Mashup Challenge $100,000 prize - WTF if Spectate Swamp wins?



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    More complex in that it does a lot more. In the beginning it just did text. then pictures then video and music then background jobs and other complexities.
     

    Just for the record, please explain why nobody, and I mean nobody, wants to use your wonderful program.  Why have you failed where so many succeeded?  Please try to limit your answer to 1 or 2 sentences of the usual incoherent garbage.

    If you are going to turn around and claim you have users, you know what you have to do: show us the video evidence. 



  • Best SearchEngine ever

    @CodeSimian said:

    If you are going to turn around and claim you have users, you know what you have to do: show us the video evidence. 
    My next video evidence will be Screen ReShoots of the Tobacco leaf flyer and the Cloaked MotherShip. Creating the jpgs from the video using ulead. Then SSDS to play those pics back fast seem to have made the flyers easier to see. I have always had trouble showing these flyers to people. Even more difficult to explain than a Search Engine. 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Actually it's pretty amazing code

    Actually, no it isn't.  

    • You use bad variable names
    • You have no real concept of how to break up code so as to not have to repeat things over and over.  
    • If you wanted to support 7 element on your command line instead of 6, you'd have to make changes in dozens of places through your code, maybe hundreds. 
    • You have hard coded 'magic values' in your code that identify your computer, or your login; or depend on your directory structure and your specific keyboard layout
    • There are several places in your code where you have commented out code because you couldn't get something to work, or where you set strange values to variables because it happens to work that way -- clearly indicating that you don't _really_ understand what's going on in there.
    • In several instances you write multiple lines where a single call into a VB function would do the same thing
    • You have many, many commented out lines of code right in the middle of working functions.  Everyone does that a little bit, but the extent to which your code is muddied with old stuff makes it very difficult to follow.
    • Your labels have pretty much no meaning
    • You do a lot of "multiple assignments" (assigning a different value to the same variable in succession) 

    Finally, the real big issue is that the process of linearly searching through a file and doing a highlight on specific portions of text really isn't a very big problem.  Launching a media player through an existing API isn't a very big problem.  But you have more than 10,000 lines of code.   This code is easily 2x - 4x longer than it has to be, and it's less flexible than it could be.  

    I've read your source, I've looked at the flowcharts... it's just bad code. 

    -cw



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    @CodeSimian said:

    If you are going to turn around and claim you have users, you know what you have to do: show us the video evidence. 
    My next video evidence will be Screen ReShoots of the Tobacco leaf flyer and the Cloaked MotherShip. Creating the jpgs from the video using ulead. Then SSDS to play those pics back fast seem to have made the flyers easier to see. I have always had trouble showing these flyers to people. Even more difficult to explain than a Search Engine. 

    See, that's what I'm talking about! PLEASE STOP CHANGING THE SUBJECT!   I asked you to show us video evidence of SSDS users (), not video evidence of you using SSDS.  

    You completely ignored my question about your failure to garner even 1 user.  You are worse than the "lying and cheating smart guys" you always whine about.  You found a way to lie to yourself - if you hear a question you don't like, you pretend it didn't happen.

    What a coward.  Can't back up his claims of greatness.  (Notice how nobody else here claims to be great at anything.  It's just you.)

     

    () This means people other than Doug Pederson of Whitecourt, Alberta.  I know it's hard for you to believe, but they really do exist.



  • @dlikhten said:

     Addition to conspiracies:

    Doug believes that shortcut keys are a conspiracy. After all why would anyone want to use buttons like Ctrl Alt and other combinations. He feels that his "quick keys" are an obvious superiority with combinations like "kkk" instead of Ctrl+Alt+Del and jjj for whatever else. Despite everyone telling him that infact shortcut keys are often customizeable and frankly his ideas are not realistic (if someone gets frustrated and hits k 3 times they restart their computer, hows that for frustration), he refuses to believe it. One of his rationalle is that he wants to design a keyboard/quick keys for his friends with missing (or partially cut) fingers and feels that everyone else is against helping his handicapped friends.

     

     

    I don't know, that seems like a stretch.  He definitely doesn't like normal shortcut keys, and that should probably go somewhere (the SSDS section?) but it really doesn't seem like he thinks they're a conspiracy.



  • @CodeWhisperer said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Actually it's pretty amazing code

    Actually, no it isn't.  

    (...)

    I've read your source, I've looked at the flowcharts... it's just bad code.

    I'd call the code amazingly bad - wouldn't that make both of you right?



  • Old media clippings and more aliens

    @CodeSimian said:

    You completely ignored my question about your failure to garner even 1 user.  You are worse than the "lying and cheating smart guys" you always whine about. 
    Too busy capturing aliens to be answering all these questions and challenges. The challenge I want is these NetSquared folks or a showdown with the other desktop searches. They can't do anything worth a damn. Swamp search is way better.

