🚀 go-pugleaf

Harlan Messinger wrote:
> 
> Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
> : Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
> : > åÓÔØ ÓÒÏÞÎÁÑ ÎÅÏÂÈÏÄÉÍÏÓÔØ ÎÁÐÉÓÁÔØ ÉÇÒÕ ÎÁ C++.
> : > îÁÄÏ,ÞÔÏÂÙ ÂÙÌÁ ÖÅÌÅÚÎÁÑ ÄÏÒÏÇÁ É ÐÏ ÎÅÊ ÈÏÄÉÌÉ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ.
> : > ðÏÄÓËÁÖÉÔÅ ÁÌÇÏÒÉÔÍ ÐÅÒÅÄ×ÅÖÅÎÉÑ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ ÐÏ ÒÅÌØÓÁÍ(É ÐÏ ×ÏÚÍÏÖÎÏÓÔÉ ÐÒÉÍÅÒÙ)
> :
> : Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
> : a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
> 
> Whence the sense of entitlement to be able to read every posting that
> goes by your eyes? 

:)  This is funny.  I mean funny in the sense that this post should be
generating *this* kind of controversy.  Look at the post carefully.  There is 
a ridiculous amount of redundancy in accented "A"'s, "O"'s and "I"'s.  This 
does not look very Russian or like any sensible written language for that 
matter.  If you stand back and relax your eyes, it almost looks like it 
spells out something in large block letters ... it almost looks like 
"Victor".  My guess is that using whatever warped font he used when posting 
this message the message actually looked a *lot* like a picture of the word 
"Victor".

-- 
Paul Hsieh
qed@xenon.chromatic.com

What I say and what my company says are not always the same thing

Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
> åÓÔØ ÓÒÏÞÎÁÑ ÎÅÏÂÈÏÄÉÍÏÓÔØ ÎÁÐÉÓÁÔØ ÉÇÒÕ ÎÁ C++.
> îÁÄÏ,ÞÔÏÂÙ ÂÙÌÁ ÖÅÌÅÚÎÁÑ ÄÏÒÏÇÁ É ÐÏ ÎÅÊ ÈÏÄÉÌÉ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ.
> ðÏÄÓËÁÖÉÔÅ ÁÌÇÏÒÉÔÍ ÐÅÒÅÄ×ÅÖÅÎÉÑ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ ÐÏ ÒÅÌØÓÁÍ(É ÐÏ ×ÏÚÍÏÖÎÏÓÔÉ ÐÒÉÍÅÒÙ)

Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.

-- 
Albert Dorofeev                    mailto:albert@sonytel.be

Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
: Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
: > åÓÔØ ÓÒÏÞÎÁÑ ÎÅÏÂÈÏÄÉÍÏÓÔØ ÎÁÐÉÓÁÔØ ÉÇÒÕ ÎÁ C++.
: > îÁÄÏ,ÞÔÏÂÙ ÂÙÌÁ ÖÅÌÅÚÎÁÑ ÄÏÒÏÇÁ É ÐÏ ÎÅÊ ÈÏÄÉÌÉ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ.
: > ðÏÄÓËÁÖÉÔÅ ÁÌÇÏÒÉÔÍ ÐÅÒÅÄ×ÅÖÅÎÉÑ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ ÐÏ ÒÅÌØÓÁÍ(É ÐÏ ×ÏÚÍÏÖÎÏÓÔÉ ÐÒÉÍÅÒÙ)
: 
: Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
: a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
: 

Whence the sense of entitlement to be able to read every posting that 
goes by your eyes? When you post in English, do you feel you are doing 
some terrible disservice to all the people in the world who don't read 
English? If you didn't happen to know English, would you feel that you 
didn't deserve to use the Internet, and leave it to those of us who do? 
Did it occur to you that this person may not know English?

Don't you think that anybody who posts in any language understands
perfectly well that his posting will be legible only to people who read
that language? 

Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
>Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
>: Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
>: a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
>: 
>When you post in English, do you feel you are doing 
>some terrible disservice to all the people in the world who don't read 
>English? If you didn't happen to know English, would you feel that you 
>didn't deserve to use the Internet, and leave it to those of us who do? 
>Did it occur to you that this person may not know English?

For what it's worth, it is considered a breach of netiquette to post
non-English posts to newsgroups that are not specifically chartered for
that language.
-- 
bgeerdes@igs.com (Bruce Geerdes)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>>>> In article <1996Mar21.155605.23307@igs.com>,
>>>>> Bruce == "Bruce Geerdes" <bgeerdes@igs.com> writes:

Bruce> For what it's worth, it is considered a breach of netiquette to
Bruce> post non-English posts to newsgroups that are not specifically
Bruce> chartered for that language.

