Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright with
just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768
But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of grid,
into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%....
What am I missing here!
Doug
Marc <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8ls60m$7jb$[email hidden]...
the
> > fastest in the world.
> > Gareth Evans
> >
>
>
Is GP3 the worst-looking 3D accelerated game?
Allan Harrison called GP3 the worst-looking 3D accelerated game, blaming sloppy coding. Replies split between those with poor processor occupancy, often on Matrox G400 cards, and those reporting smooth performance on GeForce or Voodoo5 cards. The thread was later dominated by an argument between Glen Priest, Greg Cisko and Uncle Fester over newsreader quoting and manners.
Automated summary.
Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking
game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you play
this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean
honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no!
The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. Perhaps
this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its
physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same
details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massive slow
down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d card should
be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes down to
SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine.
Allan Harrison
Allan Harrison wrote:
Err?....it goes like s**t off a stick on my PIII-450, which is hardly the
fastest in the world.
Gareth Evans
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking > game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you play > this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean > honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! > > The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. Perhaps > this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer.
Allan Harrison <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8ls2vu$aal$[email hidden]...
> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking
> game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution youplay
> this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean
> honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no!
Oh, and I suppose you could do so much better ? Who says that he has spent
4 years making this ? More like it's been four years since GP2.
> The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version.Perhaps
> this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its
> physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same
> details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massive slow
> down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d cardshould
> be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes down to
> SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine.
>
> Allan Harrison
How do you know the physics engine isn't as detailed as GPL ? They are two
totally different styles of vehicles.
So, it comes down to SLOPPY CODING ? WTF ? You've obviously disassembled
and examined the code extensively then haven't you.
I look forward to seeing the "Harrison GP1" game.
Basically, if you like it, play it. If you don't then don't. If you really
want to slag it off, then produce something better and maybe then you'd be
qualified to say whether something is bad due to sloppy coding or bad
physics engines, etc.
I have to agree with Gareth PIII 500 + Geforce
blinding and smooth
"Gareth Evans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
>
> Allan Harrison wrote:
>
> > Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worstlooking
> > game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution youplay
> > this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean
> > honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no!
> >
> > The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version.Perhaps
> > this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer.
>
> Err?....it goes like s**t off a stick on my PIII-450, which is hardly the
> fastest in the world.
> Gareth Evans
>
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:01:26 +0100, Gareth Evans
<[email hidden]> thus spoke:
>Err?....it goes like s**t off a stick on my PIII-450, which is hardly the
>fastest in the world.
>Gareth Evans
>
Maybe he has a video card driver issue. I noticed that GP3 somehow
switched to software mode on my V5 a couple of times and it did run
very poorly. And that on a P3 800. Hardware mode is smooth though.
--
Nos
Looks like the Matrox G400 is your problem I am using a P2 333 and a Geforce
and my Occupancy is around is between 120 and 200. I have the mirrors turned
down. Do you have the lastest Matrox drivers?
Douglas Ellison wrote:
Quoted text (38 lines)
> Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright with > just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768 > > But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of grid, > into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > What am I missing here! > > Doug > > Marc <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8ls60m$7jb$[email hidden]... > > I have to agree with Gareth PIII 500 + Geforce > > blinding and smooth > > "Gareth Evans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > > Allan Harrison wrote: > > > > > > > Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst > > looking > > > > game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you > > play > > > > this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean > > > > honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! > > > > > > > > The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. > > Perhaps > > > > this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. > > > > > > Err?....it goes like s**t off a stick on my PIII-450, which is hardly > the > > > fastest in the world. > > > Gareth Evans > > > > > > >I mostly agree with the original poster.
If bad graphics and jerk-o-vision gameplay is NOT down to sloppy coding then
what is?
The point is that he thinks it looks bad and plays bad. I just happen think
so too (and I have a PC well over and above the min. spec required for GP3).
We are all entitiled to our opinions ("glib mode" off now).
Nick Bull <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> Allan Harrison <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:8ls2vu$aal$[email hidden]...
> > Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worstlooking
> > game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you
> play
> > this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean
> > honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no!
>
> Oh, and I suppose you could do so much better ? Who says that he hasspent
slow
> > down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d card
> should
> > be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes downto
> > SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine.
> >
> > Allan Harrison
>
> How do you know the physics engine isn't as detailed as GPL ? They aretwo
really
> want to slag it off, then produce something better and maybe then you'd be
> qualified to say whether something is bad due to sloppy coding or bad
> physics engines, etc.
>
>
Quoted text (7 lines)
> 4 years making this ? More like it's been four years since GP2. > > > The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. > Perhaps > > this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its > > physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same > > details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massiveQuoted text (8 lines)
> totally different styles of vehicles. > > So, it comes down to SLOPPY CODING ? WTF ? You've obviously disassembled > and examined the code extensively then haven't you. > > I look forward to seeing the "Harrison GP1" game. > > Basically, if you like it, play it. If you don't then don't. If youDefinitely down to V/card & Driver versions. On a GF2 GTS set to 25.6fps at
1280x1024 I get 70% Occupancy at the back of the grid (jumps up to 110% in
external shot though)... Although I have to agree on it being the worst
looking 3D accell Sim.(Except for maybe Eidos's original effort F1GP,but at
least you could tell when 3D Hardware was in use :o) )
Oh well maybe in GP5 or 5,,,, :)
rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:47 +0100, "Douglas Ellison"<[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > >Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright with > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768 > > > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of grid, > >into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > > >What am I missing here! > > > >Doug > > > > Doug, that has something to do with your video card, I bet. > Do you have the latest drivers, etc.? > > You should be running -great- with that setup. > >On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:36:55 +0100, "Nick Bull"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
I could do better with his GP2 source code and 4 years.
There.
Damn easy, too.
OpenSource the bloody game. It will be much better.
No need for GP4 anymore. It won't improve in the driving section, if
it's up to Geoff.
...
>How do you know the physics engine isn't as detailed as GPL ? They are two
>totally different styles of vehicles.
Newton stays the same. If you've driven both (and almost all) sims,
you KNOW that GPL shows how good a driver you are in a far more
consistent way.
>So, it comes down to SLOPPY CODING ? WTF ? You've obviously disassembled
>and examined the code extensively then haven't you.
Experience can tell sloppy coding as well. I'm a professional
programmer and I can see that a LOT of the source code was NEVER even
touched.
>Basically, if you like it, play it. If you don't then don't. If you really
>want to slag it off, then produce something better and maybe then you'd be
>qualified to say whether something is bad due to sloppy coding or bad
>physics engines, etc.
He could have done a better job, and that's an even objective
statement. That's the fact. But oh no, Geoff was going to do it all by
himself. Bad mistake.
Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.53
MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl
Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery
Quoted text (11 lines)
> >Allan Harrison <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:8ls2vu$aal$[email hidden]... >> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking >> game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you >play >> this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean >> honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! > >Oh, and I suppose you could do so much better ? Who says that he has spent >4 years making this ? More like it's been four years since GP2.Well I have a P3 700Mhz, 128mb Ram, GeForce 256 and at 800X600 it runs like
absolute crap (PO 150%-250%) during the start of a race. I usually
understand slowdowns on most games but the graphics in GP3 aren't WORTH it!
There is hardly any difference at all between software and hardware mode
which I find terribly poor. I would be interested to find out why Geoff has
so many pixels in this game? I mean the large majority of gamers these days
have a very capable graphics card.
Can anyone out there tell me why this game took 4 years to make? The replays
are the same, STILL no black flags, poor sound, no 107% rule etc.........
haven't been implemented after all that time! I find it hard to believe that
it took four years for just a tweak in the physics and the addition of
weather.
I don't mind the game at all, it just frustrates me that it lacks these
little important options that are essential in modern F1. Imagine GP3 with
all these little options added (eg A3D sound, more utilising of 3d Hardware,
F1 rules/regulations etc) , it would be fantastic and don't say it's too
hard because plenty of other sims out there have done it.
BTW I run the FPS patch which I find makes the game a hell of a lot better,
would this cause a mass load on the PO??? I would hope not because 25.6
isn't acceptable these days!!!!!!
Also does anyone have some graphics setting that may make this game look
better?
Again I AM ENJOYING THIS GAME!!!!!!!!!!!
Eric Cote wrote in message <[email hidden]>...
>hmmm Allan, I'm starting to believe it goes down to what PC hardware peopleare
looking
>> game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution youplay
>> this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean
>> honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no!
>>
>> The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version.Perhaps
>> this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its
>> physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same
>> details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massiveslow
>> down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d cardshould
>> be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes downto
>> SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine.
>>
>> Allan Harrison
>
Quoted text (21 lines)
>using.... coz on my machine, I actually find it silky smooth :0) > >P3 800, V5 5500 with 2x fsaa at 1280 x 1024 = 40% PO in practice, 75 % PO >in a race. > >Check these images and tell me if it's what you get ? > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_9.jpg > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_4.jpg > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_6.jpg > >Eric > > > > >Allan Harrison wrote: > >> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worstIn article <[email hidden]>, rrevved
<[email hidden]> writes
Same here, who's got time to count pixels when they are racing?
--
Sean Black
Quoted text (22 lines)
>On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:50:21 +1000, "Allan Harrison" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking >>game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you play >>this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean >>honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! >> >>The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. Perhaps >>this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its >>physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same >>details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massive slow >>down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d card should >>be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes down to >>SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine. >> >>Allan Harrison >> > >It looks nice at 1024x768, and plays smoothly on my PIII-600 Voodoo3. > >[shrug] >hmmm Allan, I'm starting to believe it goes down to what PC hardware people are
using.... coz on my machine, I actually find it silky smooth :0)
P3 800, V5 5500 with 2x fsaa at 1280 x 1024 = 40% PO in practice, 75 % PO
in a race.
