Sandman
In article <os0i99phs0sv3eiusavajk5r0h26nhreai@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

You guys are trying to enforce your viewpoint with the use of classic troll methods, many which I have pointed out to you.

An no - many times I can't understand what it is you guys are trying to say. Tony, for instance, have been contradicting himself a lot in this thread, mainly due to the fact that he is trying to apply a word ("protocol") to something he doesn't understand (software developing)

Eric Stevens
There is a major part of your mistake. It has little to do with software development other than setting the objectives.

Sandman
That's something you have to take up with Tony, he's the one that started to talk about it, trying to showhorn the word to fit his limited knowledge about it.

Haha, I am jerking you around? Tell me, Eric - in what way did I jerk you around when you joined this thread and posted this unsubstantiated claim:

Paintshop and Corel 11/28/2013 <s14d99tpigvh1jt1g2idvq17u7j8h16t9q@4ax.com>

"The problem in this case is that neither of you properly understand the meaning of 'protocol'."

Eric Stevens
It's not unsubstantiated to the majority of people.

Sandman
But *still* unsubstantiated by you, in relation to the claim you made. Refering to a supposed "majority of people" you claim to speak for has no relevancy at all. Substantiation for your claim has relevancy.

Eric Stevens
You persistently demonstrate that you don't understand the meaning of 'protocol' as it is used in this situation. Otherwise you would not keep going on about 'software development'.

Sandman
Ironic for you to claim that, since it was Tony that brought it up, not me.

How on *earth* can you claim that *I* am jerking *YOU* around here? You are the one who jumped in to the thread and posted an unsubstantiated accusation - something that *still* remains unsubstantiated! That's a *classic* troll move!

Eric Stevens
You substantiate it every time you engage in this argument.

Sandman
Claiming this does not make it true Eric. It was *your* claim, and you've failed to substantiate it.

Eric Stevens
You have ignored all the attempts to explain it to you.

Sandman
There have been no attempts from you to explain the word "protocol" to me that have exposed any misunderstanding about the word on my part. Quite the contrary, it has exposed a gross misunderstanding of the word on your part - something I have *substantiated*, Eric. Your laymen "black box" nonsense further showed that you failed to understand it - as I have explined thoroughly.

Eric Stevens
Your determination to maintain that you are correct prevents you from learning anything new.

Sandman
Correct about what? In contrast to what? Don't be so afraid to be specific, Eric.

You see - I *also* jumped in to this thread, but I did it to question Tony's condescending trolling, not to troll Tony or "jerk" him around. My post contained my interpretation of Tony's post and a desire to expose his very childish attitude towards nospam.

Eric Stevens
"tangle tangle tangle". Are your multiple repeats of that either a meaningful or helpful aid to the discussion?

Sandman
I have made many helpful and meaningful posts that discusses how and when to use the word "Protocol" walong with examples, analogies and pedagogical scenarios. I've been far far more meaningful than either you or Tony has been - ESPECIALLY than you have been.