I apologize in advance to list members who disapprove of a flame. But this was too fun to pass up. So enjoy! On Sun, 2003-06-29 at 13:50, afme@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > I happen to be a qualified expert in communication, (snip) The you should realize that communication is receiver based and that it is the senders responsibility that the message being sent is understood in the context intended. > Funny that. YOU don't understand, so blame ME, Freud calls that projection. Actually that is called "Displacement", which is defined as "taking one's feelings out on a person or object that is not the original target of those feelings." It has absolutly nothing to do with blame and everything to do with taking out your frustrations on other people. "Projection" involves attributing one's own thoughts, feelings, or behaviors to another person. For example, say that you really cannot stand your mother-in-law, but instead of acknowledging that this is the case, you claim that it is she who does not like you because you married her son or duaghter. You are projecting your feelings of dislike onto your mother-in-law when it is really you who does not like her. (more snippage) > Also the way one gets one's head bitten off when offending against the **hidden agenda** of > lists, makes RED HAT enterprise a CLOSED SHOP; they don't take criticism, also very typical. Can you imagine how Freud would interpret that statement considering the email list is basically a free-for-all serving volunteers. Perhaps coming to terms with paranoia would help to ease you frustration. Your statement, "when offending against the **hidden agenda** of lists", is an anthropomorphism becasue as we all know an email list, any email list, is a non-living entity that cannot ascribe to a human characteristic. > The fact that YOU cannot see any relevancy to my quotes does not mean there is None, do it? I thought you were an honors student in English. Ending a sentence in "do it" is not only bad form, but terrible grammer. Instead you should have phrased it, "The fact that you cannot see any relevancy to my quotes does not mean relevance is absent." There is also no need to capitalize random words and letters in a sentence unless it is a proper name or abbreviation. > REDHAT is into v 9.0 and still not there. Go look at mandrake and peanut website. I visited the Mandrake, and the Peanut Linux, websites and searched for several minutes but found no indication as to the location of what you termed as "REDHAT". So I can only conclude that neither the Mandrake or Peanut Linux authors can tell me if "REDHAT" is there or not. After realizing that this was the Red Hat email list for Red Hat Linux 8.0, I assumed that you really meant "REDHAT" to be Red Hat, Inc., and "9.0" to be 9 because there isn't a company called "REDHAT" who puts out a 9.0 version of Linux. > > I've also no doubt you think of yourself as a kind, well-willing person, AND a volunteer who helps > others, but ONLY on the group's self-agreed on terms NOT known to outsiders, nor made clear to > outsiders, although this outsider can see them 3 miles off on a foggy day. You probably also think you > are doing me a good turn. I would think someone with Honors in English would make sure to check the grammer before sending email. Grammer aside, thank you for acknowledging that kind, well-wishing, volunteers, who help others frequent this list. As for your vision I can only say that I am impressed. I can't see three miles away on a perfectly clear day unless the topography is very flat and the weather conditions prove to be clear. > It would be an idea to send this *hidden agenda* spelled out clear, WITH the acceptance to the list > e-mail. > We have already established the anthropomorphism regarding the "lists" having a "*hidden agenda*". I should also point out an email list is incapable of "acceptance". Perhpas the email list subscribers can, but an email list itse;f cannot. Since an inanimate object cannot ascribe human characteristics perhaps you could tap into your proclaimed communication expertise and positivly identify the person or persons who have "hidden agendas". I do concede that social norms exist between members of email lists such as this. Typically when a person becomes part of a membership they would explore those communicative and social norms prior to comaplining about them. A certain amount of responsibility is attributed to you as a list member. > It just so happens that the likes of me lie outside your mental bailiwick, also very typical of > specialists. IS that MY fault? Is that yours? Neither. Making it my problem, does not solve the problem. I can think of a few specialists who would completely understand you. Except in extreme cases those specialists tend to get dramatic results by prescribing appropriate medications and counseling. > It is BETWEEN us: transactional and interactional; also called a credibility gap. First. What is "it"? If you are referring to communication then you would be correct. It is a transaction. It is also a "process". A process in which expectations of feedback