Check these images and tell me if it's what you get ?
http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_9.jpg
http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_4.jpg
http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_6.jpg
Eric
Allan Harrison wrote:
Quoted text (14 lines)
> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking > game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you play > this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean > honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! > > The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. Perhaps > this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its > physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same > details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massive slow > down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d card should > be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes down to > SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine. > > Allan Harrison"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8lujp0$2q9$[email hidden]...
> BTW I run the FPS patch which I find makes the game a hell of a lotbetter,
This is great. You are having your cake and eating it too. You
totally slagg the game then mention that you are enjoying it.
Wow.
--
[email hidden]
Quoted text (7 lines)
> would this cause a mass load on the PO??? I would hope not because 25.6 > isn't acceptable these days!!!!!! > > Also does anyone have some graphics setting that may make this game look > better? > > Again I AM ENJOYING THIS GAME!!!!!!!!!!!DANG! This is not good news! Are you sure there isn't a glitch here
or an incorrect setting there.causing these problems? DANG!
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Thank You, Gentlemen! This is my idea of a well done thread! There is
good information, plenty of room for the disagreement which obviously
exists on the issue, a minimum of flame, no blue language and no
insults!! Excellent job, and thanks to all. ( I fully realize this
isn't WWW. Sunday School.com, and I can stand some of the opposites of
the characteristics above, especially if the writer can make me laugh
:-)) but there has been too danged much evil-tempered sniping and
irritability on the NG these last few days, IMO!!) ole' Glennie
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Oh shut up already... No one needs you editorializing.
:-)
Who or what were you replying to anyway???
--
[email hidden]
Quoted text (8 lines)
> Thank You, Gentlemen! This is my idea of a well done thread! There is > good information, plenty of room for the disagreement which obviously > exists on the issue, a minimum of flame, no blue language and no > insults!! Excellent job, and thanks to all. ( I fully realize this > isn't WWW. Sunday School.com, and I can stand some of the opposites of > the characteristics above, especially if the writer can make me laugh > :-)) but there has been too danged much evil-tempered sniping and > irritability on the NG these last few days, IMO!!) ole' GlennieRead the "Message" field, Cisco! I believe it says "In response to
Eric Cote". That should answer a couple of your questions. I suppose
on that basis, you could just butt out, being as you are NOT Eric Cote.
That would be too bad, though, cause actually I'd like to think I could
make even a hard-case like you smile once in a while!
As to my "editorializing" which, according to you no one needs; jeez,
you've really got me there. I couldn't make a claim that my comments
should be required reading for anyone at all, but then I'll be
uncharitable enough to say that I've never seen any of YOUR posts I
would rank anywhere near the top of my list for the greatest written
expressions in the English language.
Once in a while your stuff makes me smile, or even chuckle, but
very often what I see is that nasty-tempered irritability coming
through. Maybe that is just your boyish charm sneaking out of the
cracks, but it frequently sounds like "Who asked you, worm, and just
for general information where do you get off opening your yap on my
NG?? When I want to hear from YOU, I'll p*ss in your general
direction"!
In spite of the tag line that one poster uses in this NG which
says something like "One is no less a prisoner just because he gets
to choose a new warden every four years" (or something) I'm still
naive enough to think of myself as having freedom of speech; ergo, I
will continue to have opinions, and I may even make so bold as to post
them in this forum without having asked, may I say, for YOUR
permission.
YOUR freedoms are equally important to me, and though I think I am
generally able to avoid invective, insult and profane expression
(qualities which seem to fall readily to your pen..umm..
keyboard...whatever) YOU obviously have the perfect and total right
NOT to read MY stuff! So there you have it, for what it's worth.
Every time I see something of yours I like, (and it does happen!
:-))) ) I let you know, and SOMETIMES when I see something I DON'T
like, I say mention it. Hope it evens out. I don't need to be
insulted, but I do need information and a good laugh once each post.
my guess is that you are up to the task! :-)))
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>> :-)) but there has been too danged much evil-tempered sniping and
>> irritability on the NG these last few days, IMO!!) ole' Glennie
"Danged"? Do people say that? I thought it was only for taking the
piss out of cowboy types ;-)
Cheers!
John
How the hell can you compare Gp3 to Midtown Madness. Midtown Madness
actually has a physics engine! :)
JOKE
Allan Harrison
"Dan Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8lupts$4ic$[email hidden]...
positive
> aspects of the game such as the weather effects and the fact it's the best
> modern F1 game we have at the moment. However the reason I can enjoy GP3is
Quoted text (17 lines)
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: Greg Cisko <[email hidden]> > Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators > Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2000 11:16 PM > Subject: Re: GP3 - The Worst Looking 3d Accelerated Game EVER !! > > > > > > This is great. You are having your cake and eating it too. You > > totally slagg the game then mention that you are enjoying it. > > > > Wow. > > hehehehehe > > > Well what I mean is unlike some other people out there I find someQuoted text (13 lines)
> because I treat it like a no-brainer racing game like Midtown, which I > totally enjoy aswell. > > However as a sim I feel GP3 is way off and has been made for the average > gamer to enjoy unlike GPL. It's the fact Geoff kept hyping GP3 up as a sim > without the important features that are needed is what I'm slagging. Sorry > for not being clear in my previous post. I didn't want it to end up 100's > of pages long :) > > Hopefully new steps will be made in up and comind sims such as WSC ans N4 > etc. > >----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Cisko <[email hidden]>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2000 11:16 PM
Subject: Re: GP3 - The Worst Looking 3d Accelerated Game EVER !!
>
> This is great. You are having your cake and eating it too. You
> totally slagg the game then mention that you are enjoying it.
>
> Wow.
hehehehehe
Well what I mean is unlike some other people out there I find some positive
aspects of the game such as the weather effects and the fact it's the best
modern F1 game we have at the moment. However the reason I can enjoy GP3 is
because I treat it like a no-brainer racing game like Midtown, which I
totally enjoy aswell.
However as a sim I feel GP3 is way off and has been made for the average
gamer to enjoy unlike GPL. It's the fact Geoff kept hyping GP3 up as a sim
without the important features that are needed is what I'm slagging. Sorry
for not being clear in my previous post. I didn't want it to end up 100's
of pages long :)
Hopefully new steps will be made in up and comind sims such as WSC ans N4
etc.
Rrevved wrote in message <[email hidden]>...
>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:44:57 +1000, "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>Well I have a P3 700Mhz, 128mb Ram, GeForce 256 and at 800X600 it runslike
>>absolute crap
>
>Then return it. You obviously aren't going to believe that it is your
>system, or the config. of GP3 that is at fault.
>
>Get on with your life.
Return what? The computer is fine with all the other games I play, infact
it's beautiful! And as I said I still enjoy GP3 so why would I return that?
If you are confused, read my reply as "Dan Brown" to "Greg Cisko" under this
thread.
Also the problem with slow frame rate was down to the FPS patch, when I set
it back to 25.6 from 30.9 it was fine. Which is a shame because after the
start of a dry race the thing ran beautifully at 30.9 but I had major
slowdowns during the wet. I'm going to have to find a nice medium of FPS and
graphics. I feel a frame rate of 30+ is essential in racing games but Geoff
doesn't think so. Guess people like me ae going to have to deal with it.
BUGGER! :)
DANG! I wrote you a clever, even brilliant :-)) rebuttal this
afternoon and it didn't seem to post up, somehow. As slowly as * I *
type that represents some doing. However, just in passing, didn't
your mama ever tell you not to tell your elders to "shut up" ? VERY
poor form. And further, do we or anybody "NEED (caps mine) YOUR
editorializing"??? Huh??
Remember that old saying about honey, flies and vinegar? Are you trying
to be persuasive and informative, or simply obnoxious? Is
everyone waiting longingly for that next squall of virtual acid rain
you are preparing to visit upon the NG? I dunno...maybe you ARE beyond
redemption, forever outside the bounds of pleasant, polite discourse.
Just make me laugh, or refrain from responding.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Well, I'll try this for the third time! Hey, Cisco, I was not
responding to YOU!! I believe the "message" field says: "Response to
Eric Cote". You could chill a bit while you consider whether your
comments were "editoralizing" or random venom spewing. (DANG!! I
liked those other two messages I posted to this thread for your
enjoyment, and they seem not to have gone!!)
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:56:07 -0700, Glen Priest
<[email hidden]> wrote:
> Once in a while your stuff makes me smile, or even chuckle, but
>very often what I see is that nasty-tempered irritability coming
>through.Cisko is a PD....its to be expected..... Nasty is all they can manage
most of the time.
without having asked, may I say, for YOUR
>permission.
I don't need to be
>insulted, but I do need information and a good laugh once each post.
>my guess is that you are up to the task! :-)))
>
>
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
**ElfKing**
T'was in a kingdom long ago and far away......
The message said nothing of the sort.
--
[email hidden]
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Well, I'll try this for the third time! Hey, Cisco, I was not
> responding to YOU!! I believe the "message" field says: "Response to
> Eric Cote". You could chill a bit while you consider whether your
> comments were "editoralizing" or random venom spewing. (DANG!! I
> liked those other two messages I posted to this thread for your
> enjoyment, and they seem not to have gone!!)
