Book search

fundoc wrote:

> Mike wrote:
> >remove nospam to reply.
> Ah, the irony!
> http://rarebooksinjapan.com

Not that chestnut again!

>From the FAQS:
___________________________
1.6 How Do I Advertise My Cool Website?
Add the information below your "signature". It is considered rude to
just blurt out an ad, but if you join in the discussions people will
see the information, and be more interested in visiting as well.
(http://www.massmedia.com/~mikeb/rcb/#5)
___________________________

John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john RemoveThis @rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1126688625.668531.58030@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> Mike wrote:

> >remove nospam to reply.

> Ah, the irony!

> http://rarebooksinjapan.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

Fundoc wrote:

> Irony is defined, roughly, as incongruity between what is expected and what
> happens.

Dear deadloss in limbo,

Looks like you got that definition from
http://www.wordreference.com/definition/irony. Not a very good
definition, is it? Expectations frequently do not match with what
actually happens, but it is not necessarily ironic. If you ever want a
better definition, just ask.

> That definition does not change depending upon a newsgroup FAQ.

That's right. The FAQs do not define or redefine irony or, indeed,
comment on irony in any way. (Sheesh!)

But according to your muddled and partial definition, in order for
there to be irony there must first be expectations and then an
incongruity with those expectations. Now, where do those expectations
come from, in this case? That's right! From the FAQs.

Mike's posting is incongruous with the FAQs, which prohibit commercial
postings. Note that this in itself is not ironic, and illustrates the
insufficiency of the definition you gave. The irony comes in when, in
addition to spamming the group with a commercial posting, he inserts
"nospam" into his e-mail address.

The FAQs allow and encourage people to add a link to their website
after their sig. If you choose to see it as ironic that people actually
do this, that's fine.

In fact, about half of the requests I get relating to my website are
from people wanting free translations, free identification of Japanese
books, and other help, all of which I try to provide (within reason) to
the best of my ability, and the only irony I see here is that some
anonymous Usenet nonentity chooses to take offence and waste my time
with his pathetic and repetitive drivel.

Cheers,

John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john.DeleteThis@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1126698093.224323.316240@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> fundoc wrote:
>
> > Mike wrote:
> > >remove nospam to reply.
> > Ah, the irony!
> > http://rarebooksinjapan.com
>
> Not that chestnut again!
>
> >From the FAQS:
> ___________________________
> 1.6 How Do I Advertise My Cool Website?
> Add the information below your "signature". It is considered rude to
> just blurt out an ad, but if you join in the discussions people will
> see the information, and be more interested in visiting as well.
> (http://www.massmedia.com/~mikeb/rcb/#5)


Dear mullethead in Japan:

Irony is defined, roughly, as incongruity between what is expected and what
happens. That definition does not change depending upon a newsgroup FAQ. Unless
you are Humpty Dumpty in Japan. In which case arr the kings holses and arr the
kings men can't put you togethel again, so it doesn't really matter anyway.

--
Fundoc

Selling as fundoc on ebay
Selling as fundoc on half.com
Selling as fundoc on abe.com
Hardcovers, paperbacks, fiction, nonfiction, first editions, book club editions,
readers digest condesations, anthologies, encyclopedias, dictionaries,
textbooks, cookbooks, newspapers (individually or by the ton), periodicals,
magazines (no National Geographics please!), comics, porn, ephemera, old
shopping lists, bought, sold, traded, bartered.
http://Ibuyandsellbooks.com
http://notacommercialsoliciation.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

Fundoc wrote:

> Unlike you, and Humpty Dumpty, I know the meaning of the words I use.

Congratulations! Now let's see you demonstrate your knowledge. For a
start, can you explain why your primary definition of "irony" is only
the third sense given in the Mirriam and Webster definition below?

>> Not a very good definition, is it?
>
> Isn't it? Because it seems good enough for both Merriam and Webster: "Irony .
> (3) . a state of affairs that is the reverse of what . was to be to expected."
> (W3I, page 1195.)

So if you expect to win the lottery and you don't, then that's ironic?
I don't think so. Such situations *may* contain irony, but if every
case where reality did not meet our expectations is ironic then the
word becomes so general that it ceases to have any practical meaning at
all. Like most dictionary definitions of this particular word, this one
falls down in the face of specific examples.

> sometimes bad things happen, but they don't necessarily make me
> cry; sometimes they even make me laugh.* Does that mean they're
> not tragic?