exist. Sometimes the feedback is positive and sometimes it is negative. Either way it is a neccessary component of "effective communication". It appears as though you have receieved some negative feedback and have not accepted it as a source for improving the overall efficacy of your communication dialog. Credibility Gap? I'm not certain about the context you use that term so I won't comment on it now. > All of you made judgments about me without knowing one damn thing about me, typical. Until this point I've never heard of you, so until this reply I could not have made a judgement about you. One cannot make blanket statements like that. Once again I would remind you that an person with Honors in English would recognize your grammatical error in the above sentence. > You also imagine that you're giving me good advice > on the FALSE assumption that because I don't know any Linux I > must be stupid or ignorant, haha. I was not aware that in addition to seeing three miles through fog that you could also read minds. Again I am impressed. I am curious to know why you would need any help from any list member with the ability to do that. > It's called "the first four minutes of contact" when folk jump to confusions about other people > that are SELDOM CHANGED later. How did you know you email was read by any list member within four minutes of sending it? Was it because of your mind reading ability? I have never heard of anyone "jumping to confusions". Did you mean to say "jumping to conclusions"? > How many words do you know? I don't keep track of them. Do you? That would seem to be a socially inappropriate behavior outside of Linguistic Anthropology or maybe Speech Therapy. > The help supplied by REDHAT is nomothetic. You probably won't find that word in > a standard dictionary, haha. Actaully it is in Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. One can also find it by using /usr/bin/gnome-dictionary, although your path may vary a little. I do believe it is shipped with Red Hat Linux 8.0 and 9. > The man took Computing 1 in 1972 on an Eniac; now useless knowledge. What man? Is any knowledge actually useless? I would assert that all knowledge is a valuable resource, even if only used for reference and historical retrospection. > The > REDHAT boss, I wrote to, told me "to be blunt..... etc, probably in archive. Anaconda - what did I > know? - dev/junk, etc .. nulled me. haha. Callan suggested early I stay with it; he does not know me > well either. IAIN, more moderately, > simply told me HE did not understand me, which is very understandable. > So one can extrapolate from your above sentences that lists members and Red Hat employees have been trying to help you. You also admit that it is "understandable" that someone may have difficulty understanding you. A person with expertise in communication would take that to be a direct indication that their message was not being received correctly. Since the transaction began with the sender it is the senders responsibility to ensure the message was received and understood correctly. > I learn things by the phrase "I'll get there if it kills me". The man also uses the engineer's "Suck it > and see". I don't sit there and bleat either, or woof. If someone mentions killing, sucking, barking (woof), and the plaintive cry of a sheep (bleat) in one exchange of ideas I would immediately keep a good distance from them. I would also make sure not to bend over. Would you please explain your interests in "woofing", "bleating" like shppe do, "sucking", and "getting there even if it kill you"? > > In communication the range lies between 0 and 100% comprehension or understanding of whatever for either > party. I'm pretty sure that most anything that can have a range falls between 0 and 100%. That is a "no shit" statement if I ever heard one. > WHO should bridge the gap? The one with the most understanding and expertise! The one who can't effectivly communicate his/her message should initiate the bridge building. You have already said that you find it "understandable" that someone would misundertand you, so I think it would be reasonable to expect you to start the gap closing. > Once and after I get to know some Unix jargon, I won't need you, except for bug fixes. Learning some "jargon" won't be terribly difficult for someone who has Honors in English. English is a language which is probably the most "jargon" ridden language in the world. While you are using people subscribed to the email list for bug fixes it might be a good time to think about what your contributions back to others on the list might be. That is unless you are here to just selfishly "take". > HENK alone picked that maybe a > re-install might work, after a week, I'd already done three and went 2 more using all the options on > anaconda, short of manual, as I am not a PC expert. "Doctor! Doctor! It hurts when I raise my arm," proclaimed the man. The doctor replied, "Then don't do that stupid". I count five re-installs if I read your poorly worded sentence correctly. In fact why would "HENK" claim that a re-install would work" ..