>
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Read the "Message" field, Cisco! I believe it says "In response to
> Eric Cote". That should answer a couple of your questions. I suppose
> on that basis, you could just butt out, being as you are NOT Eric Cote.
Perhaps you should send him email then. Besides, your message said
nothing of the sort. It could be a feature of Outlook express I suppose.
> That would be too bad, though, cause actually I'd like to think I could
> make even a hard-case like you smile once in a while!
I smile all the time.
> As to my "editorializing" which, according to you no one needs; jeez,
> you've really got me there. I couldn't make a claim that my comments
> should be required reading for anyone at all, but then I'll be
> uncharitable enough to say that I've never seen any of YOUR posts I
> would rank anywhere near the top of my list for the greatest written
> expressions in the English language.
Swell.
Now I have never said any such thing. I do have that attitude
when some newbie shows up and starts flaming or talking
stupid, and then dissapears never to be seen again. Yes
I have that attitude towards those people.
Hey, you have the same right to not read my crap.
> Every time I see something of yours I like, (and it does happen!
> :-))) ) I let you know, and SOMETIMES when I see something I DON'T
> like, I say mention it. Hope it evens out. I don't need to be
> insulted, but I do need information and a good laugh once each post.
> my guess is that you are up to the task! :-)))
I guess :-)
--
[email hidden]
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Once in a while your stuff makes me smile, or even chuckle, but > very often what I see is that nasty-tempered irritability coming > through. Maybe that is just your boyish charm sneaking out of the > cracks, but it frequently sounds like "Who asked you, worm, and just > for general information where do you get off opening your yap on my > NG?? When I want to hear from YOU, I'll p*ss in your general > direction"!Quoted text (12 lines)
> In spite of the tag line that one poster uses in this NG which > says something like "One is no less a prisoner just because he gets > to choose a new warden every four years" (or something) I'm still > naive enough to think of myself as having freedom of speech; ergo, I > will continue to have opinions, and I may even make so bold as to post > them in this forum without having asked, may I say, for YOUR > permission. > YOUR freedoms are equally important to me, and though I think I am > generally able to avoid invective, insult and profane expression > (qualities which seem to fall readily to your pen..umm.. > keyboard...whatever) YOU obviously have the perfect and total right > NOT to read MY stuff! So there you have it, for what it's worth."Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8lujp0$2q9$[email hidden]...
> There is hardly any difference at all between software and hardware mode
> which I find terribly poor.
Maybe that's got a little bit more to do with how GOOD the software mode
is...
G
Glen Priest wrote:
>
> Read the "Message" field, Cisco! I believe it says "In response to
> Eric Cote". That should answer a couple of your questions. I suppose
> on that basis, you could just butt out, being as you are NOT Eric Cote.
Not on *my* newsreader it doesn't! Obviously not on Outbreak Express
either as that's what Greg uses. And what is this attitude about, after
the preaching to "lose the attitude" at other people?!? Or better yet,
to quote Mr. Cisko, who the hell are you? :-)
> In spite of the tag line that one poster uses in this NG which
> says something like "One is no less a prisoner just because he gets
> to choose a new warden every four years" (or something)
That would be me. And the words are "Slave" and "Master", not
"prisoner" and "warden". I've had a myriad of sig lines over the past
year or two. Obviously you've missed most of them. ;-) Some that come
to mind: "Unarmed and unafraid", "If guns don't kill people, people kill
people, what happens when you give a gun to a monkey?", "The box said
Windows 95 or better, so I installed LINUX!", "Humanity will not be
served until the last Beaurocrat has been hung with the guts of the last
Capitalist", and "Your freedom's just a state of mind". If you don't
really believe the one of mine that you quoted above, that's your free
delusion.
>I'm still naive enough to think of myself as having freedom of speech;
Agreed
> ergo, I will continue to have opinions, and I may even make so bold as to post
> them in this forum without having asked, may I say, for YOUR
> permission.
Whatever... <shrug>
> YOUR freedoms are equally important to me,
Don't worry about any of us, we can take care of ourselves. ;-) There's
not really any freedom's left to be important.....
You don't like someone's posting style? Killfile them. None of this
crap above is gonna do *anything*, trust me. This NG is really pretty
tame, try some of the other newsgroups out there. ;-)
--
Chuck Kandler
Windows is just a virus with a GUI
Quoted text (10 lines)
> and though I think I am > generally able to avoid invective, insult and profane expression > (qualities which seem to fall readily to your pen..umm.. > keyboard...whatever) YOU obviously have the perfect and total right > NOT to read MY stuff! So there you have it, for what it's worth. > Every time I see something of yours I like, (and it does happen! > :-))) ) I let you know, and SOMETIMES when I see something I DON'T > like, I say mention it. Hope it evens out. I don't need to be > insulted, but I do need information and a good laugh once each post. > my guess is that you are up to the task! :-)))Senninha wrote:
When our older kids were teens, they'd try & substitute "dang" for
"damn". Never flew with me, I'd let them know about it real quick.
Guess he thinks we don't make that connection here either.
--
Chuck Kandler
Windows is just a virus with a GUI
Quoted text (9 lines)
> > "Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > >> :-)) but there has been too danged much evil-tempered sniping and > >> irritability on the NG these last few days, IMO!!) ole' Glennie > > "Danged"? Do people say that? I thought it was only for taking the > piss out of cowboy types ;-)Glen Priest wrote:
>
> Just make me laugh, or refrain from responding.
I don't *think* so! WTF is this, Make me Laugh?? You're wearing rather
thin...
--
Chuck Kandler
Windows is just a virus with a GUI
In what way do you expect the hardware mode to be better?
Higher quality textures? How many graphics cards have enough memory to
handle that?
More polygons/objects? Would only eat up processor cycles needed for
physics/AI/etc. Of course the few cards that have T&L might help, but then
you would lose all the tricks that will have been able to put into the
software routines - without those, T&L engines would probably struggle with
the current amount of polygons, let alone more.
Realistically, the only things that hardware support could improve over the
software mode are:
1. Higher framerates.
2. Texture filtering.
3. Higher resolutions.
... which is precisely what I get.
G
"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8m1e48$4dp$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (14 lines)
> > Graham Triggs wrote in message ... > >"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:8lujp0$2q9$[email hidden]... > > > >Maybe that's got a little bit more to do with how GOOD the software mode > >is... > > > > No not at all, it shows just how poor the hardware mode is. > > >Geez thats too bad...those graphics really bother me....I was gonna
get it for when I want to be amused going around the gokart tracks
they call race circuits these days...but those graphics. eeee...
PAPA DOC
Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand
Voodoo 5 vs Geforce 2 shootout...
Flanker Target
GPL Crash Dummy
Video Card Wizard
www.papadoc.net
FALCON 4 Benchmarks
Rants, Bullshit and Reviews
Quoted text (36 lines)
>hmmm Allan, I'm starting to believe it goes down to what PC hardware people are >using.... coz on my machine, I actually find it silky smooth :0) > >P3 800, V5 5500 with 2x fsaa at 1280 x 1024 = 40% PO in practice, 75 % PO >in a race. > >Check these images and tell me if it's what you get ? > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_9.jpg > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_4.jpg > >http://simracing.com/simracingmag/gif/gp3/gp3_6.jpg > >Eric > > > > >Allan Harrison wrote: > >> Well I think the title sums it up really. This has to be the worst looking >> game ever since 3d acceleration. It doesn't matter what resolution you play >> this game on it is covered with Pixels. What's Geoff's Excuse. I mean >> honestly he said he has spent 4 years making this game. Well umm no! >> >> The 3d version of this game is no different to the software version. Perhaps >> this is why it runs so poor on everyone's computer. Think about it. Its >> physics engine is no where as detailed as GPL yet same resolution, same >> details and it runs a good 10 -15 frames slower than GPL with massive slow >> down. By the looks of these graphics any computer with a good 3d card should >> be able to run it with high detail and it should be fine. It comes down to >> SLOPPY CODING and that the game was built off the GP2 engine. >> >> Allan Harrison >
Graham Triggs wrote in message ...
No not at all, it shows just how poor the hardware mode is.
Quoted text (7 lines)
>"Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:8lujp0$2q9$[email hidden]... >Maybe that's got a little bit more to do with how GOOD the software mode >is... >
Graham Triggs wrote in message
<_hXg5.2145$[email hidden]>...
>In what way do you expect the hardware mode to be better?
>
>Higher quality textures? How many graphics cards have enough memory to
>handle that?
I expect it to get rid of those horrible pixels on the wheels, marshalls,
tire walls etc. etc.. It's almost Duke Nukem quality :) I mean look at games
like SCGT, GPL, VIPER pixels throughout these games are hard to find
(although I don't look for them) but in GP3 there are pixels smack bang
right in front of you on your front wheels, and this gives the game a sloppy
feel IMO. I would expect these pixels in the masses in software mode but not
in hardware. It's not as if SCGT, GPL, VIPER have poor physics engines, in
fact I rate their physics engine over GP3's.
>More polygons/objects? Would only eat up processor cycles needed for
>physics/AI/etc. Of course the few cards that have T&L might help, but then
>you would lose all the tricks that will have been able to put into the
>software routines - without those, T&L engines would probably struggle with
>the current amount of polygons, let alone more.
Again why do games like SCGT, VIPER, and to an extent the good old GPL have
no problems producing wonderfull graphics?
>Realistically, the only things that hardware support could improve over the
>software mode are:
>
>1. Higher framerates.
