• Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r4wp

[Ann-Reply] Reply to Announce group

Gregg
9-Sep-2012
[388x2]
Looking at other blog post comments, Carl's should appear with a 
different background color. It's been so long since he commented, 
that I didn't think about that.
And it tells you how desperate I am for an answer from him. :-)
Steeve
9-Sep-2012
[390]
We all feel the same. That's why we can't clearly see the troll (still 
some hope in our poor heart)
Kaj
9-Sep-2012
[391]
Gregg, I was wondering if the troll did your response, as well :-)
james_nak
9-Sep-2012
[392x2]
No, mine legit. What a world we live in.
=is legit
Steeve
9-Sep-2012
[394x2]
Kaj was asking Gregg. Are you Gregg as well James ? (/me confused 
beyond help)
I see trolls everywhere now :-)
james_nak
9-Sep-2012
[396]
No, I am james and I didn't read kaj's question enough but I have 
an excuse... I am in the middle of a rebol application that is not 
going so smoothly. :-)
Kaj
9-Sep-2012
[397x2]
Well, once after already having been in the first REBOL world for 
some time, someone asked if I was a bot...
I'm probably the bot detecting bot
james_nak
9-Sep-2012
[399x2]
kajbot, eh?
Well, "Kaj" is a one 'syllable' word :-)
Steeve
9-Sep-2012
[401x2]
Kaj means 'chicken" I don't see the connection with robot though 
;-)
Brian didn't see it
BrianH
9-Sep-2012
[403]
I noticed that it wasn't the same color, but guess I took your words 
for it. We'll find out soon enough.
Kaj
9-Sep-2012
[404]
I thought chicken is kai
Steeve
9-Sep-2012
[405]
Well, more I read it, more it becomes obvious.

Last week, a few heffalumps burst into my basement and turned over 
the last barrel of 1999 Châtemateloo

Using a microwave oven, amateur radio, and 4 lines of code in REBOL 
I was able to construct a modem and here I am.
 
Pretty funny
Kaj
9-Sep-2012
[406]
There's at least one such REBOL troll who writes well enough that 
it makes you doubt
GrahamC
9-Sep-2012
[407x2]
heffalumps = fictional animal
Pretty funny though
Robert
10-Sep-2012
[409x2]
Well, now on to creating a new "save-the-world-open-source-license". 
Why is it so hard to just pick one like MIT and release the code. 
Every day we loose, we can't get back. I expect this licensing thing 
to take at least 12 months. It's just waste of time.
And even if it's a troll, Carl should just pick MIT :-)
Henrik
10-Sep-2012
[411]
Max, it's unfortunately fake. Sorry.
MaxV
10-Sep-2012
[412]
Well... I don't know... if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes 
the truth. 
So just repeat this announce, it'll became true!
Gabriele
10-Sep-2012
[413x5]
When I saw Max's post here, I went to check the blog because I thought 
it was a joke from Max. :-)
But, apparently it's a joke from someone else.
I find it funny that you guys fell for it, it was clearly not Carl's 
style of writing. Besides, he already has his own open source license. 
:) (When I was in Ukiah, we went to lunch with his - at the time 
- lawyer, who created his own license... I can't find it on Wikipedia 
right now, but it used to be there.)
ok, i think it was Lawrence Rosen and the license was the Open Software 
License.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Software_License
BrianH
10-Sep-2012
[418]
I'm more concerned about the license. His last attempt at an open 
source R3 license wasn't - it had usage restrictions that violated 
the definition. That's why all of my mezzanine work was MIT licensed, 
even the stuff that Carl included in R2 and R3.
DocKimbel
10-Sep-2012
[419]
So, just the mezz code recently added or all R2/R3 mezz code is MIT?
Andreas
10-Sep-2012
[420]
Heh, so the person impersonating Carl on his blog is now also trying 
to fake the yellow background? Quite insistent, that one :)
Kaj
10-Sep-2012
[421x2]
Ah, I was wondering, because it's not completely filled out, but 
he got me this time
I can't find anything on Github
BrianH
10-Sep-2012
[423]
Doc, maybe half of R3's mezz code is MIT (since I wrote it). All 
R2 mezz changes since 2.7.5 are MIT too since they're licensed from 
R2/Forward.
Henrik
10-Sep-2012
[424]
The HTML is screwed up in the comments section now.
Kaj
10-Sep-2012
[425]
Sorry, just tried to make a point :-)
Arnold
10-Sep-2012
[426]
You replied the same second Kaj Luke!
Kaj
10-Sep-2012
[427]
No, that's another way to prove the point. You can just edit the 
time of your message. Do you want me to answer before the previous 
post? :-)
Arnold
10-Sep-2012
[428]
Maybe you can get the columns the same height again? No I just wrote 
it to point this out in case someone doesn't notice.
Kaj
10-Sep-2012
[429]
No, I can't edit previous messages. Maybe the troll can
Arnold
10-Sep-2012
[430]
I was doubting my previous postings ;)
GrahamC
10-Sep-2012
[431]
We have no proof the second fake Carl is the same as the first fake 
Carl :)
Kaj
10-Sep-2012
[432]
To add to the idiocy, there's now a third, real Carl. He's stating 
he agrees with the fake one
GrahamC
10-Sep-2012
[433x2]
Guess it's the real one now as the fake comments have gone
now to guess which of the other 184 comments were faked
Sunanda
10-Sep-2012
[435]
Hmmmm.....We now know a way to encourage the real Carl to post :)
GrahamC
10-Sep-2012
[436]
Thanks to the fake Carl .. please stand up and take a bow :)
BrianH
10-Sep-2012
[437]
Fake a bow?