| 1 |
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Jonas de Buhr <jonas.de.buhr@×××.net>wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:54:06 +0100 |
| 4 |
> schrieb Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > On Tuesday 11 Oct 2011 12:51:12 Jonas de Buhr wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:03:27 +0200 |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > schrieb Jonas de Buhr <jonas.de.buhr@×××.net>: |
| 10 |
> > > > it's nice how much many people on this this list are willing to |
| 11 |
> > > > help in spite of all this. but am i really the only one who finds |
| 12 |
> > > > the behavior described above at least confusing? |
| 13 |
> > > > anyway, i'm quite convinced it is fake. |
| 14 |
> > > |
| 15 |
> > > no, apparently i am not the only one thinking that: |
| 16 |
> > > http://www.stopforumspam.com/ipcheck/58.243.95.123 |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > Interesting! |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > Well, the broken English is not an insurmountable problem as long as |
| 22 |
> > we understand the question asked. Not everyone is blessed with good |
| 23 |
> > knowledge of the English language. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> i totally agree to that given any effort on the other end i would do my |
| 26 |
> best to help as well. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> > The questions seem genuine, so it may help the OP or others that have |
| 29 |
> > similar problems. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> right, the replies probably gave the thread some value ;) |
| 32 |
> but there was *no* reaction at all to the proposed solutions, hints and |
| 33 |
> info requests. why ask for help if you don't even try the suggestions? |
| 34 |
> it takes you about ten minutes of reading this list to realize that the |
| 35 |
> usual way of solving problems is a cycle of "i am trying to do X |
| 36 |
> and receive error Y"->"hey, try Z"->"oh, now A happens"->"try B too" |
| 37 |
> etc. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> > Now, if as you say it is indeed spam, what escapes me is why would |
| 40 |
> > someone spam the list in this manner? It doesn't make sense. |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> my point exactly! i don't get it - this intially led me to post |
| 43 |
> this comment in the first place. |
| 44 |
> what really points into the direction of spam in my opinion is using |
| 45 |
> the different names mentioned of stopforumspam. and that others went as |
| 46 |
> far as reporting it. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> > So I |
| 49 |
> > am led to believe that the peculiarities you mention are probably a |
| 50 |
> > cultural (or personal) issue. |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> possible. but what makes it even more confusing is that this doesn't |
| 53 |
> go well with my experience of chinese people having a hard time with |
| 54 |
> english (i can't really put my finger on it, but it doesn't feel right) |
| 55 |
> and how they react to "hey, you're doing X wrong, thats rude". |
| 56 |
> not meaning to stereotype, it just made it more suspicious. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
I understand why you would think the OP is a spammer, but the topic just |
| 61 |
seems too genuine (to me at least) for this to actually be spam. It |
| 62 |
definitely would have been more polite if Lavender had replied to the other |
| 63 |
suggestions, but (assuming the thread is not spam) you don't know what is |
| 64 |
going on in their life and it may take a few days to respond. Just because |
| 65 |
the person is from China, doesn't mean we should assume they're a spammer |
| 66 |
(following Alan's last reply). |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
-- |
| 69 |
Matthew Finkel |
Archives