25.6FPS is nothing for this game to bragg about and at higher frame rates
the horrible slow-mo takes effect. Also with me the software mode runs just
as smoothly as hardware.
>2. Texture filtering.
Yes I do notice this but the graphics still have an out dated look to them
IMO.
>3. Higher resolutions.
>... which is precisely what I get.
Yes so do I but anything above 800X600 on my 15" Monitor mean jack.
I have fiddled with my card settings and yes I have made it look as good as
everyone elses screenshots but still compared to other games out there with
a more powerfull physics engine, GP3 in hardware mode looks poor. Having to
run 25.6 FPS with those quality graphics I find terribly wrong.
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:10:57 +1000, "Dan" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>Again why do games like SCGT, VIPER, and to an extent the good old GPL have
>no problems producing wonderfull graphics?
I tried this, and was quite surprised:
Go drive around slowly up on the grass, and take a careful look at
buildings, objects, barriers, (i.e., check out -anything- that looks
strange or poor, in GP3, or any other sim).
Do the same thing with SCGT/GPL, ect., and try and compare the same
type graphics you saw in GP3.
It's very easy to see why some sims look better than others (just
very good programming).
Geez I gotta un-filter GP3 posts; I'm sick of reading the same thing
100 times! :).
Matt
Well, here we go "Uncle Fester" I'll try to make this brief as possible
(Not one of my few talents) but I do hope to respond to a few of your
comments. With respect to my note to Greg Cisco concerning to whom my
message was directed, I'll try to show what appears on MY computer
screen, the NG presently being downloaded (if that is the correct
word) via "remarq, The Internet's Discussion Network". Here is as
close as I can come to the way it appears on MY screen, and I am
showing what I saw when I accessed YOUR message a bit earlier.
From : Uncle Fester (previous two words in blue)
Topic: Re: GPL- The Worst Looking 3D Accelerated Game Ever
Message: 29 of 36 (In response to Glen Priest) previous 5 words
in blue
Sent Sun,30 July, 2000 13;40:01 GMT
Does that make clear to what I referred when I mentioned to Greg
that the message was directed to Eric Cote, and not to him, in the very
same way your message appears to me: "In response to Glen Priest" ?
You are correct that the initial part of my response to Greg had a
bit of an edge; it was not profane, (and yes, I DO care about
profanity in what is a public forum, and YES I think we are the worse
off for the fact that a huge portion of the population in the USA, men
and women, boys and girls will say pretty much ANYTHING to ANYONE at
ANY TIME. Do I know all the words? Of course! Do I use them?
Regrettably, yes. Do I use them in public? Rarely. Fair?) it was not
insulting, it was not demeaning nor a personal attack on Cisco.
I have seen many messages by Greg and others (and now yours)
which ARE insulting, personal attacks, delivered in a very belligerant
manner suggesting the poster hasn't the right to an opinion or to post
it, hasn't the right to ask a question, or perhaps even to read the NG
dealing with this sim racing thing which we all enjoy (with varying
degrees of satisfaction and success) Several posts to RAS in the
last few days have noted this increasingly shrill environment, and
suggest a reduction in the irritability factor would be appreciated.
You probably have seen them, also.
If you read my posts on this situation recently with any care, I
think you have noted as many conciliatory, peaceful requests for
moderation as there were lines pointing out what seemed to me were
unfair, nasty-tempered invective. When I've read posts which were, for
me. informative and helpful, or made me laugh, whether from Greg Cisco
or whomever, I have said as much and offered my thanks. Isn't that OK?
Don't people post, hoping others will READ their posts?
I am well aware you do not need my thanks or appreciation ( I
could provide some rancorous responses to that sentence, but you
probably will be able to supply your own) but in the polite world
where * I * live, gratitude for help from another, or a kind word, or
a clever one-liner..hey, forgive us, but we kind of smile at those
things and enjoy them.
I do not think you really care for one minute who I am (boy, THERE
is a set-up line if ever there was one!) but since you mention it, I'll
tell you: I am a 67 year-old retired public shcool music teacher, with
a very musical family and three darling grandsons who ALSO are very
musical, an Arts Council Children's Choir Director, a Presbyterian,
(lay reader at church this morning! :-)) ) a church choir bass, a
president of a local retired teacher's organization, new member of a
committee for a Public Radio station in our area, a long time kart
racer, a very poor GPL "driver", a proud owner of asecond and brand new
12 string guitar, an 8th scale on-road gas RC car enthusiast, ...
I suspect we are on very opposite poles of the political spectrum,
so I'll not open that OT can of worms, but when you say that my belief
that I have free speech is "my ( your) free delusion" I guess you mean
that I am free to have that delusion. Probably you would not to allow
my "free speech" to extend to posting opinions and questions on this
NG, maybe? Just wondering.
You mention the "Kill File"; I've heard of it, but don't know how
to set it up, and wouldn't if I could. I can just quietly go past
those posters who seem primarily bent upon insults and picking virtual
fights.
Skip over my use of "dang" and really, any other words of mine
which irritate you; it won't hurt my feelings at all.
I DO love a clever one liner or hot shot from Greg, you, or anyone
else at my expense, or not. Part of my enjoyment of this NG results
from sharp writers who can see the humor in even the sim racing world,
and yep, I DO love to laugh!
I suppose that you are right again in your comment that nothing I
say or do will change anything on this NG, but on the off-chance that
the several guys are correct who are posting recently that fairly soon
the air around here will clear and the level of rhetoric diminish,
maybe I'll keep hoping for a little more civility.
In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; if you
were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good
home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, too!)
and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run
better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Nice epistle... The fact remains that when people with "normal"
newsreaders read you messages, there is nothing in the message
which includes or points to the message you were referring to.
This is especially true if they choose to view only NEW messages.
I think common NG courtesy (something you claim to know allot about)
would dictate that you include the post you are replying to so people
know what or whom you are referring to.
You didn't think this was going to be totally nice did you?
Duh :-)
--
[email hidden]
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Well, here we go "Uncle Fester" I'll try to make this brief as possible
> (Not one of my few talents) but I do hope to respond to a few of your
> comments. With respect to my note to Greg Cisco concerning to whom my
> message was directed, I'll try to show what appears on MY computer
> screen, the NG presently being downloaded (if that is the correct
> word) via "remarq, The Internet's Discussion Network". Here is as
> close as I can come to the way it appears on MY screen, and I am
> showing what I saw when I accessed YOUR message a bit earlier.
>
> From : Uncle Fester (previous two words in blue)
>
> Topic: Re: GPL- The Worst Looking 3D Accelerated Game Ever
>
> Message: 29 of 36 (In response to Glen Priest) previous 5 words
> in blue
> Sent Sun,30 July, 2000 13;40:01 GMT
>
> Does that make clear to what I referred when I mentioned to Greg
> that the message was directed to Eric Cote, and not to him, in the very
> same way your message appears to me: "In response to Glen Priest" ?
> You are correct that the initial part of my response to Greg had a
> bit of an edge; it was not profane, (and yes, I DO care about
> profanity in what is a public forum, and YES I think we are the worse
> off for the fact that a huge portion of the population in the USA, men
> and women, boys and girls will say pretty much ANYTHING to ANYONE at
> ANY TIME. Do I know all the words? Of course! Do I use them?
> Regrettably, yes. Do I use them in public? Rarely. Fair?) it was not
> insulting, it was not demeaning nor a personal attack on Cisco.
> I have seen many messages by Greg and others (and now yours)
> which ARE insulting, personal attacks, delivered in a very belligerant
> manner suggesting the poster hasn't the right to an opinion or to post
> it, hasn't the right to ask a question, or perhaps even to read the NG
> dealing with this sim racing thing which we all enjoy (with varying
> degrees of satisfaction and success) Several posts to RAS in the
> last few days have noted this increasingly shrill environment, and
> suggest a reduction in the irritability factor would be appreciated.
> You probably have seen them, also.
> If you read my posts on this situation recently with any care, I
> think you have noted as many conciliatory, peaceful requests for
> moderation as there were lines pointing out what seemed to me were
> unfair, nasty-tempered invective. When I've read posts which were, for
> me. informative and helpful, or made me laugh, whether from Greg Cisco
> or whomever, I have said as much and offered my thanks. Isn't that OK?
> Don't people post, hoping others will READ their posts?
> I am well aware you do not need my thanks or appreciation ( I
> could provide some rancorous responses to that sentence, but you
> probably will be able to supply your own) but in the polite world
> where * I * live, gratitude for help from another, or a kind word, or
> a clever one-liner..hey, forgive us, but we kind of smile at those
> things and enjoy them.
> I do not think you really care for one minute who I am (boy, THERE
> is a set-up line if ever there was one!) but since you mention it, I'll
> tell you: I am a 67 year-old retired public shcool music teacher, with
> a very musical family and three darling grandsons who ALSO are very
> musical, an Arts Council Children's Choir Director, a Presbyterian,
> (lay reader at church this morning! :-)) ) a church choir bass, a
> president of a local retired teacher's organization, new member of a
> committee for a Public Radio station in our area, a long time kart
> racer, a very poor GPL "driver", a proud owner of asecond and brand new
> 12 string guitar, an 8th scale on-road gas RC car enthusiast, ...
> I suspect we are on very opposite poles of the political spectrum,
> so I'll not open that OT can of worms, but when you say that my belief
> that I have free speech is "my ( your) free delusion" I guess you mean
> that I am free to have that delusion. Probably you would not to allow
> my "free speech" to extend to posting opinions and questions on this
> NG, maybe? Just wondering.
