@terdon No comment here?

@mikeserv On what? I thought we'd reached an agreement here.

If you mean about your last point, no it's not a duplicate. It is only dealing with field-based data, the other is about manipulating strings. The two are not the same. The solutions in the first section (the ones that use fields) could just as well be used for arithmetic operations, for example.

The other does not really mention the whole field concept at all. I don't see how they're dupes. And neither does anyone else, remember that you voted and nobody agreed with you which is why your vote expired.

As for 2) I have honestly no idea what you would like to see evidence of. You keep thinking I am making some kind of claim but I'm not. The only one you've mentioned is about field-based approaches being in general more robust than regex based ones. And that is obviously true. You can't expect a newbie to be able to write robust regex based solutions.

I'm sure you probably could, but you're hardly representative.

Apart from that, I make no claims. Just explain that you can either use a tool that automatically breaks its input lines into fields and offers them as internal variables, or you can use regular expressions to define them yourself.

@mikeserv ?

Of course it is a duplicate.

The other question doesn't deal with fields.

In any case, nobody else thinks its a dupe. You voted, so did the others. Let it go.

But what i especially want to know is, what happened to the comments which put this information at the top of the question?

I did not, by the way.

@mikeserv What comments? Where?

Did not ... what...?

@mikeserv Vote to leave open or affect the close voting in any way.

What comments do you mean?

The comments that were generated when i voted to close it.

@mikeserv They are removed when the question leaves the queue I think.

Oh! No, I deleted it actually.

But only after the vote had expired.

I saw little point in leaving it. I can undelete it if you like.

i don't know about that. And anyway, the vote hadn't expired - it can't have the picture is proof that.

@mikeserv What?

And yes it has. There is no pending close vote in the Q

Do you not regard that as something like a conflict of interest?

Oh for fucks sake man.

Is that not the kind of position you ought to avoid even possibly being involved in?

What? Deleting a now obsolete comment?

It's not obsolete! I was quoting you.

@mikeserv What?

It's obsolete because the vote had finished. The question had left the close queue. I regularly delete obsolete comments.

So do all the other mods.

On all sites.

But sure, I'll undelete it if it makes you happy

I linked to your post in meta and quoted you directly contradicting your own statement there.

@mikeserv Really? I know you think so but I never understood what you were talking about.

No, it doesn't make me happy - i don't care. I just don't like to know this is ok.

Mike, look, the community voted, you were voted down. Let. It. Go.

Just follow the link.

@mikeserv Yes, I saw the other one is an all inclusive or whatever about manipulating strings not fields.

If you can;t tell the difference, I'm afraid I have nothing else to say on the matter. Nobody else agreed with you so let it go.

The vote cannot have expired. I noticed it - and took a screenshot - when the post had 99 views.

You voted to close. Nobody else did. What, am I now supposed to go against the community just 'cause you disagree?>

@mikeserv Well, it did. The question has no more close votes.

Here it is:

What the hell does that matter? I'm not talking about that - I'm talking about whether or not its ok to for you to use those kind of clicks in self-interested ways. This place should be about information - why would you remove any kind of it? Especially a link to your own post?

@mikeserv WHAT BLOODY CLICKS?

I dunno - whatever it takes to delete a comment.

I've had enough of this. I've literally spent hours trying to deal with your obsession and intransigence. I let the vote play out, I left the comments there until the vote played out, I only deleted them after you lost your vote. So no, I don't feel I did anything wrong. Apart from perhaps making the mistake of engaging with you on one of your damn crusades again.

Well 99 is pretty close - maybe it was just a time update thing.

Intransigence? Am i supposed to be bendable?

Commments are ephemeral. They are specifically designed that way. If you want to make a point, take it to meta. Not the comments. We've told you this loads of times and you keep ignoring us. I don't see why we should change the rules just because you don't like meta.

let the vote play out... what?

@mikeserv You voted to close. 4 other users voted to leave open.

You know you say that a lot, but that's not what i read on se meta proper.

Your excessive commenting represents more than half the "too many comments posted" flags we get.

@mikeserv Say what?

Anyway, you deleted a comment which contained links to your post which stated - very clearly - that the q/a you had just opened must be a duplicate of the last.

