Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3337 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] How to do Internet access restriction? [ot]
  • From: Vince Littler <suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 09:19:00 +0100
  • Message-id: <200604100919.00533@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thought I would just update the list with Ronald's reply to me. Obviously, he
is in a bit of a paddy, and he is not taking replies from me. That's fine,
but if he is going to write to me in these terms, what he writes is going to
be reviewed by his peers.

Ron, you don't need to read the rest. Oh, you are filtering me. How will you
know it's been subject to peer review?

On Monday 10 April 2006 08:26, Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
> Vince Littler wrote:
> > On Sunday 09 April 2006 03:08, Ronald Wiplinger wrote [off list, complete
> > with CEO business card and spam prevention protocol instructions. On
> > balance, I think it is appropriate to reply on list.]:
>
> I do not reply to the list!
> as many people reply to me off list, especially to this subject.
>
> >> Vince Littler wrote:
> >>> On Saturday 08 April 2006 16:44, Ronald Wiplinger wrote:
> >>>> My son, 13 years old, likes to play on-line game. For the sake of the
> >>>> school, I have to limit it. If I just ask him to turn off the
> >>>> computer, he will certainly tell me that he needs the computer for
> >>>> school.
> >>
> >> You are totally wrong!
> >> 1. it is a LINUX question, if you like it or not !!!
> >
> > Classifying your question is your choice. Classifying my response is my
> > choice.
>
> I understand that you are technical not able to solve the problem. I
> wish you good luck in trying to circumvent all your life the questions
> you have been asked. BTW, which grade are you now? Are you allowed to
> post at the list (above 13) ????
>
> >> 2. what I restrict or allow on MY network is the responsibility of the
> >> network administrator (that is me). If you do not like it, don't respond
> >> to it!!!
> >
> > No, I am happy to answer. If you put stuff in my inbox, don't be too
> > offended if you get an answer.
>
> I answer only one time to your crap!!!
> Obviously you do not understand it, and you appear to young to have own
> kids!
>
> >>> It's a familiar question, and you are a good deal more open about it
> >>> than many - I have several times seen it, without a child being
> >>> mentioned, and someone replies and mentions 'your child' - at which
> >>> other posters say 'what child' - and then it turns out to be a child
> >>> who is being controlled, sometimes a 17 year old. And then the thread
> >>> goes sour, when someone says 'perhaps you should not try to exercise
> >>> control in this way' and the original poster says 'who the hell are you
> >>> to tell me how to bring up my child?'
> >>
> >> Again, save this bullshit, THIS has nothing to do with Linux!
> >
> > No, it has to deal with solving your problem. Your problem is getting
> > your son to learn responsibility in using the internet. Your problem is
> > not with administering your network. If you did not have a son, you would
> > not be posting your question.
>
> How I do this is my problem, read my lips: M-Y problem !!!
> Here at the list I asked for a technical solution? Do you want to read
> my lips again????
>
> >>> At 13, you might think it is appropriate to do control by technical
> >>> means, but then you will need an exit strategy over the next few years
> >>> during which you will be working through all the things you need to
> >>> work through now, only a few years late, with a more resentful son. Or
> >>> you could let him leave home, go to college at 19, never having exited
> >>> from this control at home, and he will not have learned self
> >>> discipline, with predictably bad consequences.
> >>
> >> Again, that is the network admins task, here we discuss LINUX technical
> >> solutions.
> >
> > If you don't like my contributions, then you don't have to post your
> > problems. Why should I post a technical solution, if I think it will make
> > your real problem worse? You are supposed to be grateful for all input
> > ;P.
>
> Yes, I don't like your NON-contribution !!!!
>
> > And if you don't like a response to your parenting problem, then don't
> > post your parenting problem. After all this is a LINUX technical list ;P.
> > Unless you went to a parenting list first, and they gave you this as the
> > solution.
>
> get adult first, and than think again before you give your immature
> statement!!!
>
> >> Looking at your email address, you may want to look at BBC news about
> >> the Internet in U.K.
> >> Maybe your passport shows a too young age to understand it now. Keep
> >> this email and reread it when you are mature to have a child in the age
> >> of 13.
> >
> > Actually, this is a fairly usual reaction. It tends to reinforce my
> > initial premise that your issue is that you are too controlling as a
> > parent. What really gets you is that I am challenging your authority in
> > the home. Of course, if you felt secure about it, you wouldn't react, but
> > then you probably wouldn't be posting, and definitely not here.
>
> Good, so you have expected it, right? So why do you not go out and help
> YOUR police to find YOUR criminals on the net? THAN you may find that my
> questions was not so bad at all.
>
> > A controlling parent decides on a technical solution to their parenting
> > problem, and is told its a parenting problem. Then said parent throws a
> > tantrum and [without fail] asserts their own maturity as a parent against
> > the respondent. Of course if you had it sorted as a parent, you wouldn't
> > be posting, so perhaps some humility is due. And just to get to the core
> > of the real problem, it's issues with the parent component of the
> > parenting relationship.
>
> It shows again, that you are too young to understand it.
> Obviously you do not understand the subject nor the technical solution.
>
> > You are a CEO. Again, it fits a pattern, it is often people who express
> > their own position confidently who raise this particular question. They
> > really don't like it when their 13 year old flexes his will against the
> > CEO. And having their weakness exposed on a mailing list really gets them
> > going. I hope for your son's sake you get your attitude sorted and you
> > can lighten up enough from being a CEO to actually engage with your son
> > doing his school work, without actually controlling what he hands in.
>
> My job has nothing to do with being a father!
> I remove usually my signature from postings to a list, but not to a
> private email.
>
> > [Next post from RW: Even more anger, direct challenge to state my own
> > parenting credentials, some expression of desperation over the need to
> > control his son, in case he does not turn out to be a CEO and in every
> > respect the image of his father. Sorry, I am stereotyping, but it really
> > does go with the territory of controlling a child's internet use by
> > technical means.
> >
> > Previous experience is that if I post a response to this one, a new ID is
> > created and a load of abuse is then delivered in a misplaced attempt to
> > 'get even', which really exposes the motivations. Plus the subsequent
> > stalking. But I put up with it, because on this issue, my sympathies are
> > with the child. Of course, it is totally unfair to tar you with the
> > behaviour of someone else, so let's leave it there.]
>
> No, I don't need a new email account. However, you email has got a nice
> place in the spam filter, ...
>
> Have a nice day and don't forget to make your home work, ...
>
> No further email exchange wished nor can be seen, ... (because of the
> spam filter) !!!
>
> bye
>
> Ronald

< Previous Next >