    All this showing off has got me interested in doing a little alien hunting every week. Even if it is just 10 minutes. I'll be showing you some fresh flyers soon.

    Don't feel to bad about being afraid to look at the source.txt Any new program is intimidating to everybody. I've seen lots of code over the years. On one occasion the originator who was working at another branch of Govt. said "don't touch that code". I flowcharted the logic changed it and the fix worked. I became the maintenance guy. I worked with a lot of code over the years. The key element was, does it work? For the most part I didn't have time to clean up working programs. Only when the program badly needed it.

    I'll do some templates to demonstrate other SSDS features in the next day or 2 so cheer up swampies. Fresh Aliens and more swamp search demos. Dino Mummies and more of my old media clippings maybe.



  • SS Concedes!

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Too busy capturing aliens to be answering all these questions

    I think that's about as close to a "I give up" that any one is going to get.  Thanks SS! 

    -cw

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    @CodeSimian said:
    You completely ignored my question about your failure to garner even 1 user.  You are worse than the "lying and cheating smart guys" you always whine about. 
    Too busy capturing aliens to be answering all these questions and challenges. The challenge I want is these NetSquared folks or a showdown with the other desktop searches. They can't do anything worth a damn. Swamp search is way better.
     

    "Netsquared folks" ain't here, Spectate.  Neither are "the other desktop searches".  Why are you still posting here?

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    All this showing off has got me interested in doing a little alien hunting every week. Even if it is just 10 minutes. I'll be showing you some fresh flyers soon.

    Nobody cares about that here, either.@SpectateSwamp said:

    I'll do some templates to demonstrate other SSDS features in the next day or 2 so cheer up swampies.

    There are no swampies here (or anywhere), either.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    more of my old media clippings maybe.

    Yup, this is pretty much the only reason people here are still paying attention.  Everyone is laughing at you.  You will never get a single SSDS user from this forum.  Nobody here will ever believe you found aliens or that you have magical stones.  Congratulations, you are a walking joke.

     

     

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    The challenge I want is these NetSquared folks or a showdown with the other desktop searches. They can't do anything worth a damn. Swamp search is way better.
     

    http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/8159/155847.aspx#155847 

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    <font size="7">The only program I need has been written. SSDS. So I can just forget the rest.</font>

     

    http://www.telusplanet.net/public/stonedan/ 

    @SpectateSwamp said:

     

    <font size="7"><font color="#ff0000"> My Favourite Mapping site.
    this can only get better.
    (maps.google.com)</font>
    </font>

     

     

    Hey Spectate!  Do you realize Google Maps is software, just like Google Search and SSDS?  It's not a magical fucking website that displays maps without using computers or software.  So you better stop using Google Maps and start using SSDS for all your mapping needs, unless you want to be a hypocrite like all those lying, cheating smart guys.



  • Spectate, how is it that you use the Canadian spelling of "favourite" on your website, but in the forums, you write "favorite" (the American form).  Spectate, are you really Doug Pederson?  If all of this is a mean joke you're playing on poor old Doug, you can admit it to us.  



  • @Spectre said:

    @WWWWolf said:
    While making the video clip, my computer started playing the Deus Ex theme all by itself.

    You should've overlayed it onto the video for more dramaric effect 8=]. For example, the "Deus Ex Ending 2" would be quite fitting.

    Haven't listened that far in the soundtrack because I haven't actually beaten the game yet. (Yep, a bit silly habit - listening to the music probably wouldn't be that huge a spoiler...) I had not played the game for years but recently found out DX works just fine in Wine. So now I'm in Hong Kong, downloading l33t r0mz, and farthest in the game I've ever been. =)

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Actually it's pretty amazing code. Most of it was written nearly 10 years ago.

    Well, it may work for you, but as you can see from the posts above, people are losing their precious brain cells trying to convert the thing to environments that are a bit more modern.

    How future-proof is your application, if it can only be compiled with a compiler that you got in 1998? How do you expect anyone from the giant open-source developer masses to find Visual Basic 5 to work on this code, when even Visual Basic 6 support is scheduled to be terminated this year, last I checked?

    For comparison: I wrote a text-based simulation game around 1996-1997, originally in Turbo Pascal and then I converted it to C while I was learning it (first for DJGPP 1.x and then the Linux toolchain). I just recompiled the thing on GCC 4.2 and modern C libraries. The only major change needed was that C language nowadays has an actual boolean type, while my code used homebrewed booleans and I didn't even know about typedefs back then - anyway, all I needed to port the code for modern environment was to do a global search/replace ("enum bool" to "bool"), remove code from my "bool.h" file, and add lines that say #include <stdbool.h>, #define TRUE true, #define FALSE false — just as a stopgap measure to get the thing to compile, of course (could have done another search/replace here to fix it for good...) And tadah! The thing compiles and runs! Definitely not as well written C program as what I could write now, but I can relive the weirdness and get ideas for a possible epic graphical Java remake =)

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    A lot of the so called bad coding habits were done just to pick somebody's ass many years later and it's working.

