As I see, another problem you have, is you take everything literally, and as if it was to be aplied to you. It was an example, not what you have to do.

I'm not telling you what to do. I'm telling you what I use to do (and in this case, a singular example), so you might get ideas (or not), and avoid this kind of things. If you don't want to avoid it, you are free of course, but you should not say you don't know the reason why people insult you. It was not meant to be aplied out of the box.

This (the discusion you and I are having) is not a discusion about who is right or wrong. In fact, is not even a discusion. I'm just telling you what I see, from an neutral point of view. You can take my advises, or not... just that.

Quote:

The "Nice" word is a problem in the english language. "Nice is a nice word", so it is hard to define. It has so many meanings, it is very hard to define without using it. I hope you know what I mean with it. If you don't, I can try to explain it better, but it won't be easy. Anyway, a english laguage dictionary might give you a better definition than me.

Quote:

That is what you think (and me too). And that is what my posts are all about. The fact you don't think something is offensive, doesn't mean it isn't (at least for everyone).

Quote:

I don't know too, but as things are, it seems like it might be. Anyway, almost everything can be perceived as bad in a forum, at least in my experience.

Quote:

What I meant, is that what is important, is how it is perceived...

Quote:

The oposite to RTFM, would be answering with an explanation. You could even say something like "This happens because blabla [brief explanation]. You can read more in this thread". In my point of view, that is a nice answer. Only a link, seems to be nearer to a RTFM than to be nice (not to me, but feels so to some people as we see).

> another problem you have, is you take everything literally,
> and as if it was to be aplied to you.

I was under the impression that you attempted to present a real-life analogy to illustrate the situation we have right here. If you didn't, it's been a misunderstanding from my side and I'm sorry for that.

> It was an example

But obviously one that is not sufficiently fitting the situation here ;-)

> I'm not telling you what to do.

I didn't understand it that way either, but I (mis-)thought that you were attempting at giving me hints at how to resolve this (non-)issue by telling me about how you treat your workmate so that she doesn't feel offended.

> If you don't want to avoid it, you are free of course, but you should not say
> you don't know the reason why people insult you.

I'm afraid that your example didn't give me any idea as for the reason for people insulting me, as the only ideas I took from it don't sufficiently fit this situation, as you've made clear now.

> It was not meant to be aplied out of the box.

Thanks for clarification.

> I'm just telling you what I see, from an neutral point of view.
> You can take my advises, or not... just that.

I know that. And I'm only replying to that from my own point of view, to explain how I see it.

> The fact you don't think something is offensive, doesn't mean it isn't
> (at least for everyone). [...] almost everything can be perceived as bad
> in a forum, at least in my experience.

So I conclude the best measure to never offend anybody would be to never ever write in a forum, right? ;-) I think I'll prefer to go with the old saying: I'll only do unto others as I would have others do unto me. (And that includes replying to questions with mere links, I'm afraid.) I really don't see any other sensible expedient to get out of that dilemma.

> The oposite to RTFM, would be answering with an explanation.

You're right, a link is not really the opposite. But still, it's very far from "RTFM".

> You could even say something like "This happens because
> blabla [brief explanation]. You can read more in this thread".

More often than not this would equal me adopting this explanation when in fact it's not my intention to do so. Thus, I'd have to write something like "XYZ claimed that this would happen because blabla [brief explanation]". But that's exactly what the questioner realizes as soon as he clicks my link anyway. So I don't see the difference except that it would be less economical and more work for me to repeat what others already said before, which I'm not eager to do, really. That's the technical advantage of the WWW to be able to instantly refer to things that have been said before without actually having to repeat them over and over again.

The only point in the example, was finding a way, in which things are effective, and not just doing it as I feel is good, just, lawful or whatever, and hoping other people will agree, and if they don't agree, is their problem. Just that.

Quote:

Well, of course that is a solution, and a very effective one... but well, it's not what we pretend xD. It's like when Catholic Church sais the true solution against AIDS, is the abstinence... well, in fact is true, but it's not the solution we are looking for xD.

Quote:

It depends in how you see that saying... It can be understood as "I will give links as answers to others, as I will be happy with the others do the same", which is good, but also as "I will offend the others (although not intentional), and I will be happy when they offend me", which might not be as good xD. But I think you got the point I wanted to explain.

Just to end, I would like to ask everyone not to get pissed for a stupid thing (and I'm not referring to insults, and those things, but to the small thing that started it all).

Now, you all probably see me as that kind of guy that smokes weed, and wants everyone to be in peace and all that... and is not even near to the truth... but well, never mind xD.

> It can be understood as "I will give links as answers to others,
> as I will be happy with the others do the same"

Yes, that's how I mean it.

> which is good

Thanks :-)

> but also as "I will offend the others (although not intentional), and I will be
> happy when they offend me", which might not be as good xD.

