Sandman
In article <dmbfa9luvcj6vcn9ilvqeegu62ufh6bmgq@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens
Let's reduce this to the basics. On the 25th November you are saying:

"That's my interpretation of the term as well, that a "backup protocol" is something you execute manually."

Sandman
Indeed.

Eric Stevens
Note that? Definition (1) A"backup protocol" is something you execute manually."

Sandman
Exactly - I was responding to Savageduck who had just described what he considered to be a backup protocol, which was something done manually.

Savageduck 11/25/2013 <2013112421034119589-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>

"I use the term "protocol" in many different situations including referring to my back-up plan, method, etc. as my "Back-up protocol" especially when it comes to back-up on a road trip. Then I have referred to it as my "Triple Redundant Back-up Protocol" when using my Colorspace UDMA, MBP, & FW800 1TB portable HDD. I have written that in these photo NGs many times"

Also - this is not a "definition" as you falsely call it. It is clearly prefixed with "my interpretation" of "the term", i.e. not "the word".

Eric Stevens
I then rubbed your nose in four undeniably real-world protocols. Then you started singing a different tune, which as it happens is now

Sandman
Why no quote of this supposed "rubbed your nose"? Stop merely claiming things.

Eric Stevens
"The RFC's does not tell my how to code anything, it tells me how my application has to behave, and I can code that in a number of different ways."

Sandman
100% correct.

Eric Stevens
Now you are to definition (2) " ... it tells me how my application has to behave, and I can code that in a number of different ways."

Sandman
The quote above has no definition of the word "protocol", Eric. Stay focused! We we're talking about RFC's that deal with system communication, some of which have the word "protocol" in the name. This has always been totally unrelated to the topic of backup protocols. I was just correcting your misinformation above.

Eric Stevens
Definitions (1) and (2) are mutually inconsistent and both can't be right.

Sandman
So the problem basically is that you can't read English to save your life. You will claim I have stated a definition of the word "protocol" when the quotes you supply for support of that claim shows me doing nothing of the kind. THis is poor, even for you, Eric. You COULD have found quotes of me defining the word, such as this one:

Sandman 11/26/2013 <slrnl98hmr.u9i.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"A protocol is a set of rules and/or steps in a given procedure."

See - that's me *defining* the word. Here's another:

Sandman 11/29/2013 <slrnl9gdg6.99f.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Again, a protocol is a list of actions you are to take in order to fulfill a given task."

See - that's what a definition looks like. These are the kind of quotes you should have found from me where I have been incorrect. Alas, you have been unable to do so.

Eric Stevens
Clearly your use of the word 'protocol' has been incorrect on one occasion or the other. In fact your use of the term has been incorrect until 10th December.

Sandman
You just can't find these supposed incorrect usages of the term, now can you?

See above, those - correct - definitions are from the 26th and 29th of november.

Eric Stevens
don't try to argue that the RFCs are not protocols. The word 'Protocol' is in their respective titles.

Sandman
You're so ignorant, Eric. "RFC" is short for "Request for Comment" and can be about anything, mostly related to computers. Here is RFC 3986, a RFC that discusses URL's, not a single protocol in sight

<http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt>

WHen you say "RFC", you are in reference to a RFC *about* a protocol, like RFC 959, which is about FTP:

<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc959.txt>

This is an RFC that talks about the File Transfer *Protocol*, but I'll repeat this once more - the concept of system communication protocol's wasn't the topic under discussion. Tony once used it as an example, but this was what I said about that at the time:

Sandman 11/26/2013 <slrnl9a72h.eo.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Well, there's your problem. You think a protocol determines what a program does... Maybe that's why you were talking about the totally unrelated FTP before?"

See? The File Transfer Protocol most certainly determines what a program does when it wants to use FTP, but that has nothing to do with the usage of the term "backup protocol" - which is NOT something that determines what a program does.

Eric Stevens
Please, also, do not try to argue that a backup protocol is different from all other protocols in that it refers to manual operations. There is no reason why it can't apply to a network of servers which carry each other's backup data, rather the way news servers work. Such a network can operate entirely automatically and require no manual operations whatsoever.

Sandman
What? I've never said that backup protocols are only manual, it was my *opinion* that the term "backup protocol" mostly refers to a manual task, like the one Savageduck described.

I have told Tony many times that I never ever claimed that it was *WRONG* of him to use the word "protocol":

Sandman Re: Paintshop and Corel 11/26/2013 <slrnl9a696.eo.mr@irc.sandman.net>

"Look - I'm perfectly fine with you calling someone's backup method as a "protocol", you got into this mess because you choose to be all condescending towards someone whose only crime was to say that he had never heard that particular term being used. You are free to use it for whatever you want! You can do your usenet-posting protocol, or your objective-mounting protocol or whatever!"

This was never about Tony not "understanding" the word protocol.