Re: The problems in comp.lang.c

CBFalconer <cbfalconer@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

"Jeff P. Bailey" wrote:
Richard Heathfield wrote:

... snip ...

Surely that's the wrong way round? If you want the atmosphere
around here to be more positive, *make* it so by posting positive
articles.

I have to say that I'm not satisfied with the views I've read from
people defending the status quo. It does seem to me that there's
an elite here who want to maintain the "purity" of this group, and
they seek to do that by stifling discussion of topics they consider
outside their own interests in C.

You are wrong. The answer is extremely simple. I, personally,

It's not so simple. And no one cares about you personally - it's about
the bigger picture.

like a newsgroup where people are all discussing the same thing.

They are. C.

The item that creates that 'same thing' is the C standard, and this

Or the language C in the real world.

is why we consider anything that ignores it to be off-topic. The

Who is "we"? There is no "we". This is not your NG much as it might
surprise you.

majority here agree with me.

No they don't. A small minority have expressed an agreement with it.


Yes, I do occasionally get off-topic. The reasons are many. But I

And post with a broken signature I notice.

do try to control it. There are others here who simply don't make
the slightest effort.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

Please fix your signature.

.

Relevant Pages