    I'm not sure how to interpret this. You intentionally picked up bad coding habits so that years later, people would find it annoying?

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    This code is simple enough and has lots of internal notes and crumbs.

    Believe me, it has altogether too few internal notes that are actually legible, and altogether too much on the crumb department. You should learn to comment on what the code does

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    The only complex part has a flowchart.

    As complex as the code itself, if not even more complex.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    See the changes that were required to add scrolling text. (use SSDS) with scource.txt at prompt #1, at prompt #2 enter "c" for context search and at prompt #3 enter "12/dec/2004" and you will have them displayed 1 after the other.(enter enter...)

    And how did you remember that you have to look for "12/dec/2004" specifically? What about typos - suppose if one of the lines actually would have said "12/Dec/2004" or "12/dec/20004"?

    Again, a little comparison: If I want to know when I added or otherwise worked on JAXB support for my own little project I've worked on lately, I type:

    darcs changes --matches="name JAXB"

    Much simpler, no?



  • @WWWWolf said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:
    A lot of the so called bad coding habits were done just to pick somebody's ass many years later and it's working.

    I'm not sure how to interpret this. You intentionally picked up bad coding habits so that years later, people would find it annoying?

    I think it's another conspiracy deal.  People suddenly decided that a specific code form was a bad practice just to 'pick somebody's ass' (by which I assume he means himself).   For instance, no one ever thought that meaningful variable & label names were important until someone arbitrarily made a rule about it just to annoy him.   He isn't doing anything wrong, it's everyone else's fault.

    Just like always.

    -cw



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Creating the jpgs from the video using ulead.
     

    So now instead of camcordering a screen, you're making .jpgs of compressed video frames? Have you totally ignored everything you've seen in all these forums posts where we've screamed at you about digital artifacts?

    ding ding ding School is now in session. Please observe the following image:


    You'll notice it contains two items you're very familiar with, having received them on essentially all of your forum posts on various sites - it's a lock. On the left we have the original lock, as it was created in Photoshop, using the 'Webdings' font. The red square indicates an area I've blow up, which is the black arc left/above the lock. The green areas indicate where I've replaced "pure white" with green, to highlight what's "outside" the lock. Notice how the green area is regular and smooth.

    On the right we have the very same lock, but this time I've converted the original image in photoshop to a .JPG image. You'll note that the green area is now quite jagged and there is considerable "leakage" of white into the green area. Compare the two locks. Notice that the original (left) is quite crisp and sharp, while the compressed version (right) is quite fuzzy. This is what's we in the industry like to call "JPG compression artifacts". They are utterly unavoiable, as .JPG compression is a "lossy" format - it is impossible to get the same picture out of a .JPG as you originally put in, as the compression process destroys information in the picture. These artifacts are particularly prevalent where the image contains sharp borders with high contrast colors - ie: white meets black.

    Those are the "aliens" you see in your videos. Your camcorder does not store a sequence of raw unprocessed images - it uses a variant of JPG compression on each frame and stores compressed data. So... just by recording a video, you're already losing image data through the camcorder's hardware compression of the video stream.

    Then you extract frames from that video, and save them as .JPG. Now you've just thrown away even MORE image data via this second compression sequence.

    In other words, every time you open a .JPG, make some changes (ie: add your time stamp and red lines/circles), then save back to the same .JPG, you're destroying more and more of the original photo.  And each time you make more and more artifacts, which you claim are "aliens".

    They're not aliens. They never existed in the real world. They only appeared once you "recorded" them with your camera - and they were put there by the camera's video compression hardware. Then you added even more by saving the video frames as .JPGs

    So... now we've met the aliens. And they are you. You put them there, by using a digital camcorder and then .JPGing the video frames. You see a leaf or a bug passing by, and when you look at the resulting video, you see artifacts around the bug, and claim it's cloaked mother ships. Far from the truth. All you're seeing is the shimmer of .JPG compression at a high contrast portion of the image: Dark bug/leaf against bright sky. And then you make things worse by editing the .JPG image and adding red lines/circles, which add even more highly contrasting images against the sky, which creates even more artifacts.

     

    Oh, by the way, you can see those artifacts in the above image yourself, if only you had some software that could zoom into an image, instead of just randomly flashing stuff on screen every 0.02 seconds.



  • This sucks. Hierarchical indentation and <center> don't mix.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Too busy capturing aliens to be answering all these questions and challenges.
    @SpectateSwamp said:
    All this showing off has got me interested in doing a little alien hunting every week. Even if it is just 10 minutes.
    Uh, inconsistency alert!