> You mention the "Kill File"; I've heard of it, but don't know how
> to set it up, and wouldn't if I could. I can just quietly go past
> those posters who seem primarily bent upon insults and picking virtual
> fights.
> Skip over my use of "dang" and really, any other words of mine
> which irritate you; it won't hurt my feelings at all.
> I DO love a clever one liner or hot shot from Greg, you, or anyone
> else at my expense, or not. Part of my enjoyment of this NG results
> from sharp writers who can see the humor in even the sim racing world,
> and yep, I DO love to laugh!
> I suppose that you are right again in your comment that nothing I
> say or do will change anything on this NG, but on the off-chance that
> the several guys are correct who are posting recently that fairly soon
> the air around here will clear and the level of rhetoric diminish,
> maybe I'll keep hoping for a little more civility.
> In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; if you
> were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good
> home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, too!)
> and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run
> better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest
>
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
Glen Priest wrote:
Fair enough. Here's how it looks in Netscape 4.73's newsreader:
Subject: Re: GP3 - The Worst Looking 3d Accelerated Game EVER !!
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:02:34 -0700
From: Glen Priest <[email hidden]>
Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions
Start Here
Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6
I suspect the header in Outbreak Express is quite similar to this.
I would disagree on that. However, Greg is more than capable of taking
care of himself. I would never have gotten involved if I hadn't been
mentioned (indirectly) in the message. Since I was, I figured I'd start
at the beginning & work my way through. ;-)
> I have seen many messages by Greg and others (and now yours)
> which ARE insulting, personal attacks, delivered in a very belligerant
> manner
Must have missed my smileys there, bud. Sorry. :-) I'm a generally
nice guy, just don't get me rankled. <g> I don't take a lot of crap,
less in Real Life(TM) than I do here. And I'm known to say exactly what
I think, whoever I'm talking to. My teammate, who I also work with,
could vouch for that one!
Yes I have. I just ignore it, these situations always play themselves
out after a new release of a long-awaited title. No biggie.
No problem. Only thing in that vein that wound me up was, on the one
hand, you were making postings to the effect of (sorry, they're not
verbatim. I don't have the messages right in front of me) "I wasn't
talking to you, so butt out" and "If you can't make me laugh, don't
post". Then on the other hand, you're telling people to be nice in
their postings. Can't have it both ways. ;-)
Very nice to meet you, sir. Too bad it wasn't under better
circumstances. ;-) I'm a 41 yr old auto mechanic from metro Detroit.
Have 4 kids, 4 stepkids, 1 grandchild & 3 stepgrandchildren. Oldest
stepchild is 27. I lived in the ghettoes of Pontiac & Detroit for
*many* years, and suspect I may still retain somewhat of an "edge" to my
personality because of it. <g>
> I suspect we are on very opposite poles of the political spectrum,
> so I'll not open that OT can of worms, but when you say that my belief
> that I have free speech is "my ( your) free delusion" I guess you mean
> that I am free to have that delusion.
Yes, sir. Many feel as you do, so I have no problem with that. I won't
go there either. Suffice to say I'm anti-American (as Americanism is
known in it's present form), I don't vote or participate in the census,
& I'm basically anti-Capitalist. Too many people get used, and lives
get ruined, in the pursuit of Corporate Greed. 'Nuff said there. ;-)
>Probably you would not to allow
> my "free speech" to extend to posting opinions and questions on this
> NG, maybe? Just wondering.
Not at all. I was just pointing out the inconsistencies. Telling
people to be nice while getting somewhat edgy yourself. Without the
inconsistencies, I'd have no problem at all. Just skip right over it...
> You mention the "Kill File"; I've heard of it, but don't know how
> to set it up, and wouldn't if I could. I can just quietly go past
> those posters who seem primarily bent upon insults and picking virtual
> fights.
That's how I do it as well. :-) It was just a friendly suggestion to
help keep the blood pressure down, because all your requests will
basically (if unfortunately) fall upon deaf ears in here.
> Skip over my use of "dang" and really, any other words of mine
> which irritate you; it won't hurt my feelings at all.
Doesn't bother me. Just another inconsistency I'd pointed out.
Admonitions not to swear, followed by thinly-veiled swearing itself. I
have no problem with it overall.
> I DO love a clever one liner or hot shot from Greg, you, or anyone
> else at my expense, or not. Part of my enjoyment of this NG results
> from sharp writers who can see the humor in even the sim racing world,
> and yep, I DO love to laugh!
Same here. That the reason this is one of the NG's I visit on a
"regular" basis.
> I suppose that you are right again in your comment that nothing I
> say or do will change anything on this NG, but on the off-chance that
> the several guys are correct who are posting recently that fairly soon
> the air around here will clear and the level of rhetoric diminish,
> maybe I'll keep hoping for a little more civility.
It's your right, I suppose. Just think it'd carry more weight if it
wasn't followed with rhetoric of your own. ;-)
> In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; if you
> were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good
> home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, too!)
> and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run
> better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest
Take care, Glen. And I rather suspect we're a lot more alike than you
realize. Just come from different backgrounds.
--
Chuck Kandler
A man is no less a Slave just because he is
allowed to choose a new Master every four years.
Registered Linux User #180746
http://counter.li.org
Quoted text (21 lines)
> > Well, here we go "Uncle Fester" I'll try to make this brief as possible > (Not one of my few talents) but I do hope to respond to a few of your > comments. With respect to my note to Greg Cisco concerning to whom my > message was directed, I'll try to show what appears on MY computer > screen, the NG presently being downloaded (if that is the correct > word) via "remarq, The Internet's Discussion Network". Here is as > close as I can come to the way it appears on MY screen, and I am > showing what I saw when I accessed YOUR message a bit earlier. > > From : Uncle Fester (previous two words in blue) > > Topic: Re: GPL- The Worst Looking 3D Accelerated Game Ever > > Message: 29 of 36 (In response to Glen Priest) previous 5 words > in blue > Sent Sun,30 July, 2000 13;40:01 GMT > > Does that make clear to what I referred when I mentioned to Greg > that the message was directed to Eric Cote, and not to him, in the very > same way your message appears to me: "In response to Glen Priest" ?Quoted text (8 lines)
> You are correct that the initial part of my response to Greg had a > bit of an edge; it was not profane, (and yes, I DO care about > profanity in what is a public forum, and YES I think we are the worse > off for the fact that a huge portion of the population in the USA, men > and women, boys and girls will say pretty much ANYTHING to ANYONE at > ANY TIME. Do I know all the words? Of course! Do I use them? > Regrettably, yes. Do I use them in public? Rarely. Fair?) it was not > insulting, it was not demeaning nor a personal attack on Cisco.Quoted text (7 lines)
> suggesting the poster hasn't the right to an opinion or to post > it, hasn't the right to ask a question, or perhaps even to read the NG > dealing with this sim racing thing which we all enjoy (with varying > degrees of satisfaction and success) Several posts to RAS in the > last few days have noted this increasingly shrill environment, and > suggest a reduction in the irritability factor would be appreciated. > You probably have seen them, also.Quoted text (7 lines)
> If you read my posts on this situation recently with any care, I > think you have noted as many conciliatory, peaceful requests for > moderation as there were lines pointing out what seemed to me were > unfair, nasty-tempered invective. When I've read posts which were, for > me. informative and helpful, or made me laugh, whether from Greg Cisco > or whomever, I have said as much and offered my thanks. Isn't that OK? > Don't people post, hoping others will READ their posts?Quoted text (16 lines)
> I am well aware you do not need my thanks or appreciation ( I > could provide some rancorous responses to that sentence, but you > probably will be able to supply your own) but in the polite world > where * I * live, gratitude for help from another, or a kind word, or > a clever one-liner..hey, forgive us, but we kind of smile at those > things and enjoy them. > I do not think you really care for one minute who I am (boy, THERE > is a set-up line if ever there was one!) but since you mention it, I'll > tell you: I am a 67 year-old retired public shcool music teacher, with > a very musical family and three darling grandsons who ALSO are very > musical, an Arts Council Children's Choir Director, a Presbyterian, > (lay reader at church this morning! :-)) ) a church choir bass, a > president of a local retired teacher's organization, new member of a > committee for a Public Radio station in our area, a long time kart > racer, a very poor GPL "driver", a proud owner of asecond and brand new > 12 string guitar, an 8th scale on-road gas RC car enthusiast, ...At this point, I am much inclined to ignore your comments directed to
me in the thread above, because I spent some considerable time last
evening typing out a response to several of your statements and
"questions" only to find that the message didn't fly.
It seems clear to me that you glory in ill-tempered invective and
put-downs directed at anyone who has somehow gotten on your bad side,
and I should not be surprised at that from a person who has
announced on this forum that he has given his boss a boat-load of crap
for three years since the union will protect him against the boss'
saying anything; "harrassment" I think you suggested, would be the cry.
Fine.
It takes all kinds of people in "real life", so it takes all kinds
of people on this NG.
I'm sorry my danged message from last night didn't get out; it
was not an attack, it was not belligerant; it was conciliatory. I
ended by saying if you were here I'd offer you an hand-shake, a cup of
tea and some really good home-made cookies.
I don't know how to make a "kill-file" and wouldn't if I could;
I'll just pass over posters who I've concluded are mainly trying to
bait readers into an irritable exchange.
Well, maybe THIS one will go past the keyboard!
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:02:34 -0700, Glen Priest
<[email hidden]> wrote:
<snip snip snip>
> In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; if you
>were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good
>home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, too!)
