1 |
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Jonas de Buhr <jonas.de.buhr@×××.net> wrote: |
2 |
> hey guys, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> please don't get me wrong on this one, i mean no offense. |
5 |
> can anyone explain to me what this is? are these lavender threads some |
6 |
> kind of trolling i don't get? |
7 |
> |
8 |
> it (apparently on purpose, since hints in that direction are ignored) |
9 |
> combines loads of annoying qualities: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> - nondescriptive titles |
12 |
> - doing everything to rip apart threads: no In-Reply-To and even |
13 |
> subject changes |
14 |
> - no line-breaks |
15 |
> - difficult to read incorrect punctuation (plenk) |
16 |
> - problem details are kept nebulous and info requests are ignored |
17 |
> - none of the proposed solutions are ever tried or commented |
18 |
|
19 |
To me, the "Lavender's" messages read like someone is going through an |
20 |
automated translation tool to get between English and their native |
21 |
language. (In this case, Chinese) |
22 |
|
23 |
"Anyone can afford ... ?" sounds like bad forced translation between |
24 |
semantic idioms. |
25 |
|
26 |
"Anyone can afford information about build kernel" |
27 |
"Can anyone afford information about build kernel" |
28 |
"Can anyone spend time helping about build kernel" |
29 |
"Can anyone spend time helping me build my kernel" |
30 |
|
31 |
That explains the punctuation (poor translation tool(!)) and nebulous |
32 |
requests. His responses indicated he was reading what had been sent in |
33 |
reply. His first reply and his second reply were closely related, and |
34 |
when commands were offered that allowed him to find the exact |
35 |
information he needed, he gave his third reply indicating he had what |
36 |
he needed. |
37 |
|
38 |
I'm using GMail as my email client, and threading and subject lines |
39 |
showed intact for me until your "this is spam" message following the |
40 |
one I'm replying to. |
41 |
|
42 |
As for line endings, I can think of two possible reasons. The first |
43 |
(and, I suspect, more likely) would be that Lavender is using an email |
44 |
gateway that automatically translates between English and Chinese, and |
45 |
the email gateway did not implement line wrapping (or did so poorly). |
46 |
The second might be that Chinese email clients, frequently operating |
47 |
with an ideogram langauge, don't need to line-wrap so frequently, so |
48 |
Lavender's email client might be buggy in that regard. |
49 |
|
50 |
> |
51 |
> it's nice how much many people on this this list are willing to help in |
52 |
> spite of all this. but am i really the only one who finds the behavior |
53 |
> described above at least confusing? |
54 |
> anyway, i'm quite convinced it is fake. |
55 |
|
56 |
I have no reason to believe it's fake. I'm reasonably sure it was |
57 |
machine-processed, but I expect there was a human at the far end. |
58 |
|
59 |
-- |
60 |
:wq |