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Actually it's pretty amazing code. Most of it was written nearly 10 years ago. A lot of the so called bad coding habits were done just to pick somebody's ass many years later and it's working. This code is simple enough and has lots of internal notes and crumbs. My memory has never been all that great and it doesn't have to be. I know who wrote the code and that it's easy to go into the source and make a change and jam it.
     

    The code is appalling - every single thing you do is a text book example of what not to do. You ignore sensible programming constructs like functions and subroutins. Global variables are everywhere, poor naming conventions abound and your comments are pointless. There is no way anyone other than you could do anything useful to this code without spending an excessive amount of time with it - it doesn't even compile under anything more recent than vb5.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    This is a simple working search engine. Don't be scared.
    No it isn't.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    The only complex part has a flowchart. And doesn't need to be touched(much). See the changes that were required to add scrolling text. (use SSDS) with scource.txt at prompt #1, at prompt #2 enter "c" for context search and at prompt #3 enter "12/dec/2004" and you will have them displayed 1 after the other.(enter enter...) Then look at some other date change. This program has had quite a few changes and is more complex than ever. Good luck.  
    The flow diagrams are useless to anyone other than yourself, and it would appear we need to know the date a change was made to find it - how on earth are we supposed to figure that out???

    Complex in this case just means messy - there is nothing difficult in the code (from what I can figure out) it has just been done in a crappy and confusing way. 



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    The challenge I want is these NetSquared folks or a showdown with the other desktop searches. They can't do anything worth a damn. Swamp search is way better.
    Why would anyone bother - you just ask for challenges and then refuse to participate...

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    All this showing off has got me interested in doing a little alien hunting every week. Even if it is just 10 minutes. I'll be showing you some fresh flyers soon.
    A leaf is not a flyer - we have explained this before...

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    Don't feel to bad about being afraid to look at the source.txt Any new program is intimidating to everybody. I've seen lots of code over the years. On one occasion the originator who was working at another branch of Govt. said "don't touch that code". I flowcharted the logic changed it and the fix worked. I became the maintenance guy. I worked with a lot of code over the years. The key element was, does it work? For the most part I didn't have time to clean up working programs. Only when the program badly needed it.
    This program is probably beyond tidying up... The code is a mess, badly documented (or plain not documented) and makes no sense to anyone who lives outside of your head. I am not scared, amused - yes, finding examples to show to new programmers as awarning - yes.

     

     

     



  • Repeat keys are very fast

    @burntfuse said:

    I don't know, that seems like a stretch.  He definitely doesn't like normal shortcut keys, and that should probably go somewhere (the SSDS section?) but it really doesn't seem like he thinks they're a conspiracy.
    People say things like "what if somebody hit "jjj" by accident and didn't want "Ctrl/Alt/Del" so what. They could just as easily hit Ctrl/Alt/Del. It's not a big deal. The repeat keys options could be turned off on on as you like. Using any keys that the user has to look for is slow. Terribly slow. Too slow.  

     

    ie select the file to search at prompt #1 by using inset keys ie "j" for file 4 "k" for file 5 etc. way way quicker than reaching for the upper row or a mouse (mouse won't work here) But a nice new skin would fix that...

    The other main conspriacy is "political plants" at forums. Hillary Clinton did it. Got in lots of trouble for it and should. A camcorder exposes them. Plants don't like to see a record of their deeds. The last few forums were remarkably free of plants. They were scared that I would expose them. Here in Canada the chamber of commerce puts on most of the forums and is about the worst for rigging questions. They want their members to be elected to council. They select other phoney winners for "citizen of the year" usually their members as well. Watch them with a camcorder they are easy to catch.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    People say things like "what if somebody hit "jjj" by accident and didn't want "Ctrl/Alt/Del" so what. They could just as easily hit Ctrl/Alt/Del. It's not a big deal. The repeat keys options could be turned off on on as you like. Using any keys that the user has to look for is slow. Terribly slow. Too slow.  
     

    No they couldn't - Ctrl+Alt+Del would require a deliberate action, hitting the same key three times can easily be done by accident (especially if you are deliberately trying to hit it twice). People with disabilities may find multiple key strokes like that somethng they do often, hence the reason this can be managed through accesibility options (therefore ruining your quick key idea).

    As people get familiar with keyboard input common / short words are not difficult to type, and they are understandable - jjj, ww, tt however make no sense and aren't really giving any speed benefit in my opinion.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    ie select the file to search at prompt #1 by using inset keys ie "j" for file 4 "k" for file 5 etc. way way quicker than reaching for the upper row or a mouse (mouse won't work here) But a nice new skin would fix that...
    SSDS is never going to get a new skin - no matter how often you use this as an excuse. The code is far too tightly coupled to the shitty ui for a simple skin to be possible - the software would need a complete rewrite; this however is unlikely as you yourself no longer show any interest in maintaining the code while the rest of us can't compile itdue to nobody still using vb5.



