The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding

[David Kastrup]

Twisted <twisted0n3 at gmail.com> writes:

> On Jun 20, 5:37 pm, David Kastrup <d... at gnu.org> wrote:
>> ...spewing...babbling...
>
> I won't dignify your insulting twaddle and random ad-hominem verbiage
> with any more responses after this one. Something with actual logical
> argumentation to rebut may be another matter of course.
>
> One more GG issue: those stupid star ratings. So potentially
> prejudicial. So easy to game, as evidenced by your managing to somehow
> vote 82 times(!) against one of my posts in a matter of minutes.

It has not occured to you that actually thousands of people read those
postings?  And they are heavily crossposted to boot (redirecting
followup to comp.emacs, I would suggest everybody else do the same).

And you have really nothing worthwhile to contribute.  So if there is
some rating system (I don't use Google Groups so can't tell) in place,
your postings would certainly be good candidates for downrating.

Not that this posting of mine is much better, and actually the
followup-to comp.emacs would indicate that this is about Emacs.
However, you have still not given any information about what, if any,
version of Emacs your very vaguely expressed experiences are supposed
to have come from.

> So far I've found a less-impressive method to game them -- it's not
> hard to get throwaway accounts elsewhere, send yourself there a
> gmail invite, and create many GG accounts.

And you wonder that people don't find it worthwhile reading you...

> Handy to get around their onerous posting limits. Handy for stuffing
> the star-vote ballot boxes with multiple votes, too, but there's no
> way I can see to generate 82 of them that fast by that method, and
> that much logging in and out in that short a time using different
> accounts but from just one IP address is sure to come up on Google's
> radar somehow, with unpredictable but probably bad results.

Uh, is there some monetary compensation for star ratings?  Or what's
the deal?  Really, if somebody can come up with a better group for
followups, feel free to direct there.

> How did you do it? I'm guessing they stop the link for voting
> appearing as a usable link on the page for a) your own posts and b)
> the ones you've voted for, but the link's URL still works, so if you
> use a script to keep fetching the appropriate URL ...

What a crazy obsession.

-- 
David Kastrup