Archived from groups: rec.games.int-fiction,alt.lang.asm (
More info?)
Annie wrote:
> Beth wrote:
> > Yes...but, also, in the computer context, there are also "dingbat"
> > fonts...fonts composed of useful shapes and symbols but no
> > alphabetical characters...
[ snip ]
>
> As usual, Beth, you're totally out to lunch.
As usual, Annie, you're replying for no useful reason other than to
continue your "obsession" of "festering hate" to attack anything I post...
> The term 'dingbat' was around for at least 40 years before that
> appellation was applied to a set of non-font 'fonts.'
Correct; Indeed, I'd be surprised if the word was that only "new", to be
honest...Chaucer was using the "f" word and "c" word centuries back but
still some people think these words are "modern"...not at all...
The word "bug", for instance, is certainly far, far older than computers,
even though it's used in a computer context...indeed, it's older too than
electrical engineer (from where computer science stole "bug")..."bug" in
the "malevolent spirit" context, whence the computer "bug" term originates
(via a long chain of "borrowing"), is to be found in Shakespeare...and
people who have no idea of computer bugs or electrical engineer bugs
_STILL_ know of the word...as people often say: "I think I've caught a bug"
when they get a cold or the flu...same concept yet again: "Infected" by a
"malevolent spirit"...the idea that computer bugs are "ghosts in the
machine"...that illness (a belief long ago but, as noted, the use in common
sayings still exists, even though we know it doesn't work that way
anymore...ah, it's still nice on a "poetical" level
is from being
"possessed" by a "bug" or "evil spirit"...
Trace the etymology of the term "bug" back to its roots and we find it
actually refers to "an evil or mischievous spirit"...a "ghost in the
machine"...similar "ghosts" possess people when they are ill (old belief,
still reflected in modern language) when "I've caught a bug"...trace it
back through Shakespeare and other ancient authors using the word in the
exact same kind of context...
And you discover that the apparently "modern"-looking term of "bug" is
centuries old, in fact...just that it kept getting "re-applied" to new
ideas and technology...but the word itself is _ancient_, not "new" at
all...
I'd be surprised if it was only 40 years, in fact...it sounds close to
"dungbat"...perhaps a distortion of an original "you smell of dung" or "you
eat / collect dung" insult from long ago...Chaucer proves that a lot of
insults considered "new" actually turn out to be anything but...I'm just
guessing here but "dingbat" has the sound of being something "distorted",
as it makes no sense otherwise...
My "word origin" book has nothing about "dingbat" (unsurprisingly...it's
only a "concise" book and picks "selected" words..."dingbat" is hardly
"common" enough for them to bother
...BUT it does have "dingy" and, sure
enough, it suggests that some etymologists believe the "ding" in "dingy"
may likely come from "dung" (dhengh, the original Indo-European base) and
the word suggesting "dung-coloured"...hence, if correct, the same
distortion of "dung" to "ding" for "dingbat" kind of makes sense in
"insult" terms...the "bat" similar to "bat" in "acrobat", perhaps? Some
kind of general "dung-person" insult? IN terms of use, that would make some
sense...so that saying "you dingbat!" could mean "you dung-person!"...which
finally explains why it would be an insult and something for people to take
offence at being called "dung"...
Anyway, be it 40 years or more, you are, indeed, quite
correct...BUT...BUT...BUT:
> Why do you think some geek decided to CALL them 'dingbat fonts'
> in the first place? It's because such a non-character 'font' set
> is totally stupid.
Yes, totally...this was exactly what I thought probably happened too...
What you've failed to notice was that I wasn't saying that there was no
connection between "dingbat" as an insult and "dingbat font" as a term, I
was solely mentioning the _secondary meaning_ from the computer context...
You obviously need to look at a dictionary sometime, Annie...you'll note
that many words have _MORE THAN ONE_ meaning...it can be _simultaneously_
an insult and a term in computer science at the same time...