  • Repeat keys are the fastest

    @spenk said:

    No they couldn't - Ctrl+Alt+Del would require a deliberate action, hitting the same key three times can easily be done by accident (especially if you are deliberately trying to hit it twice). People with disabilities may find multiple key strokes like that somethng they do often, hence the reason this can be managed through accesibility options (therefore ruining your quick key idea).
    Actually it would take a 'jjj' then enter to make it work. Not that likely that it would happen accidentally. And if it did. It would be no big deal. It's not a delete everything on disk function.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    Actually it would take a 'jjj' then enter to make it work. Not that likely that it would happen accidentally.
    But then they have to move their hand all the wat to the enter key - isn't that the kind of movement you do not want? You would still get problems if filterkeys was enabled as this makes repeated keystrokes harder to do.... Plus is still doesn't address the problem of how people are supposed to discover or remember this things.

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    And if it did. It would be no big deal. It's not a delete everything on disk function.
    How are we supposed to know that? jjjgives no clue whatsoever to it's functionality.



  • SSDS shows you speed.

    @spenk said:

    But then they have to move their hand all the wat to the enter key - isn't that the kind of movement you do not want?

    My little finger on the right hand can reach that without moving from the home position.

     @spenk said:

    Plus is still doesn't address the problem of how people are supposed to discover or remember this things.
    No doubt they need to know these keys if they want the speed. But being I wrote this for Me. I know them. The code is provided so they can check it out. Maybe even make other quick key combinations to replace some of the other slower entries.

    When people use a program lots. They will take advantage of any means to make it faster.

     Don't worry SpenkSwamp I'll do some more video demos.

     



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    But being I wrote this for Me. I know them
    You have finally admitted this!!!! This is the whole issue with you and SSDS - you claim it is the bestest thing ever for everyone, but in reality it is written entirely for you. Nobody else cares about or understands SSDS so why keep pushing it on every sodding forum you can find? It is a tool by you for you and nothing more.

     @SpectateSwamp said:

    The code is provided so they can check it out. Maybe even make other quick key combinations to replace some of the other slower entries.
    Apart from the fact virtually nobody is in a position to recompile the source....

    @SpectateSwamp said:

     Don't worry SpenkSwamp I'll do some more video demos.
    Your videos suck. Out of focusmonitors and inane babble do not help anyone.



  • @joemck said:

    This sucks. Hierarchical indentation and <center> don't mix.
     

    Browser?



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    The other main conspriacy is "political plants" at forums. Hillary Clinton did it. Got in lots of trouble for it and should. A camcorder exposes them. Plants don't like to see a record of their deeds. The last few forums were remarkably free of plants. They were scared that I would expose them. Here in Canada the chamber of commerce puts on most of the forums and is about the worst for rigging questions. They want their members to be elected to council. They select other phoney winners for "citizen of the year" usually their members as well. Watch them with a camcorder they are easy to catch.

     

     

    I can't believe this.  He actually is able to comprehend all the material we're posting for the site, apparently doesn't realize that it's all about showing how stupid he is, and even gives us a bit of content.



  • @SpectateSwamp said:

    @burntfuse said:

    I don't know, that seems like a stretch.  He definitely doesn't like normal shortcut keys, and that should probably go somewhere (the SSDS section?) but it really doesn't seem like he thinks they're a conspiracy.
    People say things like "what if somebody hit "jjj" by accident and didn't want "Ctrl/Alt/Del" so what. They could just as easily hit Ctrl/Alt/Del. It's not a big deal. The repeat keys options could be turned off on on as you like. Using any keys that the user has to look for is slow. Terribly slow. Too slow.  

     

    ie select the file to search at prompt #1 by using inset keys ie "j" for file 4 "k" for file 5 etc. way way quicker than reaching for the upper row or a mouse (mouse won't work here) But a nice new skin would fix that...

    The other main conspriacy is "political plants" at forums. Hillary Clinton did it. Got in lots of trouble for it and should. A camcorder exposes them. Plants don't like to see a record of their deeds. The last few forums were remarkably free of plants. They were scared that I would expose them. Here in Canada the chamber of commerce puts on most of the forums and is about the worst for rigging questions. They want their members to be elected to council. They select other phoney winners for "citizen of the year" usually their members as well. Watch them with a camcorder they are easy to catch.

