ happy and quit complaining and hurling accusations at people (is this your idea of being nice and friendly, by the way?) is to know whether /you/ have any idea whatsoever about what other people are talking about? But clearly, you do not. You assume that some disembodied "correct and accepted terminology" is sufficient, but do you know to what it applies? I fear you do not even ask yourself that question. | You can read, can't you? I marvel at your idiocy, Pascal, but more than that, I am deeply worried about your sanity. Because, you see, after this moronic rhetorical question, which suggests that if you were any slower, you would be thinking backwards, mere moments later, you write this: | Oh, I am sorry, I have forgotten that you are obviously incapable | of reading. Pascal, I have long suspected you to be a deficient, malfunctioning human being, but when you go and say such things, I know that the fragile connection between reality and whatever is inside that poor excuse for a cranium of yours is no more. /Psychosis/ has set in, wherein you actually believe what is not so to be the truth, and sadly but typical of psychotics, you insist with a strenght rivaling religious fanatics that only what you think is right, even though it is frequently self-contradictory and betray a mind that is no longer accepting any input from the external world. Rest assured that I can read, Pascal, also between the lines. When I look at your "output", I feel the remnants of pity that a flood of disgust cannot quite wash away. You betray your innermost fears to me in ways at which your future self will recoil in horror, and you display your want of coping strategies in ways that so far removed from an adult discussion that somebody, /anybody/ with compassion for you, would have yanked you out of that mental state you are in, /made/ you snap out of it since you cannot do that on your own. This was about /programming languages/, Pascal! You act as if your entire psychological makeup is under attack, that your identity as a person is in danger, that you will cease to /exist/ if you have to admit that (1) your contradiction was a figment of your imagination and (2) your personal problem with "correct" terminology tells the whole world that you /malfunction/ when an error occurs. Smart and healthy people exhibit a graceful degradation of performance under pressure as well as self-awareness of same, but you lose /all/ your marbles at once. Do you think you could try to get back to what your objections were? Do you think you could at least /try/ to keep somewhat on track? I do not want to hear any more of your insane ranting and raving about whether I can read or what you have "forgotten" of what you have clearly invented entirely on your own. I want you to be /nice/ to me, like you have argued that people should be towards one another, and apologize for all the insane accusations you have hurled my way, and /demonstrate/ the superiority of your kinder, gentler way. Use that warm language of yours, show cognizance and care for how I feel and display your excellent command of the way you suggest that I and others deal with people on this newsgroup. As you are hurt and frustrated, there is no better time than now to /perform/ according to your own standards. Show us the Pascal Costanza that you want us to remember, your flair for compassionate communication. Show us the grandeur of a person who can, in the face of negative emotions and suspicions that he is a staggering fool, put his money where his mouth is. Show us the Pascal Costanza that takes it upon himself to lambast those who unfairly criticizes yet is far and away above that reprehensible act himself. Show us Pascal Costanza as he wants to be seen! I await your performance with baited breath. Imagine, not a harsh word, not one accusation, not a single rabid rant. We who are about to read, salute you! By the way, I do have a really heartfelt suggestion to you: Do try to be nice to people. Not because I think you should primarily be nice, but because I think you should avoid trying to insult people at all cost: You absolutely stink at it, and I loathe incompetence. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.