Re: Re[2]: A86: Re: anything useful to say?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Re[2]: A86: Re: anything useful to say?
> > I've been on the list since it was created, back in 1997. I'm sure you
> don't go
> > back that far.
> **** I've been on this that long... I was here when you got fired. I was
> here when some people attempted to go off and start another list (over at
> onelist.... was that you? well, back then I joined it). My point being...
> Everything coming from you somehow leads the dismemberment of Ticalc. And
> frankly it's just getting annoying. I was on the 89 list for a while too...
> off of that now just because it was distoyed by the off-topic religion
> aregument and I couldn't handle so many people yelling and not listening...
> and blah blah (<-- my little rant about 89 asm)****
Good for you. :) I didn't start that list at onelist, that was someone else.
> > > I was fed up with his off-topic posting, mainly because it's all he
> post.
> >
> >
> > Not true. I would post more on-topic things if I wasn't so busy defending
> > myself against your attacks which are largly untrue.
> >
>
> ****Brian you know that recently you have been making that statement *more
> and more* true. I found myself yelling at my computer screem in my dormroom
> "Oh, just SHUT UP Bryan!!" People in the halls probably thought I was
> nuts.****
It's Bryan.
What did I say that made you yell that? If you want to yell at someone, yell at
iDanny for pushing this issue..
> > > Bryan does not know z80 ASM, Bryan is not even trying to lear z80 ASM to
> my
> > > knowledge, now I ask you, why is he on the list? I can give a fairly
> good
> >
> >
> > I'm on this list so I can stay up to date with information regarding the
> TI-86
> > and any new programs that come out.
> ****Not if they're afraid to post. Someone might respond to it...
> Bryan...idanny... Do you guys remember that lame thread with all the
> comments about AOL; and bashing AOL users? Well, I'd say that David
> Phillips (who was where Brian is now) was just being foolish and
> overly-righteous. But that thread stopped. And this is like the 3rd one
> that you've been the heart of Bryan. As far as this list goes I see one
> very **great quality** in you; you are very persistent. I've never seen you
> give up. But, as with all great qualities, there comes responsibility on
> when to use them, and, unfortunately... it's hurting more people than it's
> helping right now.
> Let me just give you some numbers really quick (you're all calculator
> people... shouldn't be too hard). Someone sends a message... it's off
> topic. All 50 (just an estimate the list server stats are going right now)
> DL the message and it takes them each 2 seconds (to log on and get it). Now
> it takes them each 1 second to open it. Then 5 seconds to read (sometimes
> more, sometimes less). And a 1 second to delete it. Totaled out that's:
> 100+50+250+50 = 450 seconds of people's time that is used by each off topic
> message. let's estimate that there's been 100 off-topic messages these past
> few days (there's been close... with more (or close) than 20 messages a day.
> That's 4500 seconds of people's time.that's 75 mins.... or 1 hour and 15
> mins. That's a lot of other people's time these messages are using up(not
> including the time to write these emails). If you're a programmer (in
> Bryan's case a basic -- so this should mean even more to him). One way to
> optimize code is to not call functions or methods (Java) in loops that will
> always return the same value... you should just store that value to a
> variable and do that... so what if it take 2 bytes; it speeds everything up
> a ton.
> Regards, <-- In honor of Zolton from the 89 list
> Joe
1 hour and 15 minutes..hehe...thats COLLECTIVE time lost, not individually.
There are 6 billion people on this earth, and lets say 1 billion of them drive
to and from work everyday. They waste an average of lets say 5 minutes waiting
for red stop lights. That's 9512 YEARS of wasted time per DAY. Gee, doesn't
that information sound useful? :)
Bryan
References: