Gaia question

[The Unintelligible]

Yeah, I'm sure you had some other goal in mentioning my full name and posting a picture of me. How stupid of me.

You obviously didn't understand my post at all, unsurprisingly.

How so? I don't see anything that could possibly lead you to that conclusion.

Oh, I don't know. Thin air, maybe. lol.

What were some of the recent arguments we've had?
The first two that come to mind are "hg vs git" and "struct vs class in C++" (or "Is it possible to write OO code in C?").
Who "won" those? I recall you being woefully stupid on the topic of hg vs git (you claimed that git's popularity somehow made it a better candidate despite that hg has a plugin for interacting with git repos).
As for class vs struct, http://pastebin.com/9ghMUGAt

Won't address our previous arguments considering we've been over this myriads of times. Moreover, congratulations on googling C/C++ OOP code.

K&R-style braces? You embody the meaning of non-programmer.

Spoiler:

Do you even understand our argument?
Edy told me that the fix could not be done in GSI because you cannot trust client data. That is absolutely ridiculous. The whole point of using GSI (in this case) is to avoid trusting client data.
My solution requires a very small change to the friend request method of GSI.
1. When someone attempts to add a user, a GSI request is made. When this request is made, it should be identical to making a friend request on the actual site (i.e. that user gets a pending request, which didn't happen the last time I checked).
2. When someone "accepts" a request, verify that they have a pending request from said user.

That's all. Fixed. No need for changing every game. This fix would be compatible with all games.

Edy's fix would only be compatible with updated games and towns 2.0. I tried to tell him that wasn't necessary, but he wasn't able to understand what I was saying. I'm completely justified in telling someone with several times more experience than me that their solution is fucking stupid and that they should consider a new job if they aren't capable of understanding that it's possible to verify the authenticity of submitted data on the other end.

Nothing more or less than nonsensical ramble. I've explained to you what you were wrong in regard to. What you're doing is twisting the argument now. None of our past confrontations are up for debate at this point.

In any case, this seems to be going around in circles like most of our arguments usually tend to do. I'm going to concede with the following points:

• You aren't a programmer.
• You're not going to be an entreprenuer.
• You're still an idiot.
• Edy owned you.
• "Classes are structs."
• "I'm going to be an entreprenuer when I grow up!"

Need I say more?

Edit: Oh and, Edy and I still laugh at you to this very day.

[Personoid]

"Nothing more or less than nonsensical ramble."
Of course. Every time.

Final notes: I didn't say classes are structs. I said (paraphrasing, with line breaks shown for where I hit send):
In C++
classes are basically structs.
there is only one difference: in structs, members are public by default.

You completely ignore the rest of what I said and hinge your insult on bad wording (which has never been my strong suit).

I mount my platypus.

[The Unintelligible]

"Nothing more or less than nonsensical ramble."
Of course. Every time.

You should know the routine by now. If it's invalid/senseless, I won't bother directly addressing it; I'll let your diction do that for me. What you did was type up a tl;dr post for an argument that was already concluded and consolidated over the course of a few Towns sessions.

Final notes: I didn't say classes are structs. I said (paraphrasing, with line breaks shown for where I hit send):
In C++
classes are basically structs.
there is only one difference: in structs, members are public by default.

I'm more than pretty sure that isn't what you originally said. Granted, below you said it was probably at fault of bad wording. I don't entirely buy that. But at the same time I can't necessarily refute that either (hence I'm declaring a stalemate).

You completely ignore the rest of what I said and hinge your insult on bad wording (which has never been my strong suit).

See above. For a very solid reason. I think even you realize that we can agree to disagree that this is utterly pointless and repetitive.

I mount my platypus.

You're clever.

Edit: That was obviously sarcasm if you didn't catch it the first time around.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/i-mount-my-platypus

Very original there, Newton.