(insert dramatic pause).. "after a week"? Wouldn't it work immediately after a re-install if it was going to work at all? > Computerese is but 1 of thousands of areas of > specialisation to be expert in, each with their own jargon. More bad grammer. > Craig is a real charmer, woof. Why are you "woofing" at Craig? Are you thinking about the "bleating", "sucking", and "getting there..." again? Perhaps a cold shower is in order. You should really try to control yourself. This is no place for that kind of "cat-calling". > I'll now have to do a 6th, letting auto do its thing + a re-format again, and then correct later. Are you really going to continue to do the same things over and over again? How many times do you have to repeat the same process before you figure out that what your doing isn't working? > I spent two hours on the phone [toll call] with a program designer who knows all PC languages, short of very > specialised ones. All of them? Are you sure? > He'll come and fix it later as he cannot - over the phone - feed me the right textmode > commands. I can "feed" a computer text mode commands over a modem. I'm am not sure how or why he would want to "feed" them to you while on a phone call. > Gnome does not have a command shell listed in its bottom panel redhat icon menu. It won't let > me get into textmode, nor does system when booting. Anaconda auto nor druid installs KDE. One has to > customise after install, without any UNIX commands knowledge. funny that. Simultaneously pressing the "ctr-alt-F1" keys on your keyboard would bring you to a non-graphical login prompt after your machine booted up into run level five. That is graphical mode in case you are unfamiliar with the "jargon". Of course Google or any other search engine on the internet would have information such as this. > > Have you heard of problem solving, I doubt it. Yes. Have you ever heard of helping others help you? Alienating the very people you want help from will usually not get the desired results of asking for help. > It ain't logical as one eliminates a well contrived list of possibilities one by one. What isn't logical? By the way. I have to question your honesty about holding Honors in English. The word "ain't" would never be used by a person with Honors in English. > Next, being Lazy, that means efficient, I have to disagree. I've never heard anyone seriously claim being lazy was efficient. Can you demonstrate how this is true? "I'm all ears" for that explanation or demonstration. > the 1st order of business is: > A: pick brains, in this case of REDhat who supplied the package. It's Red Hat, not REDhat, or REDHAT, or R eD haT, et, al. > QUOTE: > "Welcome to the official RED Hat Linux: "This kit contains everything you need to successfully install > and run the latest version, etc blahh" end-quote from the red flimsy "GO FOR IT" I did and what > happened? I believe this may be a point we can agree on. Red Hat should not have said, "This kit conatains everything you need to successfully install and run the latest version, etc....". They should have specified that the person using the product should possess the initiative to seach for help and not piss off people trying to help them. > IT's called trusting people for knowing what they are up to. "Ask the expert". I did, and what happened? > B: read books, did so, handbook and frisbie docs; all I could get hold of. I have to travel about 80 km > to visit a bookshop; MY problem. That sir is the least of your problems! > Could not get at the doc and info, done by install to disc, since RH > 8.0 did not get into being workable as an OS. Also does not explain how to recover from something gone > wrong. Did you buy the documents when you purchased your Red Hat 8.0 CD's? If I recall correctly they are included in the boxed set. You could have downloaded them prior to installing. You could have created a documentation CD from the available ISO's on the Red Hat website, as well as over 25 mirror websites. You could have...would have....should have.....But you didn't! You didn't make adaquate arraingements in case of a problem during installation. What a pity. As for being "workable as an OS"....(dramatic pause again)...I won't go there. If ignorance is bliss you must be one happy fellow. > C: Start thinking - which is what I'm doing now; slow tough work. Thinking is slow tough work for you huh? Misplaced and dangleing modifiers are abundant in your command of English grammer. > > 5 installs failed, anaconda has no means to recover from such things as going wrong You mean you don't have any patience to handle things that go wrong don't you? > Therefore it is now most likely that either, from incompatibilities: > 1: the hardware is later than the build of RH 8.0, viz, it cannot cope with a microsoft wheelmouse PS/2, > done during installing on a click, despite the fact that in install 2 & 3, using gnome I redid the > generic 3 tooth mouse setup and it supplied a wheelmouse PS/2 package that worked, so that's a bug. You can be assured that your Microsoft PS/2 Wheel Mouse works and is compatible with Red Hat Linux 8.0. It's not a bug in the install