On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 09:55:12 -0700
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 16:15:14 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> >(it means i am engaging in what is nominally a gesture of respect in
>> >a mocking way, so as to indicate that your pompous demands for
>> >respect are being deliberately ignored)
>>
>> Wasn't a demand for respect, just making a point about serious
>> applications and the languages used for them. Games arn't serious.
>
>Your definition of "serious applications" seems to coincide pretty
>substantially with "fields I, personally, have worked in," particularly

There are plenty of fields I haven't worked in that I would also consider
serious eg agriculture, automotive, energy.

Games arn't on that list.

>provocation, you name-call like a grade-schooler. So it's difficult

I simply descended to the level that the argument had been brought to so
don't complain.

>Muttley: "Also you're a poopiehead."

Are you expecting to be taken seriously?

On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:33:14 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

> There are plenty of fields I haven't worked in that I would also
> consider serious eg agriculture, automotive, energy.
>
> Games arn't on that list.

Very well, then! That leaves us with the larger questions:

* By what logic do you argue that a language which is commonly used in
fields which are (by your own admission) "pretty big" but (in your
assessment) not "serious" is therefore "pretty irrelevant in most
language discussions?"
* What about all of the other non-game applications people have cited?
Are none of these "serious" by your standards?

> I simply descended to the level that the argument had been brought to
> so don't complain.

On the contrary, you've been the one dragging it down from the start;
the first to name-call, the first to accuse someone of being a sock-
puppet, the first to mock other people for having specialties you don't
consider "serious" - and, for that matter, the person who started this
off by talking pointless smack, as if anybody in comp.lang.misc cares
whether a language is considered "relevant" or "serious."

> >Muttley: "Also you're a poopiehead."
>
> Are you expecting to be taken seriously?

Were *you,* when you decided to start throwing around terms like
"aspie?" (2009 called, they want their insult back.)

On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:16:53 -0700
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:33:14 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> There are plenty of fields I haven't worked in that I would also
>> consider serious eg agriculture, automotive, energy.
>>
>> Games arn't on that list.
>
>Very well, then! That leaves us with the larger questions:
>
>* By what logic do you argue that a language which is commonly used in
> fields which are (by your own admission) "pretty big" but (in your
> assessment) not "serious" is therefore "pretty irrelevant in most
> language discussions?"

The amount of code written in the language. I doubt game scripting amounts
to much in the scheme of things.

>* What about all of the other non-game applications people have cited?
> Are none of these "serious" by your standards?

Don't remember them tbh. A serious application IMO is something that
impacts society as a whole in that if it didn't exist we'd be in trouble
or something that benefits a persons ability to live their life.
If games vanishes some teenagers and kidults might get a bit annoyed for
a while before they went outside and played with a ball but society would
carry on as before.

>> Are you expecting to be taken seriously?
>
>Were *you,* when you decided to start throwing around terms like
>"aspie?" (2009 called, they want their insult back.)

Its a very relevant insult given these days every socially awkward moron
decides they're on the spectrum so they can have some kind of disadvantage
kudos.

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:57:08 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:

> The amount of code written in the language. I doubt game scripting
> amounts to much in the scheme of things.

And you base this assumption on...?

> Don't remember them tbh. A serious application IMO is something that
> impacts society as a whole in that if it didn't exist we'd be in
> trouble or something that benefits a persons ability to live their
> life. If games vanishes some teenagers and kidults might get a bit
> annoyed for a while before they went outside and played with a ball
> but society would carry on as before.

So you discount them because you didn't bother to pay attention before
firing off a response?

> Its a very relevant insult given these days every socially awkward
> moron decides they're on the spectrum so they can have some kind of
> disadvantage kudos.

Nobody in this discussion said any such thing.

In article <20240419160845.00000472@gmail.com>,
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
....
>And you base this assumption on...?
....
>So you discount them because you didn't bother to pay attention before
>firing off a response?
....
>Nobody in this discussion said any such thing.

You do realize you're arguing with a moron, don't you?

Something about arguing with a moron - they just bring you down to their
level...

Or, something about wrestling with a pig...

--
I love the poorly educated.

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:08:45 -0700
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:57:08 -0000 (UTC)
>Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> The amount of code written in the language. I doubt game scripting
>> amounts to much in the scheme of things.
>
>And you base this assumption on...?

Its a standard metric. Go google it.

>> Don't remember them tbh. A serious application IMO is something that
>> impacts society as a whole in that if it didn't exist we'd be in
>> trouble or something that benefits a persons ability to live their
>> life. If games vanishes some teenagers and kidults might get a bit
>> annoyed for a while before they went outside and played with a ball
>> but society would carry on as before.
>
>So you discount them because you didn't bother to pay attention before
>firing off a response?

Non sequitur.

>> Its a very relevant insult given these days every socially awkward
>> moron decides they're on the spectrum so they can have some kind of
>> disadvantage kudos.
>
>Nobody in this discussion said any such thing.

Where did I say they did?

On Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:48:30 -0000 (UTC)
gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

> You do realize you're arguing with a moron, don't you?
>
> Something about arguing with a moron - they just bring you down to
> their level...

What can I say, I like walking 'em through the process of demonstrating
their ignorance to everyone else. But yes, we seem to have reached the
point where he's stopped even pretending to construct an argument.