For someone who claims to know the meaning of the words he uses, you're
not doing very well. Sure, in the debased usage the tabloid newspapers
give to the word "tragedy", every "bad thing" is "tragic". Try reading
Aristotle on the subject, though, and you'll find that most bad things
aren't tragic at all.

> Golly Dr. Johnson, thanks.

Don't mention it.

> My expectations regarding "irony" come from the meaning of the word irony

Is your idiocy congenital, or are you just being intentionally obtuse?
We are not talking about your expectations regarding the word irony. We
are talking about - your words - the "incongruity between what is
expected and what happens".

The question is, what do you expect? You wrote:

> you commented unfavorably upon a post containing a commercial advertisement,
> in a post that contained your own commercial advertisement.

So, you don't expect a post that criticises commercial postings to
carry a commercial advertisement. Fine. Then you say:

> That the FAQ, which I've never read and never will, draws a distinction between
> two types of commercial advertisements, is not germane.

So your expectations are based on failing to make a very simple
distinction between postings which are purely commercial, and serve no
other purpose (and which are not allowed in this newsgroup) and those
which are not in themselves commercial, but which carry a commercial
sig (which are allowed and even encouraged in this newsgroup). That has
nothing to do with your expectations about irony, does it? It's all
about your expectations about commercial postings, and your obtuseness
in failing to distinguish between postings (=message content) and sigs
(=postscript that identifies the sender of the message).

> "About half." So the other about half are from people for whom you hope to
> provide commercial services, most or many or some of whom learn about the
> existence of your commercial website from your posts in this newsgroup, which
> contain an ad for your commercial website? In which newsgroup you complain when
> other's publicize their commercial interests?

I do not complain about anyone publishing a commercial link after their
sig, as specified in the newsgroup FAQs, providing they post a message
that promotes or develops discussion. I do object to postings which do
not promote discussion of any kind and whose only purpose is to
advertise commercial services. Such postings are alien to the spirit of
this newsgroup, and are prohibited by its charter.

> Ladies and gentlemen, the persecution rests.

Not much chance of that, I'm afraid! You'll be back, whining on about
this, as sure as night follows day.

>> the only irony I see here is that some anonymous Usenet nonentity
>
>Quite, a "Usenet nonentity."

No, an *anonymous* Usenet nonentity. Get it right.

>I take it that's as opposed to an important Usenet entity such as yourself?

No, it's as opposed to an identifiable, traceable person, not some
gutless punk with no positive contribution to make, hiding behind a
ludicrous misnomer and sneering and everyone and everything.

What a creep!

John
http:rarebooksinjapan.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john RemoveThis @rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1126742156.972410.151360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Fundoc wrote:
>
> > Irony is defined, roughly, as incongruity between what is expected and what
> > happens.
>
> Dear deadloss in limbo,
>
> Looks like you got that definition from
> http://www.wordreference.com/definition/irony.

Um, no. Unlike you, and Humpty Dumpty, I know the meaning of the words I use.



> Not a very good definition, is it?

Isn't it? Because it seems good enough for both Merriam and Webster: "Irony .
(3) . a state of affairs that is the reverse of what . was to be to expected."
(W3I, page 1195.)



> Expectations frequently do not match with what
> actually happens, but it is not necessarily ironic.

Yes quite. And sometimes bad things happen, but they don't necessarily make me
cry; sometimes they even make me laugh.* Does that mean they're not tragic?



> If you ever want a better definition, just ask.

Golly Dr. Johnson, thanks. Unlikely, although next time I have trouble falling
asleep I may ask you to favor me with an essay.





> > That definition does not change depending upon a newsgroup FAQ.
>
> That's right. The FAQs do not define or redefine irony or, indeed,
> comment on irony in any way. (Sheesh!)
>
> But according to your muddled and partial definition, in order for
> there to be irony there must first be expectations and then an
> incongruity with those expectations. Now, where do those expectations
> come from, in this case? That's right! From the FAQs.

Um, no. My expectations regarding "irony" come from the meaning of the word
irony, which is in a dictionary. Which is what I just said, with which statement
you just agreed, with an exclamation point!




> Mike's posting is incongruous with the FAQs, which prohibit commercial
> postings. Note that this in itself is not ironic, and illustrates the
> insufficiency of the definition you gave. The irony comes in when, in
> addition to spamming the group with a commercial posting, he inserts
> "nospam" into his e-mail address.

I'm not discussing Mike's post. I'm discussing yours.




> The FAQs allow and encourage people to add a link to their website
> after their sig. If you choose to see it as ironic that people actually
> do this, that's fine.