>and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run
>better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest
I don't know what this thread is about, I didn't follow it, but
sometimes it's easy to forget that there's a real person behind a
message or a nickname. I'm quite sure that people who have a quite big
mouth here (no name calling - hello Greg) wouldn't have such a loud
mouth if they were talking to these people in real life instead of
being rude to them here on RAS.
A couple of weeks ago I attended a LAN party where I met quite some
well-known names from WinVROC. It was really weird to meet all these
people in real life, and when I met them after the LAN party again on
VROC, I looked in a completely different way at all those names, now
that I knew the faces behind the names.
Andre
>
>
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
Glen Priest wrote:
I understand your frustration. I think your news server is having
problems. I've already responded to your post you mentioned above.
> and I should not be surprised at that from a person who has
> announced on this forum that he has given his boss a boat-load of crap
> for three years since the union will protect him against the boss'
> saying anything; "harrassment" I think you suggested, would be the cry.
Really don't wanna get this far OT here, but I gotta explain further in
order to defend myself here. My boss at that time was a new hire. He
was gonna "change the world", if you know what I mean. Well, he set up
this program in order to measure our on-the-job performance. He also
wanted at least 95% of our on-the-clock time to be covered in car
repairs. (I'm a fleet auto mechanic). He started giving me grief about
only have 93.something% of my time accounted for & I countered to him
that while I was active less time of my day, other aspects of his
measurement showed I was getting more cars done than others. I pointed
out to him that he should be shaking my hand for getting more done, in
less time, than some others there. At that point, he labeled me a
troublemaker & set out to get me out of there. Well, a couple weeks
later, I'm on a test-drive. I come back & he looks mad but doesn't say
a word. This was on a Sunday. Monday I come in, & he wants to fire
me. Says I was taking care of personal business on company time. I
told him I was on a test drive, I didn't deny I'd left company
property. He persisted, even with no proof whatsoever. After hearings
with the company bigshots & the union bigshots, he was forced to call me
at home & tell me to come on back to work. 3 weeks paid vacation. And
he damned near lost his job because of it. So now I poke fun at him,
saying I wanna take another test drive because I could use another
vacation. Pisses him off, but hey-->he *deserves* it. And if he tried
retaliating, you're darn right I'd do whatever necessary to turn up the
heat on his behind! Bottom line is, if someone isn't doing his job,
fine. Get rid of him. But you'd better follow the law!! With no
evidence, you can't do nothing. And to suggest there is something wrong
with fighting back in that kind of situation is plain ludicrous. I'm
not stupid enough to cross the line into an area where he could fire
me. But my joking remarks, in a non-union environment, could certainly
get me fired. And for what? I didn't do anything wrong in the first
place! I don't roll over for nobody, bosses included. I've worked
there 7 years, and had 6 different bosses. He's the first one that
hasn't liked me, the others always appreciated my honesty. They know
I'm saying what I think, not what I think they want to hear, like a
*lot* of people out there do.
I don't take this personally, & I realize it's just your frustration
talking. I've responded in your previous thread. :-)
BTW--->Good cookies!! Can your wife give my wife the recipe? <GG>
--
Chuck Kandler
A man is no less a Slave just because he is
allowed to choose a new Master every four years.
Registered Linux User #180746
http://counter.li.org
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > At this point, I am much inclined to ignore your comments directed to > me in the thread above, because I spent some considerable time last > evening typing out a response to several of your statements and > "questions" only to find that the message didn't fly. > It seems clear to me that you glory in ill-tempered invective and > put-downs directed at anyone who has somehow gotten on your bad side,Quoted text (11 lines)
> Fine. > It takes all kinds of people in "real life", so it takes all kinds > of people on this NG. > I'm sorry my danged message from last night didn't get out; it > was not an attack, it was not belligerant; it was conciliatory. I > ended by saying if you were here I'd offer you an hand-shake, a cup of > tea and some really good home-made cookies. > I don't know how to make a "kill-file" and wouldn't if I could; > I'll just pass over posters who I've concluded are mainly trying to > bait readers into an irritable exchange. > Well, maybe THIS one will go past the keyboard!"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Hey if I met you in real life I would tell you GP3 blows. And I would
tell Glen to straighten out his newsreader. I would also tell my british
friend that it was pretty chicken shit to nark on some stores because
he was having a fit by not being able to buy the game.
Then hopefully we could all have a beer. Drinks are on me :-)
--
[email hidden]
Quoted text (16 lines)
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:02:34 -0700, Glen Priest > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > <snip snip snip> > > In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; if you > >were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good > >home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, too!) > >and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run > >better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest > > I don't know what this thread is about, I didn't follow it, but > sometimes it's easy to forget that there's a real person behind a > message or a nickname. I'm quite sure that people who have a quite big > mouth here (no name calling - hello Greg) wouldn't have such a loud > mouth if they were talking to these people in real life instead of > being rude to them here on RAS.This is great. Who in the hell are you talking to?
--
[email hidden]
"Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> At this point, I am much inclined to ignore your comments directed to
> me in the thread above, because I spent some considerable time last
> evening typing out a response to several of your statements and
> "questions" only to find that the message didn't fly.
> It seems clear to me that you glory in ill-tempered invective and
> put-downs directed at anyone who has somehow gotten on your bad side,
> and I should not be surprised at that from a person who has
> announced on this forum that he has given his boss a boat-load of crap
> for three years since the union will protect him against the boss'
> saying anything; "harrassment" I think you suggested, would be the cry.
> Fine.
> It takes all kinds of people in "real life", so it takes all kinds
> of people on this NG.
> I'm sorry my danged message from last night didn't get out; it
> was not an attack, it was not belligerant; it was conciliatory. I
> ended by saying if you were here I'd offer you an hand-shake, a cup of
> tea and some really good home-made cookies.
> I don't know how to make a "kill-file" and wouldn't if I could;
> I'll just pass over posters who I've concluded are mainly trying to
> bait readers into an irritable exchange.
> Well, maybe THIS one will go past the keyboard!
>
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network
*
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
>
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:06:21 -0500, rrevved
<[email hidden]> wrote:
Duh, can't you see it then?
1. It's in assembler, so well, we all know assembler code is very
maintenance unfriendly. Thus, hardly ever changed. :)
2. If the looks, the handling, and all that has the same feel, why is
it so hard to accept that it will be 99.9% safe to say that the code
hasn't changed only 90% in 10% of the code? Don't your guts say the
same?
Oh, you're saying he completely rewrote it, in assembler once more
(that would mean they'd have to put him in a nuthouse, cause people
are worse at that than computers these days), and made all the same
errors?
I can't believe you disagree. Must not be a programmer then.
Ruud van Gaal, GPL Rank +53.53
MarketGraph / MachTech: http://www.marketgraph.nl
Art: http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery
Quoted text (7 lines)
>On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:14:38 GMT, [email hidden] (Ruud van Gaal) wrote: > >>Experience can tell sloppy coding as well. I'm a professional >>programmer and I can see that a LOT of the source code was NEVER even >>touched. > >Where did you get GP3's source code?Thanks, Greg! You are right in thinking I am having trouble with my
"newsreader", (not that I could tell you what the sam hill a
"newsreader" is!) and also that I should "insert original message";
that field I AM seeing. I figured nobody was reading my stuff anyway,
and that it was a waste of internet space or something to include all
those extra words. Eldred, I think it was, also posted to me
yesterday that I should do as you are saying and include the "original
message". I will be certain to do that after this. I know people are
able to insert a few lines from a post they wish to comment on, make
those comments, and then insert another few lines, write their thoughts
on the second part of a previous message, etc. I just don't know how
they are doing that.
The worst problem is that I can't tell which messages are posting
and which are not. The screen will say "Your message has been accepted.
Please wait a few minutes for your message to appear" or something. I
then see a field which says "Continue reading" ; I sometimes wait
overnight or longer for my messages to appear, and sometimes they seem
not to go at all. The messages I slowly type out, about half the time
never appear in the thread.
I sent a long one to Chuck Kandler yesterday, and it never came up
in the thread, and STILL hasn't, but danged if he didn't get it and
wrote me back a nice response! I have NO idea how that happened.
What is worse is that when it seemed the longer message didn't go
by this morning, I sent a much shorter and less pleasant version and in
less than an hour he sent a very genial and helpful response to the
first one, the one I thought he DIDN't get. Jeez, I can't win for
losing! To top it off, he sent a nice response to my SECOND, less
pleasant message and said he figured I was frustrated over newsreader
troubles and that explained the tone of it. (Not his words on any of
this, but true to his meaning, I believe).
In any case, Chuck came off looking extremely patient and
pleasant, I looked curt and dismissive. Man, I really hate that. If
he got my second message from this morning, then things are fine and
clear; if not, I feel like a butt-wipe. That is hard for me, because I
like to feel that I am patient and pleasant and NOT one who says
hurtful things with a hair trigger tongue.
It may be that the very thing I have complained about in posts
that I have read recently on RAS now appears to be lurking around my
door, and I feel badly about it.
Now I suppose this one won't go either! Dang, I like the phone
lots better than this typing stuff. So long for now, and thanks again!
Hey, I LOVED your line about my not expecting your message to be all so
nice and pleasant! :-))) Later.! G. Priest (Dollars to
doughnuts this doesn't go either!) Hey, if you can copy this to Chuck,
that would be great! I know he is losing absolutely NO sleep over this
discussion, but I wish I thought my second message this AM had reached
him.
