Why Airplanes Fly - Voids Above A Planar Sheet

"Dudley Henriques" wrote

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by trying
to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless venture destined
to failure as in many cases the person attempting this control on the
forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

It is on this premise where we part ways.

I have no problem with ignoring the occasional hit and run troll, and
ignoring the people that continue to enable him.

When one comes and dominates the group for as long as this one has, and many
people (good people) leave because of it, (and they have left this group in
droves) something needs to be done.

I may be tilting at windmills, but I've always been the type to be prone to
do a little of that. I feel some people need encouragement to change their
views on handling a troll, just as much as you feel the need to encourage
people to change how they fly so they are safe.

I may fail, or become a pain in the butt to some, but I have to try, or I
would not be true to myself. I can live with trying and still failing, but
can not live with not trying.

Such it is in life.
--
Jim in NC

In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by trying
to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless venture
destined to failure as in many cases the person attempting this control
on the forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

"Bob Noel" wrote

Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.

I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make.

What constitutes surrender, in your opinion?

Are you saying ignoring a troll is to play into a troll's hands?
--
Jim in NC

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 08:02:48 -0700, "Gatt"
wrote:


"Ron" wrote in message
.. .

However, that fact should not provoke the kind of vitriolic attacks I've
seen in this forum. Just because someone posts something
outside the box of conventional thinking is no reason to attack them.

The same person posted the same sort of stuff a month or so ago under a
different name, and hasn't acknowledged that he's the same guy.

The vitriol is because it's intellectually dishonest to come in and approach
the group as if you're new to the discussion, and then make reference to
something from a thread that was discussed a month ago.

Additionally, there's a difference between coming in and posting out of the
box versus coming in and suggesting that all the textbooks are wrong. If he
wants less vitriol he'll approach our common understanding of aerodynamic
science with a little more respect when among our own community.

-c


I've monitored this group for several years and contributed a little
now and then. I don't recall a previous post on this subject, but
then I don't read every post either, so it may have slipped past me.
If I've responded to a troll I apologize to the group. However, based
on his OP, he doesn't sound like a troll... he sounds like he
genuinely has some questions on the established theory of flight and
has suggested alternatives by his rudimentary experiments. I thought
the OP was meant to stimulate discussion. It seems it has, along with
some of the aforementioned vitriol.

I'm not sure claiming some of the textbooks are wrong isn't true.
Certainly NASA thinks so. I don't think they are *all* wrong, but
clearly some have misused the theories on why airplanes fly. I guess
we could kick this around for years and not come to agreement. After
all, the argument has been going on since the Wright brothers.

Ron

Morgans wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by trying
to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless venture destined
to failure as in many cases the person attempting this control on the
forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

It is on this premise where we part ways.

I have no problem with ignoring the occasional hit and run troll, and
ignoring the people that continue to enable him.

When one comes and dominates the group for as long as this one has, and many
people (good people) leave because of it, (and they have left this group in
droves) something needs to be done.

I may be tilting at windmills, but I've always been the type to be prone to
do a little of that. I feel some people need encouragement to change their
views on handling a troll, just as much as you feel the need to encourage
people to change how they fly so they are safe.

I may fail, or become a pain in the butt to some, but I have to try, or I
would not be true to myself. I can live with trying and still failing, but
can not live with not trying.

Such it is in life.

I think Dudley is correct, but I also believe that "All that is
necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". However,
on usenet, there really isn't much that can be done. I just killfile
the pests and let the technology take care of it. :-)

Matt

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by trying
to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless venture
destined to failure as in many cases the person attempting this control
on the forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.


I disagree. The goal of a troll is to suck you in to useless discourse.
Ignoring them is what will frustrate them the most and most likely
cause them to get bored and troll elsewhere.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by
trying to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless
venture destined to failure as in many cases the person attempting
this control on the forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.


I disagree. The goal of a troll is to suck you in to useless
discourse.
Ignoring them is what will frustrate them the most and most likely
cause them to get bored and troll elsewhere.


Good grief. you guys are starting to read like a chapter in alice in
wonerland.

Trolls are god's gift to us and I, for one, intend to cherish and nurture
them.


Care for your trolls and the rewards are great.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by
trying to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless
venture destined to failure as in many cases the person attempting
this control on the forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.
Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.

I disagree. The goal of a troll is to suck you in to useless
discourse.
Ignoring them is what will frustrate them the most and most likely
cause them to get bored and troll elsewhere.


Good grief. you guys are starting to read like a chapter in alice in
wonerland.

Trolls are god's gift to us and I, for one, intend to cherish and nurture
them.

If I had no life, I would also. Fortunately, I have better things to do
than entertain trolls! :-)

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote in
:

Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by
trying to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless
venture destined to failure as in many cases the person attempting
this control on the forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.
Surrender plays into the troll's hands and thus is one of the worst
ways to respond to a troll.

I disagree. The goal of a troll is to suck you in to useless
discourse.
Ignoring them is what will frustrate them the most and most likely
cause them to get bored and troll elsewhere.


Good grief. you guys are starting to read like a chapter in alice in
wonerland.

Trolls are god's gift to us and I, for one, intend to cherish and
nurture them.

If I had no life, I would also. Fortunately, I have better things to
do than entertain trolls! :-)

Matt


Apparently not!


Bertie

Morgans wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote

Trolls are a fact of life on Usenet. Trying to control a troll by trying
to control how others deal with that troll is a fruitless venture destined
to failure as in many cases the person attempting this control on the
forum innocently becomes a troll themselves.

It is on this premise where we part ways.

I have no problem with ignoring the occasional hit and run troll, and
ignoring the people that continue to enable him.

When one comes and dominates the group for as long as this one has, and many
people (good people) leave because of it, (and they have left this group in
droves) something needs to be done.

I may be tilting at windmills, but I've always been the type to be prone to
do a little of that. I feel some people need encouragement to change their
views on handling a troll, just as much as you feel the need to encourage
people to change how they fly so they are safe.

I may fail, or become a pain in the butt to some, but I have to try, or I
would not be true to myself. I can live with trying and still failing, but
can not live with not trying.

Such it is in life.


No problem at all. Departure and/or diversity are what Usenet is all about.
We'll meet again someday on some other issue I'm sure
All the best.
DH

--
Dudley Henriques