Google Groups + this list

[rurpy at yahoo.com]

On 12/23/2013 09:12 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 5:09 PM,  <rurpy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Sunday, December 22, 2013 10:37:35 PM UTC-7, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> Actually, formatting errors ARE often caused by Google Groups. Maybe
>>> it wasn't in this instance, but I have seen several cases of GG
>>> mangling code formatting, so this was a perfectly reasonable theory.
>>
>> What sort of formatting errors have you seen and how did you
>> determine it was Google Groups fault?  You would need to know
>> what the original message was, wouldn't you?  Perhaps these
>> were experiments you carried out yourself that you could share
>> with us?
> 
> Unless people were lying through their teeth when they said that their
> posted code had worked on their system,

I don't recall many whitespace-broken posts where
the poster claimed it wasn't what they posted.  In 
the cases I remember they are chided about not copying
and pasting and they either do so or don't respond
further.  

As for lying, people sometimes lie because they 
don't want to admit a mistake.  Or they often are 
just genuinely mistaken (memory is a complex and 
unreliable thing).  So your cynical presumption 
that they must be "lying through their teeth" or 
telling the truth is not is not credible.

And there is more than GG involved when you get a
message from GG.  It has long been a criticism of 
Python's significant whitespace that it is easily 
corrupted by message transports and those criticisms
predate GG.

So, assuming I was actually was unlucky enough to 
miss all the OP claims that GG FU'd their posts
that you claim to have seen, there are still plenty 
of other possible reasons for whitespace corruption
beyond GG.

> I can be pretty sure it was
> the fault of the delivery mechanism.

Bad logic.  *You* can be sure on whatever basis you 
want but to convince anyone else not predisposed to 
your biases, you need quite a bit more than your 
handwaving.

For all I know, you may be right.  But you've not
presented any evidence.  I post from GG and I've not 
noticed any whitespace corruption problems.

> Dig through the archive.

Err, no thanks.  I don't have hours to waste chasing 
down your dubious assertions.  How about you do that 
instead?  And show that the rate is much higher from 
GG than other sources proportionally and that difference
is due to GG and not just a difference in the experience
or skill of the posting populations, or gateway problems
etc.  

> Also,
> you haven't answered the other part of the post, the more important
> part.

Refresh my memory please.