In article <NXdh5.7967$[email hidden]>, "Greg
Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote:
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Quoted text (168 lines)
> Nice epistle... The fact remains that when people with "normal" > newsreaders read you messages, there is nothing in the message > which includes or points to the message you were referring to. > This is especially true if they choose to view only NEW messages. > I think common NG courtesy (something you claim to know allot > about) > would dictate that you include the post you are replying to so > people > know what or whom you are referring to. > You didn't think this was going to be totally nice did you? > Duh :-) > -- > [email hidden] > "Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Well, here we go "Uncle Fester" I'll try to make this brief as > possible > > (Not one of my few talents) but I do hope to respond to a few > of your > > comments. With respect to my note to Greg Cisco concerning to > whom my > > message was directed, I'll try to show what appears on MY > computer > > screen, the NG presently being downloaded (if that is the > correct > > word) via "remarq, The Internet's Discussion Network". Here > is as > > close as I can come to the way it appears on MY screen, and I am > > showing what I saw when I accessed YOUR message a bit earlier. > > > > From : Uncle Fester (previous two words in blue) > > > > Topic: Re: GPL- The Worst Looking 3D Accelerated Game > Ever > > > > Message: 29 of 36 (In response to Glen Priest) previous 5 > words > > in blue > > Sent Sun,30 July, 2000 13;40:01 GMT > > > > Does that make clear to what I referred when I mentioned > to Greg > > that the message was directed to Eric Cote, and not to him, in > the very > > same way your message appears to me: "In response to Glen > Priest" ? > > You are correct that the initial part of my response to > Greg had a > > bit of an edge; it was not profane, (and yes, I DO care about > > profanity in what is a public forum, and YES I think we are the > worse > > off for the fact that a huge portion of the population in the > USA, men > > and women, boys and girls will say pretty much ANYTHING to > ANYONE at > > ANY TIME. Do I know all the words? Of course! Do I use them? > > Regrettably, yes. Do I use them in public? Rarely. Fair?) it > was not > > insulting, it was not demeaning nor a personal attack on Cisco. > > I have seen many messages by Greg and others (and now yours) > > which ARE insulting, personal attacks, delivered in a very > belligerant > > manner suggesting the poster hasn't the right to an opinion or > to post > > it, hasn't the right to ask a question, or perhaps even to read > the NG > > dealing with this sim racing thing which we all enjoy (with > varying > > degrees of satisfaction and success) Several posts to RAS in > the > > last few days have noted this increasingly shrill environment, > and > > suggest a reduction in the irritability factor would be > appreciated. > > You probably have seen them, also. > > If you read my posts on this situation recently with any > care, I > > think you have noted as many conciliatory, peaceful requests for > > moderation as there were lines pointing out what seemed to me > were > > unfair, nasty-tempered invective. When I've read posts which > were, for > > me. informative and helpful, or made me laugh, whether from Greg > Cisco > > or whomever, I have said as much and offered my thanks. Isn't > that OK? > > Don't people post, hoping others will READ their posts? > > I am well aware you do not need my thanks or appreciation ( > I > > could provide some rancorous responses to that sentence, but you > > probably will be able to supply your own) but in the polite > world > > where * I * live, gratitude for help from another, or a kind > word, or > > a clever one-liner..hey, forgive us, but we kind of smile at > those > > things and enjoy them. > > I do not think you really care for one minute who I am > (boy, THERE > > is a set-up line if ever there was one!) but since you mention > it, I'll > > tell you: I am a 67 year-old retired public shcool music > teacher, with > > a very musical family and three darling grandsons who ALSO are > very > > musical, an Arts Council Children's Choir Director, a > Presbyterian, > > (lay reader at church this morning! :-)) ) a church choir > bass, a > > president of a local retired teacher's organization, new member > of a > > committee for a Public Radio station in our area, a long time > kart > > racer, a very poor GPL "driver", a proud owner of asecond and > brand new > > 12 string guitar, an 8th scale on-road gas RC car enthusiast, ... > > I suspect we are on very opposite poles of the political > spectrum, > > so I'll not open that OT can of worms, but when you say that my > belief > > that I have free speech is "my ( your) free delusion" I guess > you mean > > that I am free to have that delusion. Probably you would not to > allow > > my "free speech" to extend to posting opinions and questions on > this > > NG, maybe? Just wondering. > > You mention the "Kill File"; I've heard of it, but don't > know how > > to set it up, and wouldn't if I could. I can just quietly go > past > > those posters who seem primarily bent upon insults and picking > virtual > > fights. > > Skip over my use of "dang" and really, any other words of > mine > > which irritate you; it won't hurt my feelings at all. > > I DO love a clever one liner or hot shot from Greg, you, or > anyone > > else at my expense, or not. Part of my enjoyment of this NG > results > > from sharp writers who can see the humor in even the sim racing > world, > > and yep, I DO love to laugh! > > I suppose that you are right again in your comment that > nothing I > > say or do will change anything on this NG, but on the > off-chance that > > the several guys are correct who are posting recently that > fairly soon > > the air around here will clear and the level of rhetoric > diminish, > > maybe I'll keep hoping for a little more civility. > > In the meantime, I hope you do not see this as an attack; > if you > > were here I'd offer you a handshake, a cup of tea, a REALLY good > > home-made cookie (or three) my wife has turned out, !and Greg, > too!) > > and I'd have lots of questions about how to make my sim gear run > > better! Peace, mister. Glen Priest > > > > > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's > Discussion Network > * > > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet > - Free! > >Hey, Chuck! I am in a bind! I sent you a longer message this morning
before noon, and it hasn't appeared in the thread, and I assume the
cussed thing didn't go. I cannot tell what messages are posting and
what are not, and it is really confusing to try to keep up. You are
dead right about problems with this "newsreader" (that's what Greg
called it) and I do NOT know what to do. I used to get the ras in an
entirely different format, and when I took the computer in for an
"upgrade" the r.a.s. went away entirely. (They replaced Netscape 3.1
with Netscape 4.7; I THINK that is what they called it) They had no
clue at the 'puter shop about how to access the r.a.s., and I found
this "remarq The Internet's Discussion Network" on my own. I'm
beginning to think it let's me read OK, but only sends about half my
messages out. I told Greg all this, and said if he could copy that
message to you, that would be great! Time will tell.
I REALLY appreciated you message this morning in every way, and it
is SO good to get a handle on the real person who is sending these
messages in from across the nation or accross the world. It sounds as
if you have the Boss from Hell, and I'd guess that cannot be fun. I
just always everyone to get along, and of course, that cannot be,
either. I never had a school principal like your boss, and I am lucky.
I know. There are some bad actors, even in our little burg, and they
really can make it tough on the teacher if they choose. They can't
have a teacher fired from the system, except for a really serious
infraction, but a principal who wished to could kick a teacher out of
that principal's school, make sure the teacher gets a crappy job or one
in a school across the county, could more or less force the teacher
into a job for which the teacher is unqualified, etc.
In my message this morning, I mentioned that Pat Dotson and I are
trying to figure out a time this fall when we can get together for a
karting/ racing sim weekend! You'd be really welcome, and I said this
morning that since I'm 50 miles south of Ft. Wayne, we're nearly
neighbors! I feel sure we could have some serious fun on a great track
several of us old timers built and paved in the early 70's and which is
only three miles from my house! My kart is a dual engined Mach 1, and
the engines are 100 cc Komet K-11's. It hasn't been started in three
seasons and I'm sure the carbs are a mess. My friend Phil has a 6
speed, Honda powered shifter kart, and it is a little screamer.
Neither of these, I said to you in the mesage this morning are for the
faint of heart!
Thanks again for your message; I posted this morning to you that
your response really changed the way I was looking at the start of my
day! I have no confidence that this is going to go, but I'll hit the
keys and see what happens! They LOOK as if they are posting out just
fine, but apparently about half don't make it. So long for now. G.
