[EM] Russ's stories about me and computer programs
nkklrp at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 1 22:40:43 PDT 2005
I never completely replied to this before, at least not to one of its
completely false claims.
Russ said, in January:
A couple of years ago, Mike expressed an interest in learning to do some
programming, which he had never done.
Actually no, that isn't correct. Russ freely makes things up. I'd done some
programming, over a period of years. I discussed that in my earlier posting
today, so I won't repeat that discussion.
What I suggested was that the BeatpathWinner algorithm be put up at the
website. It was agreed that I'd send it in a programming language (as
opposed to pseudocode). Pseudocode would have been fine too, but I also
wanted to write a program rather than just a pseudocode description.
I chose Python because it was said to be the easiest of the popular modern
He asked me what language I
recommend. I told him that I like Python, and it is considered a good
I chose Python for the reason that I said, above. Authors liked it, and
suggested that it's the easiest of the popular, modern programming
languages. Russ agreed that he liked Python, or liked what he'd heard about
it, so it seemed a good medium for communication of the algorithm.
Then we decided to post some CSSD code on the site.
BeatpathWinner and CSSD, though they're equivalent, are completely different
algorithms. And the decision to post BeatpathWinner at the website was made
before a language was chosen. In fact, it was the reason why a language was
He said he would
send pseudocode, and I would implement it in Python.
No, the agreement was that I'd express the algorithm in Python, which I did.
Mike had never
actually obtained access to a Python interpreter
, but I suggested that
he could take a cut at a Python implementation and I would fix the
syntax, debug it, and test it.
Yes, I'd send a Python program for the BeatpathWinner algorighm. Having the
Python language, Russ could test the program for syntax typos.
In other words, the pseudocode would be
written in Python.
No, Python isn't pseudocode. The Python would be written in Python.
Well, Mike sent me piece of junk that was chocked full of both syntax
errors and logic errors.
As I said, there were a few (but not many) syntax errors. Of course a
particular syntax error shows up wherever that particular syntax is used.
There were no "logic errors". As I said, the Python book I used implied
something incorrect about the use of multidimensional arrays, but that was
not a "logic error" on my part, but rather was a writing error in the Python
book. As I said, when I found out that the multildimensional arrays didn't
work as described, I didn' t use them, and instead made multidimensional
arrays from Python's 1-dimensional arrays and a function that I wrote.
Mike then explained that he couldn't handle the Python convention of
using indentation, in lieu of "endif" and "endfor" delimiters, to define
the logical structure.
No, I didn't say that. I said that e-mail often can't handle the
indentation. I said that e-mail sometimes loses the correct indentations.
For that reason, I suggested that I add the endif and endfor, to mark the
end of those blocks. They could be removed prior to use, or they could be
left in as "comments".
That's an example of Russ's outright lying.
A also explained to him, in passing, that he could put in comments by
simply preceeding them with a "#". I even showed him an example of how
to do it.
That is pure fiction. I'd read a book on Python. I suppose pretty much every
programming language has a way of making non-executing comments in a program
listing, and every book on a programming language describes that. In fact,
in program examples, the comments are found on many or most pages of a
programming book. I'd justs finished reading a book on Python. I knew about
the comment notation. Russ didn't explain it to me, with or without an
He has preceded the actual
code with a lengthy explanatory message to me that was perhaps a page or
No, it wasn't an "explanatory message" to Russ. It was instructions for the
user, on how to enter the rankings via keyboard.
I wanted it to be part of the program listing, so that it would always be in
the possession of anyone who had the program listing. I suppose I could have
written the program to print the instructions when the program begins
running, but that seemed cumbersome for the user, who might not want that to
print every time. So I included it in the program listing as comments.
This lengthy preamble was obviously not intended to be a
comment to be included with the code, yet Mike had preceded every line
of it with a "#" comment delimiter!
If I preceded every one of those input instruction lines with a comment
marker, then it's odd that Russ thinks that it's obvious that it was not
intended to be included with the code, as part of the program listing. The
purpose of the comment marker is to include non-executing comments in the
Yes it was obvious that it was not intended to be part of the program
(That's what the comment markers tell us, Russ). But it was obviously
intended to be part of the program listing.
I couldn't make up stuff like this
if I tried, folks!
Folks, Russ could and did make it up.
Russ, as I've said, is someone with absolutely no honesty. There are people
like that. Very few. As I said, you probaby didn't expect to encounter any,
but now you have.
Is is complete lack of honesty in any way related to his Bush-worship?
Probably. Remember that this is someone who told me that Bush is probably
the best president that the U.S. has ever had. He said that after the
invasion and during the occupation.
He fancies himself to be some sort of expert in
I've never said that I was an expert on voting algorithms. I relayed Steve's
BeatpathWinner algorithm to Russ, identifying it as being from Steve.
Russ makes things up.
, yet he is incapable of writing a basic computer
I answered that in my previous posting today, entitled "BeatpathWinner
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
More information about the Election-Methods