I still think that from an objective point of view there's a slight difference between "feeling offended" (which just requires an assumed intention) and "being offended" (which requires a real intention). That would mean that "I will offend the others (although not intentional)" isn't really coherent, because offending someone from the offenders point of view requires an intention. And I think that nobody can be happy when feeling offended, else it couldn't be an offense, could it? ;-)

Quote:

True. Although, it might have sense from the offended person's point of view. It doesn't justify, but explain things.

I feel offended by this nonsense, lenghty offtopic .

> it might have sense from the offended person's point of view.

I think that also from the view of the person who feels offended the alleged offender needs an intention. That doesn't mean that he thinks he knows what the alleged offender's intention is, just that he believes to know that there is one. Or let's put it this way: Do you think you could truly feel offended if you knew for sure that there was no intention to offend you?

Seriously, we don't need 2nd aw.net in here :/

Quote:

Ups there is something missing.
..speaking with him in Bad Bramsted there is no need for full R300 support to get PowerBook Port out.

> what i understood speaking with him in Bad Bramsted there is no
> need for full R300 support to get PowerBook Port out.

Then why did you (unsuccessfully, as you say) try to convince him to release PowerBook G4 support without full R300 drivers when you now say it's what's been intended anyway? I still don't understand.

While I obviously can't know what pega-1 told you in person in Bad Bramstedt, I do know what he said in the MorphOS presentation video at the same event (German):

"Wir planen halt wie gesagt diesen R300-Support, also diesen neueren 3D-Treiber für die nächste Generation der Grafikkarten, die nach den R200 kamen. Und wenn das drin ist, kann man dann sicherlich auch mal über den PowerBook-Kram reden."

Rough translation:
"As said we plan R300 support, i.e. those more recent 3D drivers for the next generation of graphics cards which succeeded the R200. And when this is implemented we can start talking about the PowerBook stuff."

Do you think that this statement does *not* mean that full R300 support is supposed to be a requirement for a PowerBook G4 supporting MorphOS release?

And as I told you already twice, guruman (who was also there btw) supports my interpretation. To quote him from his report:

"he told the PowerBook G4 version basically ony lacks graphics acceleration support for R300 chipset and wireless support. The first one (both 2D for enhanced displays and 3D) is a must have"

Do you think that guruman has misunderstood something here?

What is your problem what is so hard to understand????
First you pissed ppl on PegasosoForum.de off now the same in here.

Ok one last try, maybe you will get it now.
pega-1 and maybe other MorphOS Team members wan't to have full R300 and Wifi support ready befor they release a Powerbook port.
But when you where in Bad Bramstedt and saw the Port. You would know that for some minor bugs and lack of R300 3D driver and Wifi, it's running well and stable.
Some of us at the meeting spoke with pega-1 to release it as it is in 2.8. Better then wait for the R300 3D and WIFI drivers till 2.9 or 3.0 or later. I think pega-1 was a bit surprised that the ppl would be happy with this limitations. And i can't remeber if i had this conversation with him befor or after the presentation.

And can you tell me why should be full R300 support needed for a release?
Only 2D would be enough for the start.

> What is your problem what is so hard to understand????

I think that I outlined my questions in a very clear and clean language, so it should be easy for you to address them in case you actually know the answers.

> First you pissed ppl on PegasosoForum.de off

???

> now the same in here.

If you mean that I piss you off because I'm asking questions to you then so be it.

> one last try, maybe you will get it now.

I very much hope so. Let's see.

> pega-1 and maybe other MorphOS Team members wan't to have full R300
> and Wifi support ready befor they release a Powerbook port.

Regarding the requirement of full R300 support for a PowerBook G4 release: That's what I've been saying all along (and been criticized for all along, by you and others).
Regarding the requirement of WiFi support for a PowerBook G4 release I'll quote guruman again:

"he told the PowerBook G4 version basically ony lacks graphics acceleration support for R300 chipset and wireless support. [...] the second is really a nice to have for a portable, but nobody is working on it right now and so a first PowerBook release might eventually happen even without the wireless supported."

> Some of us at the meeting spoke with pega-1 to release it as it is in 2.8.
> Better then wait for the R300 3D and WIFI drivers till 2.9 or 3.0 or later.

That would be your (unsuccessful, as you said (quote): "I haven't convinced pega-1") attempt at convincing him, I guess.

> i can't remeber if i had this conversation with him befor or after the presentation.

Do you want to imply that what pega-1 said at the presentation could have been invalidated by the conversation you had with him afterwards(?), so that PowerBook G4 support could in fact be planned to be released without full R300 support opposed to what he says in the video? If yes, then that would change everything of course, like I said already twice. But then, you would actually have succeeded in convincing him, which you clearly said you didn't.

