webber@brandx.rutgers.edu.UUCP (05/16/87)
In article <1870@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>, grr@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (George Robbins) writes: >... > If your site has purged the first hundred postings, that is a local problem, > speak perhaps to your news administrator. I've got all 150+ of them here. Exquisite. With a flow of 2 meg per day, few sites can afford even tape backups of news. How do you want requests for your archived stargate material formatted? I have heard a rumour that long ago stargate people actually posted material on their project here. > Unfortunatly, the group has lately become somewhat tedious with ~50% of the > postings coming from one self-appointed stargate heckler. What other kind is there but `self-appointed'. Who do you think should be appointing hecklers? If there are better stargate hecklers on the net, I am perfectly willing to yield my position. Incidently, Chamber's Etymological English Dictionary (1968), defines: heckle, hek'l, v.t. to comb: to ply with embarrassing questions (as at an election). - n. the same as hackle - n. heck'ler. [M.E. hekelen.] If my questions are embarassing, it is only because others have done foolish things. They seem to take the opinion that instead of attempting to defend their mistakes, they will simply wait until all trace of messages disagreeing with their policies have passed from the memory of the net (hence, they don't maintain archives on their machines). >... > Does anyone have a status report? Has anyone bought the magic boxes? Is > anyone receiving the service? Should I go out and buy me a dish? So far, the only reply that I have seen to your request was from a customer of stargate. It will be interesting to see if they will come out of their hole, even to answer such a simple question. ------------------- BOB (webber@aramis.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!topaz!webber)
jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) (05/18/87)
Purely in the interest of correct communication in the American English language, and to disabuse the falsely righteous. (Of c o u r s e , I couldn't be talking about y o u .) I rarely get around to this group any more. In article <236@brandx.rutgers.edu> (somebody) writes: >Incidently, Chamber's Etymological English Dictionary (1968), defines: > heckle, hek'l, v.t. to comb: to ply with embarrassing > questions (as at an election). - n. the same > as hackle - n. heck'ler. [M.E. hekelen.] Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, World Publishing Company: heck.le (hek'l) vt. -led, -ling [ME. hekelin] to harass (a speaker) with questions or taunts -- heck'ler n. Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam Company: heck.le \'hek-!e!l\ vt heck.ling \-(!e!-)li!ng!\ [ME hekelen, _ fr. heckele hackle; akin to OHG hako hook -- more at HOOK]: to harass and try to disconcert with questions, challenges, or gibes: BADGER. \fB syn \fR see BAIT -- heck.ler \-(!e!)l!e!r\ n [ed note: for want of 8 bits, !e! is a "schwa", or upside-down e, the generic vowel sound (my phrasing). !ng! is, of course, the combined n-g symbol ("hang"), the "ng" sound.] [Who, me? Being righteous about righteousness? Nah...] Joe Yao jsdy@hadron.COM (not yet domainised) hadron!jsdy@{seismo.CSS.GOV,dtix.ARPA,decuac.DEC.COM} {arinc,att,avatar,cos,decuac,dtix,ecogong,kcwc}!hadron!jsdy {netex,netxcom,rlgvax,seismo,smsdpg,sundc}!hadron!jsdy
scotty@l5comp.UUCP (05/19/87)
In article <236@brandx.rutgers.edu> webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) writes: >should be appointing hecklers? If there are better stargate hecklers >on the net, I am perfectly willing to yield my position. Great idea! Then George can ramble on about self appointed heckler appointers ;-). >If my questions are embarassing, it is only because others have done >foolish things. They seem to take the opinion that instead of attempting >to defend their mistakes, they will simply wait until all trace of >messages disagreeing with their policies have passed from the memory >of the net (hence, they don't maintain archives on their machines). [ other stuff ] >customer of stargate. It will be interesting to see if they will >come out of their hole, even to answer such a simple question. As a recently hooked up Usenet site I'm afraid that even the NSA couldn't recover any data from the hard disk at my site from the stargate people. I have interesting looking notes from the past two weeks, but I have no hard solid info on just what 'stargate' is except it seems to involve satellites and decoder boxes. And oh yeah, that some people seem to have it in for them :-). If others want an update, I'd LOVE to see one as well. If for no other reason than to figure out why I pay to have this newsgroup fed to me. Scott Turner -- L5 Computing, the home of Merlin, Arthur, Excalibur and the CRAM. GEnie: JST | UUCP: stride!l5comp!scotty | 12311 Maplewood Ave; Edmonds WA 98020 If Motorola had wanted us to use BPTR's they'd have built in shifts on A regs [ BCPL? Just say *NO*! ] (I don't smoke, send flames to /dev/null)
desj@brahms.UUCP (05/20/87)
In article <567@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao) quotes
some definitions which purport to show that the word "heckle" has the
negative connotation of harassment. It is clear from any dictionary
worthy of the name that the original meaning is merely one of hostile
interrogation, but not necessarily with an intent to harass rather than
to inform. The OED:
3. trans. To catechize severely, with a view to discover the
weak points of the person interrogated. Long applied in Scot-
land to the public questioning of parliamentary candidates.
Also absol.
By this standard any cross-examiner, interrogator, or other hostile
questioner clearly qualifies as a "heckler"; any presumption of intent
is unwarranted. Any additional connotation is a quite modern addition
(since the OED does not even *mention* a negative connotation).
-- David desJardins