Network cards and Win98SE

Grant Taylor cctalk at
Tue May 14 13:58:54 CDT 2019

On 5/14/19 12:16 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> No, not really. The OP was trying to get wifi working on Win98. That's 
> not the same thing.

The letter of what the OP wanted was WiFi.  I took the spirit of what 
the OP wanted was network.

> You jumped to a conclusion.

No I did not.

I responded to comment where someone else said "you may want to consider 
… using a cheap wifi-equipped micro as a network bridge".

I stated "IMHO the OPZ would be functioning as what I think are commonly 
called 'gaming adapters'.  It functions as the wireless client to 
connect the wired Ethernet client."  The key points being:

  - "IMHO" meaning in my humble opinion
  - "functioning as" meaning doing the same / similar thing as
  - "what I /think/" as in what I believe but could be wrong about
  - "commonly called" as in not always
  - "it functions as a wireless client to connect the wired Ethernet 
client." as in it's a way to connect a wired only device to a wireless 

> Then, you declared, rudely,  the OP that they should buy something,

How does "OPZ would be functioning as" translate to the OP should buy 

> by repeatedly, derisively, using a name that might be meaningful to 
> millennial gamers, 

Many of the people in my community are decidedly outside of the 
millennial gamers group and know what a gaming adapter is.

I have no idea what age range people on this mailing list are—I honestly 
don't care—but I strongly suspect that more people now know what a 
gaming adapter is than did so before the start of this thread.

> but is _not_ to a bunch of old-timer high-level techies.

Please don't conflate age with level of techies.

I've worked with all four combinations of the binary young / old vs 
techie / non-techie.

> Also, your idea meant going out and spending money on something new,

No, it did not.

> when this is a community of people who you could reasonably expect to 
> favour the approach of doing something difficult but functional with 
> existing tech that they already own.

That's one of the reasons that I enjoy this community.  I re-use things 
for different purposes all the time.  I enjoy seeing how others solve 
their problems.

> You told someone who is trying to do something on a 20-25 year old OS 
> in order that they can connect to a 40 year old OS, that they should be 
> buying a peripheral for a games console.

No I did not.

> [1] You did not "suggest". You hectored, rudely.

I disagree.

I was not intend to be rude.  I apologize to anyone that thought I was rude.

> [2] You did not _explain_ that. You just repeated some buzzword phrase 
> nobody else here knows.

I disagree.

My original comment stated "It functions as the wireless client to 
connect the wired Ethernet client."

> [3] You didn't explain that, either.

See above.

> You mean if you addressed the OP and the rest of us as competent adults 
> instead of poking fun?

I continue to believe that I have addressed everyone in this thread as 
competent adults.

I did not intentionally try to poke fun at anyone.

Believe me, when I say that I'm much more of an ass hole if I want to be 
and try to poke at someone.

> Shock horror, yeah, that might have worked better.

What does American have to do with this?

Are you implying that American ~> U.S. English dialect is different than 
other English dialects around the world and that those differences were 
part of a breakdown in communications?

> Yeah you were.

No, I was not.  See the bullet points above.

> They are, until someone comes along and starts implying they are stupid, 
> which is what you did.

How did I imply that anyone is stupid?

I apologize if I did so.  That was certainly not my intent.

> Good. Have you worked out _why_ people were upset with you?


> Have you worked out what you did and how not to do it again?


The only thing that I wish I had done differently was not used the 
phrase "gaming adapter".  I see no problems with anything else that I've 

> Have you decided to change?

Not yet.

I'm still open to feedback & critique.

> Look, *I* am someone who has, justly, been told off for being rude and 
> dismissive here. I very much fear that I have caused people to quit the 
> list, and I bitterly regret that.

I think some of your comments have been curt.  But I don't consider 
"curt" to be "rude".

> But I have tried hard to *learn* from that, and I do not want to do 
> it again.

Good for you.

> Whereas you seem to feel that you were in the right all along and we've 
> overreacted.

I'm not saying I am in the right.  I am saying that I don't think I'm in 
the wrong.

To me, there is a relatively neutral state in the middle, which is where 
I think I am.

> I think you should reconsider and try to use this as a learning 
> experience.

I try to learn from things that I experience daily.  I think most people 
do too.

There is a reason that I'm trying to defuse what I am currently chalking 
up to miscommunication based on a number of misunderstandings on 
multiple people's part.  I'm trying to turn this into a constructive 
conversation to learn from and avoid this type of issue in the future.

Grant. . . .
unix || die

More information about the cctalk mailing list