    If you can type fast (as I can), you don't have to look for the keys, you already know where the keys are. Also repeated keys aren't any faster than just using a few letters, such as 2 or 3 letters for every command would work OK, preferably sensible letters. Using "j" for file 4 and "k" for file 5 isn't really sensible, using the number keys works fine, reaching isn't that hard. (at least the number keys are not in the "penalty zone" like the esc key, function keys, arrow keys, etc. See Zenclavier: Extreme Keyboarding)

    The way SSDS is designed, it would make more sense as a console-mode program, because then scrolling, ability to change font/colors/window-size, and many other things are then automatically work. And, it also allows you to drag files to the command window. The next thing that needs to be implemented is tab completion.

    The source-code also has to be packaged correctly if anyone is going to do anything with it.

    I don't use SSDS however, it is because I already know where all of my files are, I have no intention to keep a list of something. And there are other command-line programs that do most of these functions anyways, I don't need it all in one program, but if for some reason you do need all this functions in all one program, I guess you can use SSDS if you want to



  • @burntfuse said:

    I can't believe this.  He actually is able to comprehend all the material we're posting for the site, apparently doesn't realize that it's all about showing how stupid he is, and even gives us a bit of content.
     

    Which just further validates my rationale behind making the site.

    If he wants to be The Stupidest Man on Earth, then let's help him!



  •  OMG I think Spectate has reproduced!

     

     

    How could this be????



  • @burntfuse said:

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    [snip tired rant on political conspiracies]

     

    I can't believe this.  He actually is able to comprehend all the material we're posting for the site, apparently doesn't realize that it's all about showing how stupid he is, and even gives us a bit of content.

     

    Oh, he has ranted about "political plants" many, many times before.  I think he does understand the purpose of the site, but he doesn't care. He has stated before that the insults hurled at him don't bother him.

    In a twisted way, he thinks he is playing all of us - in his mind, it is the forum members here who are the suckers because they spend time and money to create a site disseminating his ideas (especially desktop search).  It's like he said: nobody can stop SSDS now.  

    He is really a "no such thing as bad publicity" kind of guy.

    To me, the interesting thing is he treats people on the Internet like animals on the trapline: tease' em until they get angry.   He has certainly managed to get what he wants out of us - attention.

    http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/8159/156352.aspx#156352

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    One learns a lot on the trapline. Use the right bait and tease the prey. When they are mad mad, mistakes happen.

     



  •  In the next Add-on to the site I want to add a page to the site called "Swamp Sightings". I want to document every forum that we have found evidence of Swampology at.

    Video editing forums, bird watching, programming, etc.

    I think we should group them into the sites, and each thread.

    So something like:

    TheDailyWTF.com

    Channel9

     

     

    Does anyone want to compile a nice list of these sightings? I would like to roll it out in the next revision...



  • Can't forget about the original thread here:

    Why is Everybody so clueless (take 2)






  •  Just googled SpectateSwamp and hit the goldmine:

    Videoforums.co.uk

    Strange strange video artifacts. Anybody got them?

    300+ TrapLine video - Reruns

    Reason #1 for editing home video

    Still not Editing anything and doing OK

    Getting roasted for my view "Why edit video at all"

    Where did my forum go? Way too much editing happening here

    I like the logical progression of the thread titles here.

     

    DigitalPoint  (forums.digitalpoint.com)

    Strange strange video artifacts. How to capture them!

    Nature & digital video tips. For the Here and Now.

    Show us your WOW - I'm in.

    Who wants to build a Search Engine?

    Spectate Swamp VS the Desktop Search World; GDS, YDS, MDS ,? ,? ,?

    What desktop search should do.

    Video forums go ballistic over "Why edit video at all"

     

    TechCrunch (forums.techcrunch.com)

    (these don't really have any replies or arguments going on, so I don't know if they're worth adding)

    Random Video playback with Spectate Swamp Desktop search 

    Forget Mac, Linux, Windows - It's the desktop search stupid! 

                            <a href="http://forums.techcrunch.com/forums/message.jspa?messageID=12634#12634" mce_href="http://forums.techcrunch.com/forums/message.jspa?messageID=12634#12634">Digital video tips for the here and now&nbsp;
    

     

    DaniWeb (www.daniweb.com)

    Too Bizarre too Bizarre

    Video editing == Cutting crime (don't incriminate yourselves)

    Spectate Swamp Desktop Search is NOW Open Source

    Forget the OS: Mac, Linux, Windows, ?,,, It's the Desktop Search stupid!

    Video forums go ballistic when I say "Why edit video at all"

     

    ..and while I'm at it, a new quote:

    The Fish Cops had been watching it all along. and took copies


    illegally.

    http://www.biggamehunt.net/forums/archive/o_t__t_11172__start_30__index.html

     

    He's also got a thread that's mostly just him replying to himself:

    http://www.biggamehunt.net/forums/archive/o_t__t_11172__start_0__index.html



  •  ..and another quote (stupid edit timeout):

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=371501#371501

    Corner stone of computing. EXTRACT. Don't have it in your Search. BAD
    BAD You're fancy indexers and NotePad miss this KEY point in all
    computing.