Dear mullethead:

What I choose to see as ironical is this: you commented unfavorably upon a post
containing a commercial advertisement, in a post that contained your own
commercial advertisement. The end. That the FAQ, which I've never read and never
will, draws a distinction between two types of commercial advertisements, is not
germane.



> In fact, about half of the requests I get relating to my website are
> from people wanting free translations, free identification of Japanese
> books, and other help, all of which I try to provide (within reason) to
> the best of my ability,

"About half." So the other about half are from people for whom you hope to
provide commercial services, most or many or some of whom learn about the
existence of your commercial website from your posts in this newsgroup, which
contain an ad for your commercial website? In which newsgroup you complain when
other's publicize their commercial interests? Ladies and gentlemen, the
persecution rests.




> and the only irony I see here is that some
> anonymous Usenet nonentity

<snip>

Quite, a "Usenet nonentity." I take it that's as opposed to an important Usenet
entity such as yourself? That _is_ ironical. Or is it oxymoronic? Perhaps you'
ll favor us with a tedious, gaseous essay on the related lexicography. I can
hardly contain my excitzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ...


<remaining channeling of Palmbot flames hosed>


** See, e.g., http://theweasels.com/.
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john RemoveThis @rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1126802095.079427.160660@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Like most dictionary definitions of this particular word, this one
> falls down in the face of specific examples.


Yes quite, damn those dictionaries and their damned definitions. We can only
hope that someday in the near future technology will advance to the point where
scientists can reanimate Dr Johnson's corpse so that you and he can sit down and
hammer out new definitions of certain troubling and unpleasant words so that
they more closely conform to your interweb behavior. You are, after all, an
important usenet personage, and not at all anonymous; its the least they can do.
In the meanwhile, I've taken the liberty of hosing the rest of your post,
because you can jabber till you're blue in the mouth, yammering on and on,
interminably, about Aristotle, and the hierarchy of definitions in Mirriam [sic]
Webster, and how the meaning of words change depending upon what froup you're
reading, and the traffic at your website, and the distinctions between your own
commercial solicitations and those of the interlopers, and the FAQ, and the
strawberries, yes, the strawberries, and how you can prove, beyond the shadow of
a doubt, and with geometric logic, that, that, that a duplicate key to the
icebox does exist, and how you could produce that key, if only . . . . But in
the meantime, you'll remain a hypocrite, and a bromidic one besides.

<twaddle flushed>


"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means
just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many
different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"fundoc" wrote:

>definitions in Mirriam [sic] Webster, and how the meaning of words change
>depending upon what froup you're reading

Tut tut! Don't you know it's the last recourse of the desperate to
resort to commenting on Usenet typos and suchlike errors?

As for the meaning of words, context is indeed tremendously important.
There are newsgroups in which commercial postings are welcomed, and
others in which they are considered spam. But of course you know this;
you simply pretend not to because you are determined to be obnoxious.

>in the meantime, you'll remain a hypocrite

Thank you for that assessment. And you will remain a gutless punk with
no positive contribution to make, hiding behind a ludicrous misnomer
and sneering at everyone and everything.

Is it too late to invite you to get a life?

John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

In article <1126914181.964739.64620.DeleteThis@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john.DeleteThis@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote:

> "fundoc" wrote:
>
> >definitions in Mirriam [sic] Webster, and how the meaning of words change
> >depending upon what froup you're reading
>
> Tut tut! Don't you know it's the last recourse of the desperate to
> resort to commenting on Usenet typos and suchlike errors?

http://mirriamwebster.com/ works porfectly.
--
And when I write the book about my love
It'll be a pop publication, tougher than tough
When I get down on the pages all I missed
It will shoot to the top of the best-sellers list
When I write the book - when I write the book about my love
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"John R. Yamamoto-Wilson" <john.TakeThisOut@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:1126914181.964739.64620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> the last recourse of the desperate

> get a life


Fans of irony take note
 >> Stay informed about: Book search 

"fundoc" wrote:

>> the last recourse of the desperate
>> get a life
>
>Fans of irony take note

Even for you, that's lame. But I take it back. Commenting on typos is
scraping the bottom of the barrel, but I guess the real last recourse
of the desperate is misrepresenting your adversary by quoting little
snippets out of context and then tagging on a supposed witticism that
only you find funny or even apt.

Unless, of course, you wish to demonstrate that you can go still lower?

John
http://rarebooksinjapan.org
 >> Stay informed about: Book search