> can you tell me why should be full R300 support needed for a release?

No, I can't, because *I* don't know. I didn't say that I'd think that PowerBook G4 support couldn't technically be released without full R300 support. I've just been saying all along that in the video *pega-1* called full R300 support a requirement for the PowerBook G4 release, and I think I've proven that to be fact.
I asked you before in this thread, and I'll ask you again: Is it really that hard to grasp the conceptual difference between making a statement regarding an issue, which I didn't, and reporting that someone else (a MorphOS Team member actually) has made that statement regarding that issue, which I did? I'm puzzled, really.

So my conclusion is as follows:
On the one hand, we have a public statement by a MorphOS Team member that the PowerBook G4 release won't come without full R300 support. That public statement hasn't to date been invalidated by any more recent public statement (to my knowledge, that is). On the other hand we have your statement that your attempt at convincing the authorities to have PowerBook G4 support already released without full R300 support in MorphOS 2.8 may or may not (you don't seem to know yourself) have succeeded. Go figure...

I don't know what pega-1 is thinking or what is going on in his head maybe he thinks ok PowerBook port don't need wifi and full R300 for first release, or maybe he thinks it still need it.

> I don't know what pega-1 is thinking or what is going on in his head
> maybe he thinks ok PowerBook port don't need wifi and full R300 for
> first release, or maybe he thinks it still need it.

Of course, nobody except pega-1 himself knows what pega-1 is thinking or what's going on in his head, me neither. And that shouldn't be subject to any discussion here anyway, I think. But what's fully relevant for a discussion about future MorphOS releases is what MorphOS Team members like pega-1 actually *say* on that subject, the more if they say it in public (and recorded on a public video, so for everyone to check if in doubt).
To repeat once more what me and others have been repeating here on MorphZone for the last 16 days: At Amiga Meeting Nord 2010 in Bad Bramstedt, pega-1 said that the PowerBook G4 release won't come without full R300 support (but could come without WiFi support).

Andreas

Nah, i'm not going to "self edit" again you ARE a TOSSER

and ONCE AGAIN you Hijacked a thread. I created this *@#@&@)( thread to talk about 2.7 features not about your egotistical antics. Must you post on EVERY thread?

> you ARE a TOSSER

If you write it in capitals it must be true I'm afraid ;-)

> ONCE AGAIN you Hijacked a thread.

Let me tell you where exactly I think this thread got hijacked:

https://morph.zone/modules/newbb_plus/viewtopic.php?topic_id=7574&forum=3&post_id=79532#79532

And, surprise surprise, it's not a message by me.

> I created this *@#@&@)( thread to talk about 2.7 features

Yes, and I actioned your explicit request to "make comments" on your fantasy feature list. And to be honest, I would also have commented it without your explicit request. This is a public forum, after all.

> not about your egotistical antics.

Then why on earth did you hijack your own thread to start talking about me (see link to message above)?

> Must you post on EVERY thread?

I only post on threads I *want* to post on, and as you can easily check for yourself, it's not "EVERY thread".

As I'm not able to open a new pool anymore, can moderators open a pool:

Would you be happy enough receiving MorphOS for PowerBooks without 3D and WiFi support, considering they will show up in future releases?

I'm just wondering, what ppl think about that.

Quote:

fwiw I still like you Andreas

But then again, I'm from an engineering background and like to see sources of information referenced. It's even quite entertaining when the convoluted reference trail leads back (eventually) to what 'so-and-so developer said n-months ago'

/OT

> I'm from an engineering background and like to see
> sources of information referenced.

I'm not an engineer but I also like to see them referenced by others, that's why I give them in the first place :-)

andreas

We know you are not an engineer. You are clearly a PROPHET

Quote:

What is your point? That Andreas deserves to be ridiculed because I said something stupid?

Andreas' post are usually informative with a wealth of good references.

So far your posts have just been childish and a little stupid.

If you want to give someone a hard time for posting on threads without contributing anything useful, blame me.
Frequently, I'm posting questions (and I have some engineering background).

Why are you accusing anyone of highjacking threads, when so far your posts have merely been diversions into personal attacks?

Hey Jim it was a joke relax. The point is Andreas needs some humility. Hubris is not a good thing..

I should have expected that the person who Proclaimed him as his "prophet" would some how make a statement..

Quote:

Yeah, it's about time we all go for a swim to cool of

@AW

You know there is a difference between referencing and being ######

If this wasn't in a subforum I have no power in, this thread would allready be back down to 10 posts or less.

> You are clearly a PROPHET :lol:

You could ask Jim for that shrine. I think he doesn't need it anymore, but you obviously do :-)

> Andreas needs some humility.

Funny remark that. After me having clarified several times to you and others that I don't appreciate being called a "prophet" or any such nonsense you say I'm the one needing humility. Makes sense ...not.