     

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=371548#371548

    Now your are calling for and End to Learning. I know all this Desktop Search info is Swamping you. Cheer up.



  • @burntfuse said:

    Where did my forum go? Way too much editing happening here

     Maybe The Website needs a section for Swampy's irrelevant non sequitur anecdotes.  Swampnecdotes? 

    @SpectateSwamp said:

     I knew my position would be very extreme in a forum like this.

    But I had expected, that a larger amount of the traffic, would be surfers.


    Maybe they would like to hear, what I had to say.

    I have shot, a lot of video.

    My most recent video, is not anything special.

    But I learned a lot and got some lucky shots.


    My position, reminds me of a story a friend told me about his

    dad a bomber pilot, in the second world war.


    Their raid had been called back shortly after take off.

    They were told, to circle and burn off fuel, before landing.

    His crew came directly in with no excess fuel.

    What they did was take the instructions on conserving fuel and

    did everything completely opposite.


    I've taken this opposite stance in this and that other forum.

    Hoping I would get some insight and I have.

     



  •  Alright, I made an interim revision.

    I added what I have gotten so far for swamp sightings (will add the rest later), updated the Swampology page, added the Swamp Humor page.

     

    Great start for them all, keep the content coming guys!



  • Wow, Spectate displays a rare moment of clarity, lucidity and civility:

    http://www.biggamehunt.net/forums/archive/o_t__t_11172__start_45__index.html

    @SpectateSwamp said:

    The accusations I made against Greg Gilbertson
    on HuntShoot.com and other related websites were completely
    inappropriate and untrue. I apologize to Greg Gilbertson for my
    comments and I wish him the best !




    Sincerely Doug Pederson

     

    I think this is good evidence that most of Spectate's annoying Swamp-isms (poor grammar, annoying capitalization and punctuation) are simply calculated to "rile up" forums.  He really does enjoy annoying people. 

    It seems like people actually appreciate his videos there:

    @atomikall said:

    I cant find any videos all I could find was 3 send me more please.

     

    Too bad Spectate doesn't have the sense to stay on forums where he can actually make a contribution, rather than gleefully disturbing shit on random tech forums. 



  • Hey MasterPlanSwamp. [url=http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/8159/159132.aspx#159132]MCI[/url]. Favicon. Jam IT.

    Also, sightings:

    Wikipedia:

    • [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desktop_search&diff=prev&oldid=52241665]Desktop Search[/url]
    • [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SpectateSwamp&diff=prev&oldid=82474281]User_talk: SpectateSwamp[/url]

    The Daily WTF (I added new threads and sorted the list chronologically):

    • The Secretive Hidden InterNet Censors
    • [url=http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/t/5059.aspx]Trapper Busted this afternoon.[/url] [i](found by [b]Cap'n Steve[/b] earlier in the thread)[/i]
    • [url=http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/t/5063.aspx]Functions Considered Harmful[/url] [i](ditto)[/i]
    • Why is Everybody so clueless on the importance of Desktop Search to the Masses?
    • [url=http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/t/8133.aspx]EndOfThisWorld -- the collaborative online novel[/url]
    • Mashup Challenge $100,000 prize - WTF if Spectate Swamp wins?


  • @Spectre said:

    MCI.

    Updated.

    @Spectre said:

    Favicon.

    All set.

    @Spectre said:

    Also, sightings:

    Updated.

     @Spectre said:

    The Daily WTF (I added new threads and sorted the list chronologically):

    Updated.

     

    Thanks!



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @Spectre said:

    The Daily WTF (I added new threads and sorted the list
    chronologically):

    Updated.

    Neat. I made a small typo, though: it's "A collaborative online novel", not "the". (The thread was renamed to Spam actually, but I thought the original name would be more appropriate.)

    Interesting; I thought it was the "Functions Considered Harmful" thread that attracted SS to our forum (it linked to the source.txt, so maybe Swampy read the web access logs), but alas — his first post was made the day before.

    Oh, and I'm probably just picking nits here, but wouldn't it be more logical to actually link "belief perseverance" to http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/belief_perseverance.htm, and "idealization" to http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/coping/idealization.htm?



  • @Spectre said:

    I made a small typo, though: it's "A collaborative online novel", not "the".
     

    Fixed.

    @Spectre said:

    wouldn't it be more logical to actually link "belief perseverance" to http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/belief_perseverance.htm, and "idealization" to http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/coping/idealization.htm?

    I agree, Fixed.