That's what my "mouse" example was about to demonstrate another example
where a word is used in two places...and, yes, for absolute certainty, a
computer "mouse" is called that because it has a superficial similarity to
the animal "mouse" (well, it seems to have its "tail" sticking out of its
face, which is a bit odd...but then, it's an "analogy", not a precise
description that it looks "totally identical" to a mouse or anything
...the fact that there is an animal called "mouse" does not mean there
can't also be a computer input device called a "mouse" too...indeed, we
know that's the case because that's true, as we all know already...which is
why I picked this example because everyone reading will already know about
the two types of "mouse" to understand (well, all except you, it appears,
as you've totally not understood what was being said at all)...
> The scenario that you proposed makes no sense at all.
No, I did not prospose this "scenario" _YOU_ have invented at all...please
quote the text where I stated "because there is a thing called 'dingbat
fonts' this is mutually exclusive with the possibility of their being an
insult 'dingbat' and neither can exist simultaneously"...or point to where
I stated "there is no possibility that one dervied from the other"...
Go have a look...you'll find I made NO SUCH assertion...you have just
"invented" this assertion yourself...
Let me put this as simply as your small, slow mind can handle:
Absence of an assertion does not mean an assertion of absence...
I repeat, absence of an assertion does not mean an assertion of absence...
Yes, I did not say "undoubtedly, the term 'dingbat font' originates from
the insult 'dingbat'"...but not saying it doesn't mean I don't think it...I
completely agree with you, it seems somewhat impossible that "dingbat font"
didn't originate from the "dingbat" insult...and, yes, "dingbat" as an
insult is far older...indeed, I would challenge your misunderestimating
just how old, as 40 years seems a bit too "new" (plus, as it makes little
sense as it stands - "ding"? "bat"? Where's the insult in that? - then I've
a feeling we're looking at a "distortion" of something old over the
centuries...though it's only a guess, the "ding" immediately looks like a
possibility of having been "dung" originally and something with "dung" in
it immediately becomes understandable as a form of insult
...
The "scenario" makes no sense but it's _YOUR_ scenario, not mine...
> Just because you're named 'Beth,' and you happen to live
> in Wales, does that imply that the name 'Beth' now means
> 'a woman who lives in Wales'?
>
> No, of course not. Such a notion would be nutty to the
> point of requiring involuntary commitment.
>
> One can only conclude, therefore, that YOU are, indeed,
> a 'dingbat'...in the classic sense of the term. Hehehe!
Ah, now wait a minute...you've put "in the classic sense of the term"
there...
So, in other words, you _do_ perfectly understand the notion of words being
capable of having more than one "sense" to them...
Which suggests you _wilfully_ misinterpreted my posting...merely to invent
a "scenario" to condemn me by...a "scenario" that clearly was not proposed
by myself whatsoever (a simple review of my post will confirm that no such
assertion, as accused, was ever made or implied)...
I re-iterate, Annie, you're not as good or as clever at expressing yourself
as you think you are...you constantly forget that communication has a
_semantical_ as well as syntactical component...you cannot be saying "in
the classic sense of the term" while simultaneously implying you don't
comprehend words being capable of having "multiple senses" (and if you
comprehend that notion, it makes no sense that you couldn't comprehend that
my post was just talking about an alternative "sense" of the word...indeed,
to qualify your "dingbat" insult at the end, you use "classic sense"
directly...for you to need to say "classic sense" to differentiate it from
the "non-classic sense" I gave, this 100% confirms you _fully understood_
that I was solely explaining that "non-classic sense"...hence, your
"scenario" is a _willful_ misinterpretation...in short, you're _lying_ -
quite delibrately - because you thought there was an opportunity to
continue your "obsessive" campaign of "festering hate" against anything and
everything I post)...
You are, indeed, quite pathetic, aren't you?
