Manhattan is a fuckwad, and Microsoft can suck my dick

The BBQ Pit
81

. . . and it’s the emphasis alone that makes your point: by de-emphasizing what I’d emphasized, you changed the sense of what I’d said. If that’s what you need to do before you can deal with it, whatever.

Manhattan knows as well as I do that I had no intention of trolling; that my “threat” to do so was hyperbolic and ironic and entirely rhetorical; that I know as well as anyone else here the defintion of and the proscription against trolling and that I’m not a troll. By highlighting that one sentence in a consistently hyperbolic and ironic post and PRETENDING that I meant it seriously and literally in order to find an excuse to limit my postings in his little fiefdom is dishonest and weasely, and fully what I expect from Manhattan anymore.

82

And before this becomes a debate on my use of the word “ironic,” here’s Webster’s with the sense I employed above:

83

He does? Doesn’t look that way to me.

84

Funny, sounds to me like it’s your livelihood. And it only took you 25 minutes to learn. Poor guy. You are clearly toiling under the oppressive fist of Bill Gates whose products are useless crap.

PS: Watch your back; Manhattan’s really got it in for you. He’s probably lurking outside your window right now, waiting for the right moment to pounce. You’re not crazy. Everyone else is.

85

I have an answer that will solve lissener’s Word dilemna.
lissener doesn’t want to use the local normal.dot because of the maintenance nightmare of having to use the Universal .dot.

Fine, what you do then is create a Word VBA Macro/add-in that will copy the universal .dot file apply any and all toolbar customizations you desire and save it as the local .dot.

Add a reference to this macro as a customization (almost a catch22, but not quite) so all you have to do is press it every morning and you will have the latest universal copy, and still have your customizations.

See how fucking easy that is? for someone with 6000 hours in Office products, I would have expected you to look into VBA as at least one possible option.

86

QED, have you read anything I’ve written? Not that you have to, but if you’re going to respond to it, it might be a good idea.

I have said that I think Manhattan is being dishonest. So quoting him hardly disproves my contention that he knows perfectly well I had no real intention of trolling.

87

I’m still confused as to how lissener’s problem is Microsoft’s fault. As I understand it, they made a decision to store custom toolbar information in the default template file. This has advantages and disadvantages. The plus side is that a normal user (e.g. me) only has one file to carry with them if they want to work on different machines. The down side is that you can’t share just one part of the template with many people. For me, the current implementation is better – I would rather only have one file which contains my preferred default settings. In your situation, this is a problem. Life sucks. Newsflash: you can’t have software which is both simple to use and infinitely customizable.

So quit crying, you big fucking baby. Throwing a tantrum because the program you are using doesn’t magically work in every conceivable configuration is, in a word, stupid.

88

Well, Giraffe, apparently Microsoft disagrees with you: the current version, XP, finally got around to doing what I’ve been talking about.

And other Microsoft products–e.g., PowerPoint–have always done this.

Of course, as you say, there are advantages and disadvantages. The Microsoft ethos of “you have no choice” leads to more and more various disadvantages; I was merely railing against a product that does not allow you to choose which method suited you best.

And I wasn’t crying because it doesn’t “magically work in every conceivable configuration,” but because a single specific function whose need it acknowledges in its other products is left out of the one that seems to need it just as much.

89

Woo Hoo! All aboard the meltdown express. Does suicide by Mod count? If so Tuesday, May 13, 2003, 22:00 EST.

90

I don’t think I’ve ever got involved in one of these types of threads, but I just feel like everyone is childishly pouncing on lissener undeservedly.

I agree with many poster’s comments that the original GQ thread OP was inappropriate for the forum, as well as simply the wrong approach according to simple common sense.

Now, I have no clue whatever history there may be between lissener and Manny and I don’t care enough to search. If it turns out that lissener has repeatedly violated GQ rules with rant-like tones after being warned, well OK.

But judging from this one instance alone why close the GQ thread like that? The only thing I can find in that thread, even remotely inappropriate is the thread title. Ok, so it said Microsuck. Seems to me a simple: “Please keep your rant-like tone in the pit. You are advised to email a mod to change the thread title” or something to that effect would have been more constructive.

But OK, Manny chose to close the thread. It’s not unprecedented or even that radical, and it was perhaps a silly knee-jerk reaction to pit him for it.

Now comes Manny’s punishment. I can predict one possible, perhaps very probable, response to my alternate suggestion regarding the GQ thread as something like: “Do you think we mods have enough time on our hands to suggest to posters that they make requests to change threads, and then sit around waiting for the request before qoing in and wasting more time changing it? It’s easier just to lock it and let the poster reopen it” as if the current punishment of banning participation in all computer related threads won’t be ten times more time consuming to enforce. Besides that, the punishment just doesn’t fit the crime, unless it’s to address the threat of trolling, (a very very stupid threat to make lissener. I mean damnit! What the hell was the point of that???). But still, is threatening to troll the same as trolling??? No more than saying “I’m gonna kill you” is murder or even close enough to it to be punishable by law in and of itself (OK, I’m not a lawyer and have no clue what I’m talking about here, but I hope you get my meaning. Sure, a stalker who poses a real threat to someone is different than your average “I’m going to kill you” statement, but I’m really losing focus here).