scripts. > Windows copes, REDHAT does not. How would I know with 1000s of chips, Boards, monitors, modems, etc > blahh around. You would know by checking the hardware compatibility list avaible on the Red Hat website. By the way the reason Windows OS's "cope" as you put it (anthropomorphism again) is because of closed, proprietary driver development by some hardware manufacturers. But in your instance the mouse in question has drivers for Linux and works just fine. > 2: The windows 98.2.4 on the PC has Msoft supplied drivers that are too old, viz most of them are dated > '99. That is the case with the Lucent Winmodem #2 for which Linux has a fix or patch. I found one too; > only to be told later there's already one on the CDRom, so how come install does not insert one? This > may include getting a bios update, already exists, just have to open the box and read those dang icky > stickies on the Eprom, etc., for the family and model number. The Mboard is a 2002 make, same year as RH > v 8.0. Monitor ditto. I imagine the best way to illustrate ignorence and disregard for taking responsibility for setting up and configuring one's own system is this remark, "...just have to open the box and read those dang icky stickies...". I can imagine your thoughts on say, reading installation instructions, hardware compatability lists, email lists, search engines,...etc, etc. > > I shan't regale with the psycho-make-up and mindset or mindstyle of most programmers, I have some of > them as dear friends, and well paid too. What about your own attitude, midset, and mindstyle? Is it not psycho-make-up as well? > REDHAT 8.0 was a gift by one. Let me say that programmers think > logically [and only binary at that] with well defined words and [like dogs resemble their owners if they > are not careful] programmers tend to think like computers; just as the military can only think of war, > etc., blahh. I don't think that way. Right. You explained already that thinking was a "slow, tough, work". Since you are slinging stereotypes about programmers allow me to sling one back to you. If you think so highly of Windows and enjoy making up and spreading a bunch of FUD about Linux then perhaps you are the type of person who really wouldn't "fit in" and requires someone else to fix your problems for you. > > So thanks for the advice. Let me be "blunt" too; Edward C. Bailey thought he was. > This person does not need an education, he can do with some HELP! I agree sir. You need help. Badly. > IFF you cannot help, just say so. I can help you. But I don't know that I want to after reading your post. I'm certain it wouldn't be appriciated and I am positive you couldn't offer anything in return. > It's quicker that way. If you don't try to remodel me, I won't do it to you. I also hope you don't ever > come across any "indigo" children, look it up on Internet. Thanks I did look it up. I don't really know what you are implying and I really don't care. I just think it goes to show how "touched" I think you really are based upon the psycho-babble you typed. For anyone interested visit this site http://www.metagifted.org/topics/metagifted/indigo/introduction.html > > > woof! > ========= > > More barking? Histronic personality disorder huh? Get a grip dude. But thank you for the entertainment. You made my day! Scott > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Schwendt" <ms-nospam-0306@xxxxxxxx> > To: <psyche-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 1:11 AM > Subject: Re: newbie > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 17:43:19 +1200, afme@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > == I've now spent 2 hours on the phone with a Prog designer friend who knows more prog languages > than > > > anybody, and he is flummoxed. He is VERY busy and will turn up tue or wed. NOTHING he tried worked, > > > cannot get into shell or command line. He double checked on his own laptop with Linux on it and that > > > worked. The frisbies are as clean as a whistle and do boot up. > > > > > > == and I will reinstall, reformat do a manual and see and after that do it again in custom. > > > > > > Re-install, sounds like one ?possible? option. > > > > > > That's two weeks of MY time wasted > > > > > > WOOF, grrrhhh,wafwaf, where 's the bone? > > > > At this point I'd like to note that your main problem is, you are a > > "newbie in communication", not just a Linux newbie. Your messages > > are confusing and difficult to read, because they are badly > > formatted and the bottom quotes are inappropriate and useless. The > > whole "newbie" thread is hard to follow. After having read the first > > 2-3 sentences of one of your messages, I usually skip to the next > > e-mail. Your description of your problems does not become clear. So > > many words, but hardly any content. Your replies to people that > > tried to help you don't make much sense (for instance, in Outlook > > Express you still have entered your e-mail address where you are > > expected to enter your full name). > > -- Psyche-list mailing list Psyche-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/psyche-list
