User talk:MikeMol: Difference between revisions
→Respectful behavior toward other users, and towards this site
Line 114:
--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 12:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
: Bleh. It does seem I've misread the discussion. My apologies. This is an artifact of my not having enough time...If you guys want me to come in and try resolving the conflict, I'm going to need information prepackaged, cited and digestible. I see some hope on Kaprekar Number's talk page, in that people started moving toward a structured resolution. That's good! Please continue! Unfortunately, I'm closing on a house this week, and I'm going to have zip spare time to go over the details for a few days. I'll look at it this weekend, if 'briefs' are readily available. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 13:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
::I hope you are enjoying your new house. In your submission to my talk page I was dissapointed to see that you consider it acceptable for RC to be a hostile environment. When you encouraged people to continue moving towards a structured resolution were you calling for Hignights contribution of October 16th which includes:
<pre>
The code that you submitted looked like something a drunk C programmer would have written while doing a first experiment with CL.
</pre>
and
<pre>
I called you a pompous dick AFTER you started dismissing valid criticisms with smart ass remarks, confusing the issue with lies on this talk page and then writing unwarranted comments on someone's user page. If you don't like being called a dick, then stop acting like a dick. It's pretty simple, really. Regarding your latest lie and attempt at confusing the issue, "You have agreed that he replaced your version to 'reduce code; simplify; speed up; conform to task and extra'," I never said that Ledrug's version reduced my code, simplified my code, or agreed to anything on this page. Ledrug's change comments were (once again) comments about his code. He improved his code. You should consider doing the same.
</pre>
or do you consider it a kick in the teeth?
::For the record:
<pre>
(cur | prev) 04:55, 19 September 2012 Ledrug (Talk | contribs) (84,438 bytes) (→{{header|Common Lisp}}: reduce code; simplify; speed up; conform to task and extra) (undo)
(cur | prev) 00:12, 19 September 2012 Lhignight (Talk | contribs) (88,507 bytes) (→{{header|Common Lisp}}: Updated the description of the 'fast' implementation.) (undo)
(cur | prev) 23:54, 18 September 2012 Lhignight (Talk | contribs) (88,429 bytes) (Undo revision 140330 by Nigel Galloway (talk)) (undo)
</pre>
00:12, 19 September 2012 was the last time Hignight had code on this task replaced by Ledrug at 04:55 with the comment "reduce code; simplify; speed up; conform to task and extra". This was his first submission of code so I can see no way of interpretting this as referring to his own code. It is my sincere belief that it refers to Hignights, I may be wrong but I am not Lying. I am not nor ever have been drunk while submitting anything to rosettacode, and not at anytime that comes immeadiatly to mind.
--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 16:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
: Regarding signing posts...there is a note left by another user on your talk page, but on re-reading, it was on the structure of your signatures, not the lack of them. I misread it in a way that backed up a misrecollection. Again, my apologies. Re-reading your contribution history, you've even gone through and adjusted indentation of previous conversation. Whether that's good or not depends on whether it's what the original author meant, but I appreciate the attention. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 13:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
::You are not precise as to which indentation you refer. The origional situation was:
<pre>
12 Common Lisp Implementation
12.1 Conflict Resolution?
12.1.1 Issue the first
12.1.2 Issue the second
12.1.3 Issue the third
</pre>
with 12.1.1, 12.1.2, and 12.1.3 being my response to paddy3118. Hignight changed that as follows:
<pre>
12 Common Lisp Implementation
12.1 Conflict Resolution?
12.2 Testing Common Lisp Contributions
12.2.1 Issue the first
12.2.2 Issue the second
12.2.3 Issue the third
</pre>
my responses now being to his rant, and making no sense. I changed it as follows:
<pre>
12 Common Lisp Implementation
12.1 Conflict Resolution?
12.1.1 Issue the first
12.1.2 Issue the second
12.1.3 Issue the third
12.2 Testing Common Lisp Contributions
</pre>
please advise if it is any other change on which you require claryfication.
--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 16:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
==How can I efficiently find out the author of a solution?==
| |||