Eric Stevens
That's because you haven't yet grasped the concept.

Sandman
That's a very ironic claim, Eric.

The topic is backup software, and Tony's insistance of forcing the word "protocol" in different ways in relation to it, ever changing the meaning and definition of the word and how the user and the developer in relation to it.

I have no problem using the word "protocol" in relation to a backup process, but Tony was very condescending towards nospam who hadn't heard it used that way, so I poked him to see if he could explain further. He couldn't and is now stuck in a death spiral contradicting himself with every post he makes.

A "protocol", in this context, is a procedure in which a given task should be carried out. You have a list of actions to go through in the protocol. This is nothing weird or even strange even when it comes to backup. But it is unusual to refer to an automatic backup function as a "backup protocol" since by the very fact that it's automatic it means there are no steps to take. It is done automatically.

Tony tried to retcon this into sayiing that the protocol is "internal" in the backup function and implemented by the developer, at which point I - a developer (and others) - pointed out that programmers rarely refer to their internal code structure as "protocols", so it was still an unusual word to be used. Not incorrect or even wrong - just unusual - and as I've said, the kind of term a layman would use to describe something he doesn't know anything about.