     



  • MPS -- I showed your site to a techie friend of mine on Friday who isn't a TDWTF reader, but who I have told about SS and his search.  He thought it was interesting that we have gotten to this point, but without much background, he really couldn't get himself interested.  Maybe this "Swamp Sightings" page will help?  Just thought it might be some useful input from non-WTF'ers.



  • @WeatherGod said:

    MPS -- I showed your site to a techie friend of mine on Friday who isn't a TDWTF reader, but who I have told about SS and his search.  He thought it was interesting that we have gotten to this point, but without much background, he really couldn't get himself interested.  Maybe this "Swamp Sightings" page will help?  Just thought it might be some useful input from non-WTF'ers.

     

    Yeah, that has been kind of my thought since the start that this is really an inside joke. People who haven't dealt with SS's stupidity first hand will have a tough time relating to the nightmare that is his mind.

    Hopefully the sightings page will help, as well as the writing as it progresses. I am hoping for a better explanation on the front page one of these days.

    burntfuse did a nice write up summarizing some of the problems with SS, which is currently on the front page, but I would like to move that to a more appropriate section one of these days and instead have the front page take a new person through where SS came from, how we came across him, the arguments we have had, etc. 

    Others have suggested a marketing approach that I am all for, hopefully someone can Jam It!

    I am not the marketing type nor am I a good writer, so I won't even try. But we have some great minds and writers here that could probably put it together.



  • @CodeSimian said:

    Spectate, how is it that you use the Canadian spelling of "favourite" on your website, but in the forums, you write "favorite" (the American form).  Spectate, are you really Doug Pederson?  If all of this is a mean joke you're playing on poor old Doug, you can admit it to us.

     

    Just a scary thought... but what if SpectateSwamp isn't actually Doug Pederson?  I haven't looked at all of the videos, but I don't think at any time we see his face in any of the videos he posts.  Pictures and newspapers clippings can be easily found and posted and such.  I am not doubting that Doug Pederson made SSDS, but if SpectateSwamp isn't Doug Pederson, then it would make absolute sense for SS to post Doug Pederson's name, address and other personal information.  It would also explain the troll-like behavior and other inconsistencies in his posts.

    I want to see a video of SpectateSwamp showing off SSDS and having his face in the video.  I would hate to think that this whole forum has been duped by a very clever troll. 



  • @WeatherGod said:

    Just a scary thought...
    I want to see a video of SpectateSwamp showing off SSDS and having his face in the video.  I would hate to think that this whole forum has been duped by a very clever troll. 

     

    Maybe, just maybe, you re overthinking it.

    I mean, yeah, it ould be a very clever troll trying to make fun out of pour douggie's app, but it could also be that he's simply an idiot. 



  • Not to be annoying, but what about the latest Conspiracies write-up?  Does it need more editing before it goes on the page?



  • @burntfuse said:

    Not to be annoying, but what about the latest Conspiracies write-up?  Does it need more editing before it goes on the page?

     

    Actually I was wondering the same thing. I thought I had it up there at one time, but I just noticed it isn't there.

    I will put it up in my next revision. I am working on quote submissions and I need to test it first before I take it live.

     

    Thanks for the reminder though I hadn't noticed until about an hour ago...



  • @WeatherGod said:

    I haven't looked at all of the videos, but I don't think at any time we see his
    face in any of the videos he posts.

    What about the election campaign videos? I also remember stumbling upon some Canadian administration site linking to Douglas's homepage and (o horrors!) thanking him for videoing some conference or whatever; so at least the "Stone Dancer" home page belongs to the real Doug.



  • @WeatherGod said:

    Just a scary thought... but what if SpectateSwamp isn't actually Doug Pederson?  I haven't looked at all of the videos, but I don't think at any time we see his face in any of the videos he posts.  Pictures and newspapers clippings can be easily found and posted and such.  I am not doubting that Doug Pederson made SSDS, but if SpectateSwamp isn't Doug Pederson, then it would make absolute sense for SS to post Doug Pederson's name, address and other personal information.  It would also explain the troll-like behavior and other inconsistencies in his posts.

    I want to see a video of SpectateSwamp showing off SSDS and having his face in the video.  I would hate to think that this whole forum has been duped by a very clever troll.

    What in God's name are you talking about?  There are hours of footage of clouds and rocks and twigs in addition to pages of posts from SS.  Anybody who would go to that trouble just for the sake of trolling is legitimately crazy.  From just looking over this, I would say SS is a delusional schizophrenic.  He is paranoid, believes all sorts of easily-refuted fantasies and his thinking is incredibly disorganized.  Whoever made those videos is crazy, whoever wrote SSDS is crazy and whoever has been spamming forums all of the Internet with desktop search nonsense is crazy.  Why is it such a stretch to believe it's the same nutjob?  You think posting his personal info is really the strangest thing he's done?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.