But the real reason I felt compelled to get involved is the frustratingly childish way others have since jumped all over lissener with that arrogant “let’s joke in front of him as if he’s not even here about how soon he’ll be banned” crap.

My parents used to do that shit to me when I threw a temper tantrum:
“He’s so bad”
“I just don’t know what’s gotten in to him”
“Maybe he’s on drugs”
and so on…

I mean come on guys, grow up. Why does there always have to be a group of posters that feel the need to fuel the fire like that? That’s the kind of thing I think should be reprimanded by the powers here. Just MHO.

91

Possibly, but you’re being such an insanely obnoxious pissant about a (quite frankly) small time GQ thread locking, which has happened for a variety of reasons to lots and lots and lots of posters over time in many forums. But then you have to go and make it super-personal, and after you’ve indulged yourself in beating on Manhattan like a drum, to then even imply that you were going all this to see the “softies” dance, was about the stupidest thing you could say. Are you just begging for a whipping?

Where is your common sense? Even if Manhattan was quick on the draw because he was pissed at your language, is this really going to help the situation or get you justice, because if you will look around just a little bit you will notice that relatively few people are sympathetic to your plight. And in case you’re curious it’s not because we’re craven toadies with a taste for the mod boot heel, it’s because your complaint is overwrought, and you’re being an obnoxious drama queen.

92

Nope, I’m still not getting it. In an older version of Word, Microsoft made a decision about how to store customized toolbar information in a way that is better for some people, worse for others. Now, there’s a new version which has the features you were complaining about the old version lacking. And this somehow represents Microsoft’s hatred of its users?

you: The current version of Word doesn’t do X.
MS: OK, we’ve added X to our next version.
you: Fucking assholes!

(Incidentally, does anyone know exactly how the XP version of Word stores template and toolbar information – if I want to move to another computer, is there a single file I can move, or multiple ones?)

**

As I said, infinite customizability comes at a cost of simplicity and usability. I guarantee you if they made the program so general that you could set esoteric options like the toolbar and template file structure, you’d be in here bitching about how impossible it was to use.

93

that’s right. 'cause we have high standards for our drama queens around here, dammit. :wink:
Moe - a thread being closed is a really minor thing, generally. it is entirely possible for people to ask via e-mail why, or even post a thread about it, questioning it. However, if, as was done here, you go over dramatic (by closing my thread, you sucked the very life blood out of my loins with a hoover, while treading over my civil rights like the jack booted stalker you are- sort of thing), you loose any hope of having a civil discussion about it and enter the rhelm of obnoxious drama queens.

94

Oh fer the love of Jebus.

The only “softie” in that thread was me. Your tone was already debated before I arrived. I saw no need for a single immature pissant temper tantrum to warrant a Pit thread. Your Mileage, obviously, May Vary. :rolleyes:

I already said this in this thread, but since you ignored it, I suppose I can say it again: I’ll go with <C> as the most childish: Erroneously representing the facts, since I did help you with your OP, moron.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I must continue Project Harm the Species, while you should probably get back to Operation Meltdown.

95

Read the fucking thread. Where did I ever say this? I had no softies in mind at all when I posted the original GQ. I expected answers, if there were any forthcoming, to come from other MS victims who’d found workarounds. My insults, such as they were, for for the product and the company, not for any individual 'Softies. It was after they all started dancing on their own that I jokingly said it might be fun to get them to do the same dance from time to time. THEY chose to come into the thread and make it about them; I was not addressing them in any way.

96

lissener, your choice of subject line encouraged bashers to go at it in your thread. Manny was justified in closing the thread for the pure sake of maintaining decorum in GQ, and in holding you responsible for an inappropriate thread title for the forum. You made the situation worse when you whined like a child when Manny did his job.

Don’t blame them, or Manny, for your inappropriate behavior.

97

lissener you-- you–! Ok, I’ve melted down before too so I can’t say too much. Why don’t you just say you’re sorry dude? You were wrong.

Is it really worth possibly getting banned just because one little measley thread of your got locked?

I read the thread in question and, IIRC, the only insulting thing you did is refer to MS as “Microsuck.” No big deal, we’ve all felt the same way at some time or another, but the bottom line is that it’s manhattan’s forum and if he doesn’t like it it doesn’t stay. Suck it up and try a different approach next time.

98

Whether your statement in this thread

pertained to the original thread or was a comment made in this thread is sort of beside the point. When you’re in the middle of a mod beat down with a fairly short tempered mod who feels you’re pissing in his pond with your language, to pull a little stinker like this out of the bag and throw it in his face as a display of your contempt for his powers of discrimination, whether you intended it as a “joke” or not, is just plain asking for it. Why is this some brain teaser for you? You keep escalating this mess onto new levels. Step back and get some perspective.

99

<irony>Would

be a yes/no question?</irony>

What pissed me off is the non-descriptive title. I’d have had less problem if it had been Customizing toolbars without normal.dot - Micro$uck can $uck themselves (though that would obviously be inappropriate to GQ).

Ike wasn’t teasing posters - it was moderators who were suggested to the F9. I am curious to know if anything came of it :slight_smile:

100

Oh for fuck’s sake, lissener, get the FUCK over it.

God. Yeah, manny’s stalking you. Sure…whatever.

:rolleyes: