| Author |
Message |
robert bristow-johnson
Guest
|
 Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:50 pm Post subject:
When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwidth |
|
|
may i suggest that
1. everyone "killfile" <me@pivacy.net> and any other pseudo-address he
comes up with, if you have such a tool.
2. stop response to all threads and subthreads about him or those that
he has started:
Re: A challenge to Mr. Bean
Re: Impossible sampling theory!
Re: Disappointed
Re: Non-existing signals!!
it looks like the other stupid threads have died, at least
other's participation in them, since i don't see his posts.
3. in case you haven't killfiled him, any response he makes to any
legit thread, to just let that post be a "leaf" on the tree.
can we apply a little collective self-discipline and nurse comp.dsp back to
healthy S/N ratio?
Jerry suggested something like this long ago. even before i jumped back in.
HE WAS DEAD RIGHT ! com'on guys! stop feeding the troll!
otherwise, i'm gonna have to experiment with adding threads to the
"killfile".
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
--
r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stephan M. Bernsee
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:35 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
On 2004-12-10 18:50:45 +0100, robert bristow-johnson
<rbj@audioimagination.com> said:
| Quote: | let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
|
Exactly what I've been saying all along. I'm with r b-j on this.
--
Stephan M. Bernsee
http://www.dspdimension.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stan Pawlukiewicz
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:49 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
Stephan M. Bernsee wrote:
| Quote: | On 2004-12-10 18:50:45 +0100, robert bristow-johnson
rbj@audioimagination.com> said:
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
Exactly what I've been saying all along. I'm with r b-j on this.
|
If I may, eventhough most of what has been going on is a waste, I do
actually, have more appreciation of sampling theory. In a round about
sort of way, in order to establish a tight bound on sampling rates on
band limited signals, i.e. the Nyquist bound, you need to use an
idealized waveform i.e. the Dirac delta. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
robert bristow-johnson
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:19 am Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
in article cpcr3h$51p$1@newslocal.mitre.org, Stan Pawlukiewicz at
spam@spam.mitre.org wrote on 12/10/2004 13:49:
| Quote: | Stephan M. Bernsee wrote:
On 2004-12-10 18:50:45 +0100, robert bristow-johnson
rbj@audioimagination.com> said:
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
Exactly what I've been saying all along. I'm with r b-j on this.
If I may, eventhough most of what has been going on is a waste, I do
actually, have more appreciation of sampling theory. In a round about
sort of way, in order to establish a tight bound on sampling rates on
band limited signals, i.e. the Nyquist bound, you need to use an
idealized waveform i.e. the Dirac delta.
|
the asshole is not Nyquist nor Shannon nor Wittiker (sp?) nor Dirac nor the
sampling and reconstruction theorem nor any sum of idealized impulse
functions. i have an appreciation of the sampling theorem, too. but that
did not come from the troll even though i briefly engaged him about it.
let's talk and even argue about those things (hey, let's toss in the alleged
inherent periodic nature of the DFT while we're at it), but we need to get
disciplined and not respond to *any* post that the troll initiates, and (to
modify my first suggestion), only respond to responses he might make to the
innocent posting legit question and only to clearly correct any falsehood he
may have made in that response. quote the falsehood, but do not attribute
it, and then correct it. then leave it alone. other than that, we should
shut him out completely. and the sooner, the better.
--
r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chrisandra
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:05 am Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
I agree.
Let's leave this person alone now.
Maybe he/she got the message that ya'll don't like him/her messing with
ya'll.
Chrissy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:05 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
The situation is that I am interested in seeing a genuine mathematical
tie-up between real-world sampling and the claims made for the Diracian.
I am consistent in this search. No explanations that have stood the
test of discussion have yet been offered that do not support the
claim that sampling is represented by f(t).d(t-T).
The undesirable and non-technical contributions to this NG have not
come from me. Bristow-Johnson is one of the main guilty parties
responsible for contributions that are at best trolls and at worst
personal attacks that have no place in respectable debate.
The thread that he initiates below is a further example.
If RBJ perceives that the NG is clogging up, then he needs to
look no further than his own keyboard. As to me, I have
consistently chastised those who indulge in irrelevant
behaviour.
I suggest that it is the likes of Bristow-Johnson and others who are
incapable of responding to technical discussion without indulging
themselves in rather silly and infantile irrelevancies who should
be the candidates for ostracism, if there is a need for any
such ostracism.
OTOH, if those whose responses to my posts are aggressive
and unnecessarily personal, then perhaps it would be a good
thing for them to ignore me, for then the search for truth and the
alerting of young minds to a con being foisted on them will
not be sidetracked by the childish stances of those responders.
"robert bristow-johnson" <rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote in message
news:BDDF4C25.2FA4%rbj@audioimagination.com...
| Quote: | may i suggest that
1. everyone "killfile" <me@pivacy.net> and any other pseudo-address he
comes up with, if you have such a tool.
2. stop response to all threads and subthreads about him or those that
he has started:
Re: A challenge to Mr. Bean
Re: Impossible sampling theory!
Re: Disappointed
Re: Non-existing signals!!
it looks like the other stupid threads have died, at least
other's participation in them, since i don't see his posts.
3. in case you haven't killfiled him, any response he makes to any
legit thread, to just let that post be a "leaf" on the tree.
can we apply a little collective self-discipline and nurse comp.dsp back
to
healthy S/N ratio?
Jerry suggested something like this long ago. even before i jumped back
in.
HE WAS DEAD RIGHT ! com'on guys! stop feeding the troll!
otherwise, i'm gonna have to experiment with adding threads to the
"killfile".
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:07 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
Once again, by the childish stance that RBJ continues
with below, with the unnecessary infantile abuse
included therein, it appears that it is RBJ and his
keyboard who constitute one of the worst trolls
who bring this NG down.
"robert bristow-johnson" <rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote in message
news:BDDF6F19.2FDB%rbj@audioimagination.com...
| Quote: | in article cpcr3h$51p$1@newslocal.mitre.org, Stan Pawlukiewicz at
spam@spam.mitre.org wrote on 12/10/2004 13:49:
Stephan M. Bernsee wrote:
On 2004-12-10 18:50:45 +0100, robert bristow-johnson
rbj@audioimagination.com> said:
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
Exactly what I've been saying all along. I'm with r b-j on this.
If I may, eventhough most of what has been going on is a waste, I do
actually, have more appreciation of sampling theory. In a round about
sort of way, in order to establish a tight bound on sampling rates on
band limited signals, i.e. the Nyquist bound, you need to use an
idealized waveform i.e. the Dirac delta.
the asshole is not Nyquist nor Shannon nor Wittiker (sp?) nor Dirac nor
the
sampling and reconstruction theorem nor any sum of idealized impulse
functions. i have an appreciation of the sampling theorem, too. but that
did not come from the troll even though i briefly engaged him about it.
let's talk and even argue about those things (hey, let's toss in the
alleged
inherent periodic nature of the DFT while we're at it), but we need to get
disciplined and not respond to *any* post that the troll initiates, and
(to
modify my first suggestion), only respond to responses he might make to
the
innocent posting legit question and only to clearly correct any falsehood
he
may have made in that response. quote the falsehood, but do not attribute
it, and then correct it. then leave it alone. other than that, we should
shut him out completely. and the sooner, the better.
--
r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:08 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
It is not an issue of being accepted by a group, it is
an issue of soundness in applied mathematics.
"Chrisandra" <marcia7773@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1102727144.463119.49160@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | I agree.
Let's leave this person alone now.
Maybe he/she got the message that ya'll don't like him/her messing with
ya'll.
Chrissy
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:34 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
Right on!
"Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3200rpF3fjpeeU1@individual.net...
| Quote: | The situation is that I am interested in seeing a genuine mathematical
tie-up between real-world sampling and the claims made for the Diracian.
I am consistent in this search. No explanations that have stood the
test of discussion have yet been offered that do not support the
claim that sampling is represented by f(t).d(t-T).
The undesirable and non-technical contributions to this NG have not
come from me. Bristow-Johnson is one of the main guilty parties
responsible for contributions that are at best trolls and at worst
personal attacks that have no place in respectable debate.
The thread that he initiates below is a further example.
If RBJ perceives that the NG is clogging up, then he needs to
look no further than his own keyboard. As to me, I have
consistently chastised those who indulge in irrelevant
behaviour.
I suggest that it is the likes of Bristow-Johnson and others who are
incapable of responding to technical discussion without indulging
themselves in rather silly and infantile irrelevancies who should
be the candidates for ostracism, if there is a need for any
such ostracism.
OTOH, if those whose responses to my posts are aggressive
and unnecessarily personal, then perhaps it would be a good
thing for them to ignore me, for then the search for truth and the
alerting of young minds to a con being foisted on them will
not be sidetracked by the childish stances of those responders.
"robert bristow-johnson" <rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote in message
news:BDDF4C25.2FA4%rbj@audioimagination.com...
may i suggest that
1. everyone "killfile" <me@pivacy.net> and any other pseudo-address he
comes up with, if you have such a tool.
2. stop response to all threads and subthreads about him or those that
he has started:
Re: A challenge to Mr. Bean
Re: Impossible sampling theory!
Re: Disappointed
Re: Non-existing signals!!
it looks like the other stupid threads have died, at least
other's participation in them, since i don't see his posts.
3. in case you haven't killfiled him, any response he makes to any
legit thread, to just let that post be a "leaf" on the tree.
can we apply a little collective self-discipline and nurse comp.dsp back
to
healthy S/N ratio?