Priest
In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester
<[email hidden]> wrote:
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Quoted text (109 lines)
> Glen Priest wrote: > > > > At this point, I am much inclined to ignore your comments > directed to > > me in the thread above, because I spent some considerable time > last > > evening typing out a response to several of your statements and > > "questions" only to find that the message didn't fly. > > It seems clear to me that you glory in ill-tempered > invective and > > put-downs directed at anyone who has somehow gotten on your bad > side, > I understand your frustration. I think your news server is having > problems. I've already responded to your post you mentioned above. > > and I should not be surprised at that from a person who has > > announced on this forum that he has given his boss a boat-load > of crap > > for three years since the union will protect him against the > boss' > > saying anything; "harrassment" I think you suggested, would be > the cry. > Really don't wanna get this far OT here, but I gotta explain > further in > order to defend myself here. My boss at that time was a new hire. > He > was gonna "change the world", if you know what I mean. Well, he > set up > this program in order to measure our on-the-job performance. He > also > wanted at least 95% of our on-the-clock time to be covered in car > repairs. (I'm a fleet auto mechanic). He started giving me grief > about > only have 93.something% of my time accounted for & I countered to > him > that while I was active less time of my day, other aspects of his > measurement showed I was getting more cars done than others. I > pointed > out to him that he should be shaking my hand for getting more > done, in > less time, than some others there. At that point, he labeled me a > troublemaker & set out to get me out of there. Well, a couple > weeks > later, I'm on a test-drive. I come back & he looks mad but > doesn't say > a word. This was on a Sunday. Monday I come in, & he wants to > fire > me. Says I was taking care of personal business on company time. > I > told him I was on a test drive, I didn't deny I'd left company > property. He persisted, even with no proof whatsoever. After > hearings > with the company bigshots & the union bigshots, he was forced to > call me > at home & tell me to come on back to work. 3 weeks paid vacation. > And > he damned near lost his job because of it. So now I poke fun at > him, > saying I wanna take another test drive because I could use another > vacation. Pisses him off, but hey-->he *deserves* it. And if he > tried > retaliating, you're darn right I'd do whatever necessary to turn > up the > heat on his behind! Bottom line is, if someone isn't doing his > job, > fine. Get rid of him. But you'd better follow the law!! With no > evidence, you can't do nothing. And to suggest there is something > wrong > with fighting back in that kind of situation is plain ludicrous. > I'm > not stupid enough to cross the line into an area where he could > fire > me. But my joking remarks, in a non-union environment, could > certainly > get me fired. And for what? I didn't do anything wrong in the > first > place! I don't roll over for nobody, bosses included. I've worked > there 7 years, and had 6 different bosses. He's the first one that > hasn't liked me, the others always appreciated my honesty. They > know > I'm saying what I think, not what I think they want to hear, like a > *lot* of people out there do. > > Fine. > > It takes all kinds of people in "real life", so it takes > all kinds > > of people on this NG. > > I'm sorry my danged message from last night didn't get out; > it > > was not an attack, it was not belligerant; it was conciliatory. > I > > ended by saying if you were here I'd offer you an hand-shake, a > cup of > > tea and some really good home-made cookies. > > I don't know how to make a "kill-file" and wouldn't if I > could; > > I'll just pass over posters who I've concluded are mainly trying > to > > bait readers into an irritable exchange. > > Well, maybe THIS one will go past the keyboard! > I don't take this personally, & I realize it's just your > frustration > talking. I've responded in your previous thread. :-) > BTW--->Good cookies!! Can your wife give my wife the recipe? <GG> > > -- > Chuck Kandler > A man is no less a Slave just because he is > allowed to choose a new Master every four years. > Registered Linux User #180746 > http://counter.li.orgOn Tue, 01 Aug 2000 01:14:01 -0700, Glen Priest
<[email hidden]> thus spoke:
>I know people are
>able to insert a few lines from a post they wish to comment on, make
>those comments, and then insert another few lines, write their thoughts
>on the second part of a previous message, etc. I just don't know how
>they are doing that.
All they are doing is editing the quote when they are replying to it.
You just select the text you don't want to reference and delete it.
--
Nos
Glen Priest wrote:
Hi Glen
Message received just fine. ;-) Email me if you want to get your
Netscape newsgroup settings straightened back around. [email hidden]
--
Chuck Kandler
Windows is just a virus with a GUI
Quoted text (12 lines)
> > Hey, Chuck! I am in a bind! I sent you a longer message this morning > before noon, and it hasn't appeared in the thread, and I assume the > cussed thing didn't go. I cannot tell what messages are posting and > what are not, and it is really confusing to try to keep up. You are > dead right about problems with this "newsreader" (that's what Greg > called it) and I do NOT know what to do. I used to get the ras in an > entirely different format, and when I took the computer in for an > "upgrade" the r.a.s. went away entirely. (They replaced Netscape 3.1 > with Netscape 4.7; I THINK that is what they called it) They had no > clue at the 'puter shop about how to access the r.a.s., and I found > this "remarq The Internet's Discussion Network" on my own."Glen Priest" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Hey, Chuck! I am in a bind! I sent you a longer message this morning
> before noon, and it hasn't appeared in the thread, and I assume the
> cussed thing didn't go. I cannot tell what messages are posting and
> what are not, and it is really confusing to try to keep up. You are
> dead right about problems with this "newsreader" (that's what Greg
> called it) and I do NOT know what to do. I used to get the ras in an
You could do something totally outrageous and use Outlook Express
to read newsgroups, and netscape for email.
--
[email hidden]
I have to say I am suprised that you think that with the machine spec below
the game should be running great. I have a PIII 800 running at 920, Matrox
400 Max and 256Mb RAM and at 1024 res I am still getting proc. util at 100%+
in some circumstances.
Michael
"rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:47 +0100, "Douglas Ellison"<[email hidden]> wrote:
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > >Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright with > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768 > > > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of grid, > >into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > > >What am I missing here! > > > >Doug > > > > Doug, that has something to do with your video card, I bet. > Do you have the latest drivers, etc.? > > You should be running -great- with that setup. > >Think it is a video card problem.. i have a common pentium III 500 with
128 mb ram and it is running at 1024 res, with the graphics/smooth bar
turned to
+3 to the graphics side that should make it unplayable if you with a PIII
800 and
256 Mb can't play it with the bar in 0 probably..
so what makes the difference is Video card.. am using the guillemont prophet
GTS
with 64 MB and it really runs very quick and light.. using only 80% of the
processor.
this is a great simulation game that takes lots of resources.. think it is
time for a
video card upgrade maybe.. don't know.. just a thought
Michael Moxon <[email hidden]> escreveu nas not�cias de
mensagem:8msgsa$2o3$[email hidden]...
> I have to say I am suprised that you think that with the machine specbelow
> the game should be running great. I have a PIII 800 running at 920,Matrox
> 400 Max and 256Mb RAM and at 1024 res I am still getting proc. util at100%+
with
> > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768
> > >
> > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back ofgrid,
Quoted text (9 lines)
> in some circumstances. > > Michael > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:47 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alrightQuoted text (15 lines)
> > >into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > > > > >What am I missing here! > > > > > >Doug > > > > > > > Doug, that has something to do with your video card, I bet. > > Do you have the latest drivers, etc.? > > > > You should be running -great- with that setup. > > > > > >The G400 MAX is new! I have to say I am surprised that I can't run with max
detail and max res. Anybody any thoughts? On average the game runs at
70% - 80% but peaks at 100% and a little more at times.
"Magno do Nascimento Gonz�lez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
prophet
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Think it is a video card problem.. i have a common pentium III 500 with > 128 mb ram and it is running at 1024 res, with the graphics/smooth bar > turned to > +3 to the graphics side that should make it unplayable if you with a PIII > 800 and > 256 Mb can't play it with the bar in 0 probably.. > so what makes the difference is Video card.. am using the guillemontQuoted text (48 lines)
> GTS > with 64 MB and it really runs very quick and light.. using only 80% of the > processor. > > this is a great simulation game that takes lots of resources.. think it is > time for a > video card upgrade maybe.. don't know.. just a thought > > > Michael Moxon <[email hidden]> escreveu nas not�cias de > mensagem:8msgsa$2o3$[email hidden]... > > I have to say I am suprised that you think that with the machine spec > below > > the game should be running great. I have a PIII 800 running at 920, > Matrox > > 400 Max and 256Mb RAM and at 1024 res I am still getting proc. util at > 100%+ > > in some circumstances. > > > > Michael > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:47 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright > with > > > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768 > > > > > > > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of > grid, > > > >into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > > > > > > >What am I missing here! > > > > > > > >Doug > > > > > > > > > > Doug, that has something to do with your video card, I bet. > > > Do you have the latest drivers, etc.? > > > > > > You should be running -great- with that setup. > > > > > > > > > > > >GMax shit get a geoforce
I have one plus only a P2 350 with 256M ram and it runs a dream
Some slow up on 1/2 corners of firstt lap
Every thing on set at 20FPS
Michael Moxon <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8n3j1d$nq9$[email hidden]...
> The G400 MAX is new! I have to say I am surprised that I can't run withmax
PIII
> > 800 and
> > 256 Mb can't play it with the bar in 0 probably..
> > so what makes the difference is Video card.. am using the guillemont
> prophet
> > GTS
> > with 64 MB and it really runs very quick and light.. using only 80% ofthe
> > processor.
> >
> > this is a great simulation game that takes lots of resources.. think itis
Quoted text (10 lines)
> detail and max res. Anybody any thoughts? On average the game runs at > 70% - 80% but peaks at 100% and a little more at times. > > > "Magno do Nascimento Gonz�lez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Think it is a video card problem.. i have a common pentium III 500 with > > 128 mb ram and it is running at 1024 res, with the graphics/smooth bar > > turned to > > +3 to the graphics side that should make it unplayable if you with aQuoted text (45 lines)
> > time for a > > video card upgrade maybe.. don't know.. just a thought > > > > > > Michael Moxon <[email hidden]> escreveu nas not�cias de > > mensagem:8msgsa$2o3$[email hidden]... > > > I have to say I am suprised that you think that with the machine spec > > below > > > the game should be running great. I have a PIII 800 running at 920, > > Matrox > > > 400 Max and 256Mb RAM and at 1024 res I am still getting proc. util at > > 100%+ > > > in some circumstances. > > > > > > Michael > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:33:47 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Have to be honest here - P3-500 with Matrox G400 - and it's alright > > with > > > > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768 > > > > > > > > > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, back of > > grid, > > > > >into chicane at Monza) and Proc. Oc went up to 400%.... > > > > > > > > > >What am I missing here! > > > > > > > > > >Doug > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doug, that has something to do with your video card, I bet. > > > > Do you have the latest drivers, etc.? > > > > > > > > You should be running -great- with that setup. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Thats an interesting technical response........................
"Carlo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8n3t9e$2cj$[email hidden]...
with
it
spec
> > > below
> > > > the game should be running great. I have a PIII 800 running at 920,
> > > Matrox
> > > > 400 Max and 256Mb RAM and at 1024 res I am still getting proc. utilat
alright
> > > with
> > > > > >just me on the track, (set to 17fps) at 800x600 and even 1024x768
> > > > > >
> > > > > >But the moment their are other cars on the track (dry race, backof
