Simple Question regarding running .py program

rurpy at rurpy at
Wed Nov 14 19:20:13 CET 2012

On 11/14/2012 06:35 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:02 PM, rurpy wrote:
>> On 11/13/2012 11:02 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> To be more accurate: This is deprecated *by members of* this list. As
>>> there is no commanding/controlling entity here, it's up to each
>>> individual to make a decision - for instance, abusive users get
>>> killfiled rather than banned. The use of Google Groups to post is
>>> deprecated in the original sense of the word: strongly disapproved of.
>> s/deprecated *by members of*/deprecated *by some members of*/
>> (and accuracy could probably be increased further by replacing
>> "some" with "a few".)
> I stand by what I said. Members, plural, of this list. I didn't say
> "all members of", ergo the word "some" is superfluous, yet not
> needful, as Princess Ida put it.

Then you would have no problem I suppose with "Australians
are racists" because some Australians are racist and I
didn't say "all"?

I stand by what I said.  Using the passive voice to
give a false sense of authority, leaving out quantifiers 
when there are likely thousands of readers of this group 
perhaps a half dozen who've been vocal against GG, is 
not an accurate description.  

> In any case, the fact remains that a number of this list's best
> responders have killfiled Google Groups posters as a whole.
> Consequently, GG forces you to go to quite a bit of extra work AND
> prevents your message from getting through to everyone. Why go to
> extra work to get a worse result?

As a user of GG, Usenet and email lists I claim you 
are wrong.  GG does NOT require "quite a bit of extra 
work".  If it did, I wouldn't use it.  For occasional 
posters, GG is EASIER.  (It would be even easier if 
Google would fix their execrable quoting behaviour 
but as I showed, it is easy to work around that.)
I think you are ignoring setup time and a number 
of other secondary factors, things that are very
significant to occasional posters, in your evaluation
of "easy".

As for "best", that is clearly a matter of opinion.
The very fact that someone would killfile an entire
class of poster based on a some others' posts reeks
of intolerance and group-think.  And since some of the 
anti-GG proponents are also among the most opinionated 
and argumentative participants here, their not reading
GG posts could be seen as an advantage.

As an aside, I've noticed that some those most vocal 
against GG have also been very vocal about this group
being inclusive.

If one observes that women post here (as a group) 
a lot less frequently then men, and if GG is easier 
for occasional posters, then the anti-GG attitude 
expressed here by a few would have the effect of 
disproportionately discriminating against women.

> I am therefore not going to
> recommend Google Groups to anyone as a means of posting to
> python-list/c.l.p, 

That's fine.  But when doing so please leave out the 
false metaphors...

> any more than I would recommend writing it on a
> Post-It note and feeding it into your floppy drive.

...such as posting here via GG is similar to feeding
post-its into a floppy drive.

More information about the Python-list mailing list