Jerry suggested something like this long ago. even before i jumped back
in.
HE WAS DEAD RIGHT ! com'on guys! stop feeding the troll!
otherwise, i'm gonna have to experiment with adding threads to the
"killfile".
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:00 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
And from this moment on, I will endeavour to
cease to chastise those attention seekers who resort
to rather silly and infantile gratuitous abusive
outbursts, for otherwise I am guilty of giving them
the attention that they seek.
I will not respond to them at all, thus starving them
of the fun they seek from trolling. RBJ is one of
the main guilty parties in that respect, followed
in close order by Jacobsen and Paulwhatshisnamewics.
However, I re-iterate that no trolling nor personal
attacks have ever originated from my keyboard. I
point out that if posts in the threads that I have initiated
had remained focussed on technical issues then the
number of posts would be a very small percentage of
those that arose. Significantly, the contributors who
now complain of S-N ratio are those who brought the
situation about. Hypocritical, or what?
Why they could not have simply used their killfiles from
the outset rather than bringing about the descent of this
NG into the gutter is beyond me.
"Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3200rpF3fjpeeU1@individual.net...
| Quote: | . As to me, I have
consistently chastised those who indulge in irrelevant
behaviour. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Airy R. Bean
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:02 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
RBJ - This particularly applies to you.
"Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3202gbF3fvp9eU1@individual.net...
| Quote: | And from this moment on, I will endeavour to
cease to chastise those attention seekers who resort
to rather silly and infantile gratuitous abusive
outbursts, for otherwise I am guilty of giving them
the attention that they seek.
I will not respond to them at all, thus starving them
of the fun they seek from trolling. RBJ is one of
the main guilty parties in that respect, followed
in close order by Jacobsen and Paulwhatshisnamewics.
However, I re-iterate that no trolling nor personal
attacks have ever originated from my keyboard. I
point out that if posts in the threads that I have initiated
had remained focussed on technical issues then the
number of posts would be a very small percentage of
those that arose. Significantly, the contributors who
now complain of S-N ratio are those who brought the
situation about. Hypocritical, or what?
Why they could not have simply used their killfiles from
the outset rather than bringing about the descent of this
NG into the gutter is beyond me.
"Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3200rpF3fjpeeU1@individual.net...
. As to me, I have
consistently chastised those who indulge in irrelevant
behaviour.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Country_Chiel
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Dec 12, 2004 3:07 am Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
"Airy R. Bean" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3200rqF3fjpeeU3@individual.net...
| Quote: | It is not an issue of being accepted by a group, it is
an issue of soundness in applied mathematics.
|
On this point I have to agree. Since and Engineering is all about proving
your hypothesis and this is all he is trying to do. This is Science in
action - he makes claims, others refute it or support it. Ok we could do
withough the childish comments though.
Country Chiel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Cain
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:28 am Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
| Quote: | i have an appreciation of the sampling theorem, too. but that
did not come from the troll even though i briefly engaged him about it.
|
Yours and other's engagements were highly instructive to me
but I agree there is little more to be gained and will join
the silent brigade. It's the attention his pathology feeds
on no matter how negative and if we stop giving it, he'll go
find other groups to mine for it.
| Quote: |
let's talk and even argue about those things (hey, let's toss in the alleged
inherent periodic nature of the DFT while we're at it),
|
'Nother year or so. :-)
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."
A. Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 13, 2004 2:15 pm Post subject:
Re: When do the constituents of comp.dsp stop wasting bandwi |
|
|
"robert bristow-johnson" <rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote in message
news:BDDF4C25.2FA4%rbj@audioimagination.com...
| Quote: |
may i suggest that
1. everyone "killfile" <me@pivacy.net> and any other pseudo-address he
comes up with, if you have such a tool.
2. stop response to all threads and subthreads about him or those that
he has started:
Re: A challenge to Mr. Bean
Re: Impossible sampling theory!
Re: Disappointed
Re: Non-existing signals!!
it looks like the other stupid threads have died, at least
other's participation in them, since i don't see his posts.
3. in case you haven't killfiled him, any response he makes to any
legit thread, to just let that post be a "leaf" on the tree.
can we apply a little collective self-discipline and nurse comp.dsp back
to
healthy S/N ratio?
Jerry suggested something like this long ago. even before i jumped back
in.
HE WAS DEAD RIGHT ! com'on guys! stop feeding the troll!
otherwise, i'm gonna have to experiment with adding threads to the
"killfile".
let's bring the S/N of comp.dsp back up!
--
r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
|
Uhhhhhhh...... is it not the likes of YOU who are wasting the bandwidth? Why
not rather just ignore him? You are feeding the troll by continually posting
responses, and even (like the top post here) originating a useless thread.
Wake up!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in