[OG] [NITRO] - Mr. George Moschovitis applies Censorship on Public Project Forum

ruby-talk
21

Paul Hanchett wrote:
[moved down]

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Friday wrote: [...] - (unbelievable)

Please grow mentally up before placing such an amateurish
CyberDoctor analysis, which could have hurted deeply someone with a
psych/situation that you describe.

-

As for me, the information is publically available:

simply interconnect those 3 parts

http://lazaridis.com/resumes/lazaridis.html

http://lazaridis.com/core/index.html

http://lazaridis.com/case/ide/index.html

And what do they mean? I see that you have self-initiated
"evaluation" projects on various subjects. I don't see that anyone
else has reviewed or agreed with them. I see that you list a number
of projects as "failures", which is very impressive indeed. In no
case do you post enough information to identify the company you claim
to have worked for.

This is gentleness.

It would be not good for the reputation of the companies.

You demonstrate incomplete thinking and an inability to communicate
with others, which is characterized by a failure to realize that communications requires the ability to empathize with others. You cannot empathize because to do so would require that you realize that
there are other valid points of view beyond your own.

Ilias, you really do need some counseling.

Yes, this is true.

As stated, I cannot apply my own process to my own system (website etc.).

Don't worry, i've no problem to accept my limits.

I've already asked for assistance.

Please get it for your own sake!

Paying for feedback would be the most efficient thing.

But I'm out of money.

Thus I go the "share results" way.

···

-

So, this was my last try to explain you, Mr. CyberDoctor.

..

--
http://lazaridis.com

22

"Paul Hanchett" <paulha@aracnet.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:d5j10u01bhk@enews3.newsguy.com...

And what do they mean? I see that you have self-initiated "evaluation" projects on various subjects. I don't see that anyone else has reviewed or agreed with them. I see that you list a number of projects as "failures", which is very impressive indeed. In no case do you post enough information to identify the company you claim to have worked for.

You demonstrate incomplete thinking and an inability to communicate with others, which is characterized by a failure to realize that communications requires the ability to empathize with others. You cannot empathize because to do so would require that you realize that there are other valid points of view beyond your own.

The key word is "abstract". Now go figure...

Sad this is

    robert

23

Florian Groß wrote:

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Friday wrote:
[...] - (unbelievable)

Please grow mentally up before placing such an amateurish CyberDoctor analysis, which could have hurted deeply someone with a psych/situation that you describe.

-

As for me, the information is publically available:

simply interconnect those 3 parts

http://lazaridis.com/resumes/lazaridis.html

http://lazaridis.com/core/index.html

http://lazaridis.com/case/ide/index.html

From what I can tell you have essentially been doing nothing productive in the last three years. This appears to be further documentation that Friday indeed appears to be right.

Of course.

What you don't understand or not see must be nuts.

Try it again in one week.

I have seen some efforts of doing things productively (your automated table evaluation seems to be useful even if I'm not too experienced in this area) and I even think that you had a point with trying to open up development of Og

of course I have.

-- but clearly trying to denunciate people on a public mailing list after shouting in their faces is not the right thing.

They denunciate themselves [I'm just a catalyst]

and: i do not shout.

Finally: please evaluate precisely "action vs. reaction".

Producing a patch shows that you can actually write code, perhaps you could contribute back to more open source projects which would be nice on a resume as well.

my resume is irrelevant.

I will reduce it shortly to just the failures.

Please, just take a more sensible / graceful approach and things will work. Even if you think you *are* right and others wrong you don't need to show it

of course i need to show it.

this is part of the process:

http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/process.html

[but I understand what you are talking about]

-- it will make it harder to admit their failure in case you are right and harder to admit your own in case they are right.

I've no problem to admit failure:

LISP - an excercise for experts?
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/169aff411a95dc24

Sorry if it feels bad for you to discuss these things in the public, but I fear you would just ignore these kind of mails if they were send privately to you.

Exactly.

Correct me if I am wrong on this (or reply privately, I don't think anybody will take offense on that) and you would prefer it otherwise.

I would prefere if you could sent me (via email) what I need and what I've asked for:

Analytical feedback to my website.

Of course, I could again be falling for trolling, but this time I didn't push so much effort that it would hurt. I hope others will forgive me in case I added to the noise side of the ratio...

nothing speciall within this list.

excessive off-topics.

..

···

--
http://lazaridis.com

24

Nikolai Weibull wrote:

Ilias Lazaridis, May 9:

this censorship case affects the whole ruby community.

You don't constitute the whole Ruby community, dude,
        nikolai

I don't have to.

Which-Hunting affects always the whole community.

[although i'm not sure yet, if Mr. Moschovitis is the 'hunter', or the 'herd' behind him]

..

···

--
http://lazaridis.com

25

At the least, it probably makes _why quite nervous.

Francis Hwang

···

On May 8, 2005, at 6:14 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Which-Hunting affects always the whole community.