Also, it's not generally a good idea to send articles with 8-bit
headers to Usenet, except by encoding them as per ISO 1522 (which
I'll try to do by hand for this post).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMVGW2edsuUurvcRtAQEXmQL/ddt8jKj7epSXSjfwpCrx7AE8mvGyjokU
z0mjPpCAlrQITcahUZRAUncB93DB9lQch6leb/mJes0efs5fisP65GfvofSBqFdz
ZsMaFc9vRNeQhmlBN5I2AhpuP5Pznf6+
=4su/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Paul Hsieh (qed@xenon.chromatic.com) wrote:
: Harlan Messinger wrote:
: > =
: 
: > Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
: > : Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
: > : > =E5=D3=D4=D8 =D3=D2=CF=DE=CE=C1=D1 =CE=C5=CF=C2=C8=CF=C4=C9=CD=CF=D3=D4=
: =D8 =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=D4=D8 =C9=C7=D2=D5 =CE=C1 C++.
: > : > =EE=C1=C4=CF,=DE=D4=CF=C2=D9 =C2=D9=CC=C1 =D6=C5=CC=C5=DA=CE=C1=D1 =C4=
: =CF=D2=CF=C7=C1 =C9 =D0=CF =CE=C5=CA =C8=CF=C4=C9=CC=C9 =D0=CF=C5=DA=C4=C1.=
: 
: > : > =F0=CF=C4=D3=CB=C1=D6=C9=D4=C5 =C1=CC=C7=CF=D2=C9=D4=CD =D0=C5=D2=C5=C4=
: =D7=C5=D6=C5=CE=C9=D1 =D0=CF=C5=DA=C4=C1 =D0=CF =D2=C5=CC=D8=D3=C1=CD(=C9 =D0=
: =CF =D7=CF=DA=CD=CF=D6=CE=CF=D3=D4=C9 =D0=D2=C9=CD=C5=D2=D9)
: > :
: > : Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
: > : a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
: > =
: 
: > Whence the sense of entitlement to be able to read every posting that
: > goes by your eyes? =
: 
: 
: :)  This is funny.  I mean funny in the sense that this post should be
: generating *this* kind of controversy.  Look at the post carefully.  There =
: is =
: 
: a ridiculous amount of redundancy in accented "A"'s, "O"'s and "I"'s.  This=
:  =
: 
: does not look very Russian or like any sensible written language for that =
: 
: matter.  If you stand back and relax your eyes, it almost looks like it =
: 
: spells out something in large block letters ... it almost looks like =
: 
: "Victor".  My guess is that using whatever warped font he used when posting=
:  =
: 
: this message the message actually looked a *lot* like a picture of the word=
:  =

Yeah, right. In just three lines of type. As it happens, I viewed it with 
a KOI-8 Cyrillic font, and it is in fact Russian.

Bruce Geerdes (bgeerdes@igs.com) wrote:
: Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
: >Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
: >: Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
: >: a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
: >: 
: >When you post in English, do you feel you are doing 
: >some terrible disservice to all the people in the world who don't read 
: >English? If you didn't happen to know English, would you feel that you 
: >didn't deserve to use the Internet, and leave it to those of us who do? 
: >Did it occur to you that this person may not know English?
: 
: For what it's worth, it is considered a breach of netiquette to post
: non-English posts to newsgroups that are not specifically chartered for
: that language.
: -- 
: bgeerdes@igs.com (Bruce Geerdes)

Does the charter for THIS group specify English? If so, that's 
reasonable, and then I was wrong about the acceptability of the Russian 
posting here, though not for the reason that was complained about 
(postings that English speakers can't understand) but because it was a 
posting that didn't conform to the charter.

However, if a specific group's charter doesn't mandate a requisite 
language, I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that one 
particular language alone is proper in the absence of specific 
authorization of any other. Why would netiquette single out the speakers 
of one language for preferential treatment? Why would netiquette single 
out the non-speakers of one language for exclusion from the broad range 
of Internet facilities that the speakers of that language are able to 
take for granted?

I have heard of people who think it's impolite to speak in a foreign
language in public, such as when two people speak in Spanish to each other
on a bus in New York. The implication is that people speaking privately
but within earshot have the responsibility to enable you to understand
what they're saying! This is sheer audacity. And what you are calling
netiquette is just as much so. 

Where are all these charters anyway? rtfm somewhere?

Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
>Bruce Geerdes (bgeerdes@igs.com) wrote:
>: For what it's worth, it is considered a breach of netiquette to post
>: non-English posts to newsgroups that are not specifically chartered for
>: that language.
>Does the charter for THIS group specify English? 

Not that I know of.

>I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that one 
>particular language alone is proper in the absence of specific 
>authorization of any other. 

That's the internet for you. :)  I'm not making the rule up, just passing
along what I thought was common knowledge.

>Why would netiquette single out the speakers 
>of one language for preferential treatment? 

Because we were here first. :)  

>Why would netiquette single 
>out the non-speakers of one language for exclusion from the broad range 
>of Internet facilities that the speakers of that language are able to 
>take for granted?

So you would rather everyone of every language post to this newsgroup
instead of, say, creating specific language groups?  No one is being
excluded from the internet.  If a need for a French C++ programming group 
exists, one will be created.  If, on the other hand, they want to reach
the largest possible programming audience, they should probably post to
this newsgroup, in English.

>The implication is that people speaking privately
>but within earshot have the responsibility to enable you to understand
>what they're saying! This is sheer audacity. And what you are calling
>netiquette is just as much so. 

Sorry you don't like it.  As I said before, I did not make it up.  Maybe 
the "English by default" rule no longer applies.  A lot has changed since
I first started using the internet.

I personally do not believe that English *should* be the default because
it's superior or anything.  It's just worked out that way.  I do see the
benefit of having a default language, however.  It helps the world 
communicate.  If you want to go to the trouble of defining a new, more
deserving, default language, say Latin or Esperanto, go for it.

>Where are all these charters anyway? rtfm somewhere?

I don't know. (Input for someone who knows anything about this would be
appreciated!)
-- 
bgeerdes@igs.com (Bruce Geerdes)

Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
: Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
: : Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
: : > åÓÔØ ÓÒÏÞÎÁÑ ÎÅÏÂÈÏÄÉÍÏÓÔØ ÎÁÐÉÓÁÔØ ÉÇÒÕ ÎÁ C++.
: : > îÁÄÏ,ÞÔÏÂÙ ÂÙÌÁ ÖÅÌÅÚÎÁÑ ÄÏÒÏÇÁ É ÐÏ ÎÅÊ ÈÏÄÉÌÉ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ.
: : > ðÏÄÓËÁÖÉÔÅ ÁÌÇÏÒÉÔÍ ÐÅÒÅÄ×ÅÖÅÎÉÑ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ ÐÏ ÒÅÌØÓÁÍ(É ÐÏ ×ÏÚÍÏÖÎÏÓÔÉ ÐÒÉÍÅÒÙ)
: : 
: : Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
: : a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.

: Whence the sense of entitlement to be able to read every posting that 
: goes by your eyes?

This is a language? It shows up as garbage characters in the IBM PC
line drawing set on my screen. It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask
people to post using text in a text-only transmission medium. That
almost appears to be a requirement. If it is in a non-English language,
it still shows up as garbage. Maybe other people using this language
have special decoders, but limiting the readability of the message to
them doesn't seem like a good way to get an answer to a question! If
there is some special formatting or something, a mime message or
uuecoding should be used.

Scott

Bruce Geerdes (bgeerdes@igs.com) wrote:
: 
: >Why would netiquette single 
: >out the non-speakers of one language for exclusion from the broad range 
: >of Internet facilities that the speakers of that language are able to 
: >take for granted?
: 
: So you would rather everyone of every language post to this newsgroup
: instead of, say, creating specific language groups?  No one is being
: excluded from the internet.  If a need for a French C++ programming group 
: exists, one will be created.  If, on the other hand, they want to reach
: the largest possible programming audience, they should probably post to
: this newsgroup, in English.

I have no problem with groups created for specific languages. So specify 
the language when you create a newsgroup. But I don't like the idea of 
people following a newsgroup where the language isn't specified, and then 
taking it upon themselves to impose their language preference on everyone 
else who might want to use the group for the same reason.

I also think it's _preferable_ to have newsgroups for non-cultural topics 
like C++ that are central repositories for discussions on the subject in 
any language. For example, I can follow postings in Spanish, Portuguese, 
German, Dutch, French and, apparently, Asturian and Catalan (which I found 
out when I came across newsgroups dedicated to the latter two cultures). 
So suppose there's a woman in Brazil who speaks no English but has a 
question or a point to make concerning C++. I might be able to help her 
with her question, or I might particularly benefit from her 
discussion--but I'm not subscribing to Portuguese language newsgroups, and 
if there IS one on C++ it's not on my server. But why in the world should 
she limit her arena to people who speak one language or another, or who 
frequent her PARTICULAR C++ newsgroup? She can reach a wider audience on 
one central newsgroup.

Suppose _I_ have a question and am having a hard time getting a response? 
Instead of hunting around for every C++ newsgroup in every language, and 
then posting to all of them--which itself is a violation of netiquette, 
remember?--I ought to be able to post in the central newsgroup, with a 
translation of my own text into several languages within one posting, and 
hope to have the widest possible audience available to me.

Isn't it useful to have the Internet bring the world closer together 
instead of enforcing the distances between us?

: Sorry you don't like it.  As I said before, I did not make it up.  Maybe 
: the "English by default" rule no longer applies.  A lot has changed since
: I first started using the internet.