@mikeserv Yes, 'cause I'm a power hungry moderator. My next step is world domination. Take it to meta where it belongs.

So fucking boot me again, man! What i don't do - is self-promote. I think that kind of behavior is icky.

I left those comments there while the close vote was active. Nobody agreed with you.

@mikeserv Well color me icky.

I don't self promote either mike.

i don't have to, terdon.

I posted question and answer I feel are useful and did NOTHING ELSE

You objected to it for reasons that nobody else seems to share.

Nobody else - 4 others?

@mikeserv Yes, that's how it works.

If you don't like it, you are free to leave the site as you have said you will.

You can also raise the issue on meta or contact SE.

For fuck's sake, after all this time, do you really think I'm so desperate for the rep?

Man, look, i just want to know which is true: is the one post all-inclusive - or is the pther not a duplicate? Either way, you might want to consider an edit. can i put that any more gently?

@mikeserv That's a step in the right direction. Next time, try using that tone from the beginning instead of slinging accusations.

And no. I don't want an edit. Post your own answer. I've asked you to do so repeatedly.

I want my answer to make precisely the two points it's making.

1) some tools have automatic field splitting 2) you can also do it with regex.

Not my edit!

?

Dang man! I'm saying, maybe you could back off the all-inclusive proclamation then, yes???

What "proclamation"?

What do you think i'm talking about this whole time? What do you think ive been talking to you about for a week? I don't give a damn about my edit.

Ok man - i learned of this when you told me it was a canonical q/a.

Fine, I called it "Putative general Q&A:" happy now?

So naturally, i went and looked at your meta post on the topic.

@mikeserv I've got no fucking idea. Never had. All I know is that I tried to post something useful and you came down on me like a rude ton of bricks.

That post makes some good suggestions.

So, are you happy now? With s/all inclusive/general/? Can we drop it?

They are that the community should vote there on the topics they think are most deserving of such a thing.

Have you altogether abandoned that notion? And if so - why does that post remain at all?

@mikeserv What? I posted that as a way to collect FAQ Q&As. What's your point?

Because it seemed pretty arbitrary both times ive seen it occur. Am i not allowed to object?

@mikeserv If you can do so without screaming and frothing at the mouth, sure.

Ok. But that's not what you say there - at least, not entirely.

@mikeserv WHAT? WHERE?

How am i screaming? How is voting to close a scream? That's a civil action - like, by the very definition.

Just read it, please? It's what you say there.

And i'm not saying anything different now than I have all along.

Read what?

Q

The meta one?

yes please?

What about it?

Dont you indicate there that the canonical q/as should be written according to popular demand?

Not that I know of.

Well?

@mikeserv?

So, the idea would be to hash it out here, and once we have a decent list, make a meta Q&A like the ones above, listing them.

Yeah, and?

And that one you did is not there.

Also:

Please vote for the answers below, upvote them if you consider the suggested Q&A to be a good candidate for the canonical one and downvote them if you don't. Upvoting the question itself is nice but less useful.

@mikeserv How could it be? If I were to dare to put it there, I would have to spend another week arguing with you. It's just not worth it.

Don't worry about the CW, I just did that cause I didn't think it was fair to advertise my answer here and then get loads of rep from it if it becomes the canonical.

I would be accused of self promotion and power abuse and eating puppies raw with no ketchup.

my idea was to have one, all encompassing answer to close duplicates with. It's a community wiki answer so I get no rep from it and upvotes just indicate that it works. Since to the best of my knowledge, all the solutions mentioned in the replace strings Q work, I'm not sure if it would be better to have multiple answers

@mikeserv Again, how is ANY of this relevant to my latest Q&A? Did I put it there? No. Did I claim it is supposed to be all inclusive? No. Did you latch on to it like a bulldog? Yes.

Ketchup is gross. A-1, though, makes a meal. Steak sauce is delcious on puppies.

You could have posted an answer giving your, usually unique, take on the field problem. Instead, you chose to leave comments, try to force edits I didn't want in my answer and just generally make a nuisance of yourself. Just post an answer already!

fuck it. I don't care. I just think it's fucked up that the stated intent in the first place seems to differ in so many ways from its execution.

@mikeserv Great. If you don't care, drop it.

yeah. Fine.

Cool