[EM] Markus's debate about what I allegedly said (Who but Markus cares?)
nkklrp at hotmail.com
Fri Dec 19 01:38:02 PST 2003
>You posted a little fragment of a Python program. And, in that fragment,
>some of the lines weren't even complete. You said I called that the Floyd
>algorithm. I replied that I have never called that line-truncated fragment
>anything. Did i call the Python program from which you got that fragment
>the Floyd algorithm? That's another matter. I didnt call your poorly-copied
>fragment anything, including the Floyd algorithm.
Markus's latest claims about that message:
You are the idiot because you see no contradiction between the fact that
you call your implementation "Floyd algorithm"
Wrong. I don't call my implementation the Floyd algorithm. I made it as
clear as possible for you that
I no longer call it that. I said that I'm going to ask Russ to delete that
name from the website. Markus, does it occur to you that most of what you
say isn't true? Doesn't that bother you at all?
Yes, I had previously called my implementation the Floyd algorithm. I
carefully explained to you how that came about, and I'm not going to repeat
it again for you. But I made it clear that I no longer call it the Floyd
List members: In case you're new to this list, this is what Markus does.
He'll latch on to some false claim about what someone said, and then he'll
keep on re-asserting it, with more false statements in each new posting. If
I keep replying to him, he'll go on like this for months. February will
arrive and Markus will still be trying to argue that I claim that my
implementation is the Floyd algorithm. Does that sound silly? Does it sound
like a reallly stupidly trivial thing to be wasting people's time, and our
archive space about? Sure, but apparently Markus really has nothing else to
do. Evidently Markus is completely without a life.
List members are probably already getting tired of this stupid debate, which
will go on for as long as I reply to Markus. He isn't really saying anything
that deserves a reply, and so you'll be glad to hear that this will be my
last reply to his sily debate in this thread. Typically Markus will then
send a few more messages, but when he doesn't get a reply he'll quit. When I
don't reply, that doesn't mean that Markus has said something irrefutable.
It merely means that I'm no longer wasting my time on Markus.
...and the fact that you have
to admit that your Python program nowhere uses the Floyd algorithm.
Markus, you see, apparently doesn't read the messages that he replies to.
I've been repeating (but to no avail) that now I don't claim to know what
the Floyd algorithm is, and nor do I care.
You wrote (18 Dec 2003):
>You claim that the 1-pass procedure that you posted finds the strongest
>beatpaths. Let's check it out and find out if it does. What was the year,
>month, and day of your posting in which you posted what you called the
The Floyd algorithm has been proposed by Floyd (Robert W. Floyd, "Algorithm
(Shortest Path)," Communications of the ACM, vol. 5, p. 345, 1962).
Excuse me, but did I ask who proposed the Floyd algorithm? I was referring
to the one that you posted here some time ago. I was suggesting that we find
it in the archives and find out if, without making more than one pass
through the permutations, it finds the strongest beatpaths between each pair
of candidates. So I repeat: What was the year, month and day that you posted
that algorithm that you called the Floyd algorithm and claimed would find
the strongest beatpaths with one pass through the permutations?
By the way, if, as you seem to be suggesting, the Floyd algorithm (the real
one, I mean) finds the strongest paths between pairs of graph-nodes, even
though the web articles say that it's intended to find the _shortest_ path,
then, if that's so, ways of finding strongest paths were being discussed as
early as 1962. If that's true, do you really believe that it never occurred
to anyone to compare path strengths between two candidates, until you
"invented" that idea in 1996?
Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and
More information about the Election-Methods