You do assume it's a rule. When did it become a rule, and under whose 
authority? Is it widely accepted among non-English speakers using the 
Internet, or was it regally imposed by people who speak English?


: 
: I personally do not believe that English *should* be the default because
: it's superior or anything.  It's just worked out that way.  I do see the
: benefit of having a default language, however.  It helps the world 
: communicate.  

How does it help the world communicate if it effectively cuts people out 
of forums that would otherwise be open to them?

Scott McMahan - Softbase Systems (softbase@mercury.interpath.com) wrote:
: Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
: : Albert Dorofiev (albert@sonytel.be) wrote:
: : : Victor A. Davidoff wrote:
: : : > åÓÔØ ÓÒÏÞÎÁÑ ÎÅÏÂÈÏÄÉÍÏÓÔØ ÎÁÐÉÓÁÔØ ÉÇÒÕ ÎÁ C++.
: : : > îÁÄÏ,ÞÔÏÂÙ ÂÙÌÁ ÖÅÌÅÚÎÁÑ ÄÏÒÏÇÁ É ÐÏ ÎÅÊ ÈÏÄÉÌÉ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ.
: : : > ðÏÄÓËÁÖÉÔÅ ÁÌÇÏÒÉÔÍ ÐÅÒÅÄ×ÅÖÅÎÉÑ ÐÏÅÚÄÁ ÐÏ ÒÅÌØÓÁÍ(É ÐÏ ×ÏÚÍÏÖÎÏÓÔÉ ÐÒÉÍÅÒÙ)
: : : 
: : : Would you mind using English, please? I do NOT have
: : : a russian font and many of people do not speak russian.
: 
: : Whence the sense of entitlement to be able to read every posting that 
: : goes by your eyes?
: 
: This is a language? It shows up as garbage characters in the IBM PC
: line drawing set on my screen. It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask
: people to post using text in a text-only transmission medium. That
: almost appears to be a requirement. If it is in a non-English language,
: it still shows up as garbage. Maybe other people using this language
: have special decoders, but limiting the readability of the message to
: them doesn't seem like a good way to get an answer to a question! If
: there is some special formatting or something, a mime message or
: uuecoding should be used.
: 
: Scott
: 

Scott,

Obviously, only people who read the alphabet it's written in and who 
have their machine set up to deal with the character set will be able 
to read the thing. So if you can't, don't. But it doesn't follow that the 
posting shouldn't be here, available to those who can make use of it.

For your information, it's Cyrillic.

Harlan Messinger (gusty@clark.net) wrote:
>Bruce Geerdes (bgeerdes@igs.com) wrote:
>I also think it's _preferable_ to have newsgroups for non-cultural topics 
>like C++ that are central repositories for discussions on the subject in 
>any language. 

We all have our preferences.  The disagreement we have here is similar to
what goes on all over the net.  Should we have one central group where
everything can be posted or should we divide a subject into different
groups.  Heck, we have plenty of that kind of arguing go on in the
comp.lang.c++ group, where some people think all platforms should be 
discussed and others think that platform-specific posts should go to their
respective programming newsgroups.

>: Sorry you don't like it.  As I said before, I did not make it up.  Maybe 
>: the "English by default" rule no longer applies.  A lot has changed since
>: I first started using the internet.

>You do assume it's a rule. When did it become a rule, and under whose 
>authority? Is it widely accepted among non-English speakers using the 
>Internet, or was it regally imposed by people who speak English?

If it is a rule, it would be under the newsgroup's charter.  I hope you
would accept its authority.  You're right that I'm assuming it's there.
It may not be.  I have seen it in other group's charters.
-- 
bgeerdes@igs.com (Bruce Geerdes)

Tach auch!

This recent uproar caused by a posting that is supposed to be russian
is a typical example for the attitude of (some, not all) americans. 
They think because they're speaking english, the rest of the world 
has to follow them.
This is american cultural imperialism. The attitude: "God's own
country speaks english, so the rest of the world has to follow us!"
OK, only-one-language-speaking-americans: if you don't understand a
message, just ignore it. Compendre?

BTW, this all has nothing to do with programming. I'm aware of that,
but, being nearly every day teased by bored american teenagers 
crossposting garbage, I feel free to waste net resources this time,
too.

Bye bye, Auf Wiedersehen, Au Revoir, Hasta La Vista, Tot ziens, Ciao

Ralf Graf
*****************************************
* Using OS/2 Warp & Linux 1.2.13        *
* Location: Duesseldorf / Germany       *
* e-mail:   101611.2710@compuserve.com  *
*****************************************

Ralf Graf:
> Tach auch!

> This recent uproar caused by a posting that is supposed to be russian
> is a typical example for the attitude of (some, not all) americans. 
> They think because they're speaking english, the rest of the world 
> has to follow them.

  Shhh!  Don't start that (don't tell loudmouths they're loudmouths, any
idiot can work out what will happen).