You can't "get over it" and have continued a obsessive personal campaign of
hateful insult over and over and over again for what is now years...you're
also not particularly good at it, if you don't mind me saying, because your
command of the English language isn't as good as you think it is...you
constantly give yourself away in what you say...no, not "psychic", as well
you know, because I've just explained the 100% _logical_ method which
clearly demonstrates either that you're an idiot or that you willfully
misinterpreted my posting, simply to give yourself another platform for
insult...
And I'm considering your state of mind to want to wage this obsessive hate
campaign as you do (it surely now surely be "beyond all reasonable doubt"
to outside observers that you are, indeed, truly engaged in such a
delibrate campaign against me because you've supplied far more than ample
evidence that this MUST be the case)...because, you see, from your very
first posting, you were already doing it...so it couldn't be that I knocked
your nose out of whack that this is simple "revenge"...at least, not
anything _since_ you've posted as Annie, as there's the possibility you
posted as another name before and I might have said something that sparked
"revenge" in your mind...but, on the other hand, "revenge" - of the
obsessive kind - centres around the focus of the grudge...and I see nothing
in particular to suggest that this could be the case...
So, presuming not, this means you attacked and have continued a "hate
campaign" for years _without_ any justifiable reason or even a simple, pure
"revenge" motivation (still quite pathetic, of course, but at least it
would explain your conduct)...leading to the conclusion that you're waging
a constant, unrelenting "hate campaign" (from "medication" to
"brain-washed" to anything that might work, however pathetically so) for no
good reason whatsoever...not from anything I've done...
And if it were, say, nationality (well, you do often display racism or at
least "racial discomfort") then why specifically me? This doesn't add up
either...and there appears to be _NO_ specific reason for you to have
launched this campaign...no "hints" provided, as would be expected from a
_reasoned_ attack, as to what I might have done and what I might do to
redeem myself...
Completely and absolutely motive-less...which brings into focus your mental
state...could it be simply _random_? To just _create_ yourself an "enemy" -
roll of the dice, throw a dart at a list - in order to...hmmm, because you
need conflict? Because your ego depends on being "Queen of the castle"? Ah,
indeed, your first posting _was_ about being the "New Newsgroup Queen",
wasn't it? My "replacement"...ah, perhaps we're not completely absent of
"clues" here, after all...and you'd thought that I'd left for good at the
time, hadn't you?
Oh, now I see, I think...you fancied my "job", so to speak...and when I
returned, this meant there wasn't actually a "vacany" there at all...but
you wouldn't let this minor detail stop you, eh? So, you have been trying
to "create a vacancy"...indeed, you tried getting me to leave...didn't
work...then you've been trying to "discredit" me with every post...if I
won't "retire" then you're going to have to try to convince the "boss" to
drop me into a lower "position", yes? You're, in effect, the "office
backstabber" role, aren't you? The one who depends on the person who's in
the "job" you want being "innocent" and "naive" enough not to realise what
your "behind the scenes" plans are...oh dear, too late...I've worked it
out...in which case, sorry, but it's now impossible for you to ever
succeed...I know what you're trying and the "boss", reading this, now also
knows what you're doing...time's up...you didn't manage it before everyone
worked out what you were doing...your opportunity has passed...time to get
used to your current "job" or, alternatively, you could try for the
"position" in another "company"...well, I'll leave that decision up to
you...but you do know where the door is, if you should change your mind...
Of course, it's now inevitable that you'll have some "revenge" concept
hanging in your mind...you, after all, show no capacity to learn from your
mistakes whatsoever...be sure, though, I do have that capacity...and I know
exactly what to expect in way of your attack...
Yeah, guess who's just earnt themselves the "ignore at my complete
discretion" mode again? I did warn you that I would re-enable the policy of
not replying to you (unless, at my full discretion, I felt like doing
so...you're NOT in control here whatsoever and don't make the mistake of
thinking you are), which so infuriated you before...now, where is that
button again? Ah, yes...
*ignored*
Beth