Talk:Luser

Yes, I know the word history is taken from the famous Jargon Lexicon (AKA Jargon file), of which there are about a billion mirrors, but I figured that the word history is too important to just leave out. I tried to change the words around so as to not directly quote the Jargon File. Besides, it is the only source for such a word. -Aluion

There was a controversy when MIT people become offended at being called losers? Can anyone validate this? I was always under the impression that the people at MIT found the harmless hacking to be somewhat funny. - bloodsorr0w

Removed LART from the see also links... it links back here anyway. --210.84.230.92 07:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

LUser =~ Local User also. --194.249.198.31 19:00, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


 * True :) 75.17.209.129 01:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I always throught the /luser command in IRC stood for List Users... 69.86.104.47 02:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

At one time, Luser was used to simply refer to Linux Users. I specifically remember the local users group being called Lusers. Obviously it's more fun to use Lusers as an insult, so I believe this is obeselete. --WildKard 22:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Video on Trial
Video on Trial's verdict about Paris Hilton is NOT actual; therefore please DON'T put a picture of her. Does that explain why? --Addict 2006 07:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Question
I was wondering, should this be written in a more encyclopedic way, or is it liked just fine as it is? I mean, I read it and wasn't offended or anything, but its totally informal and all that. Oh well, just a thought. Jaz Mcdougall 08:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I had the same thought.--80.217.189.168 02:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. -- WPholic [ talk ] 08:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Should it even exist at all? Wikipedia is not a jargon or slang guide AdamMorton 00:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not just a word, it's linked to an internet meme as well, which we do document. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 17:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Cluestick?
Why does cluestick redirect here? I don't see the concept mentioned. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 02:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I binned the section concerned, I'm afraid. It wasn't very encyclopaedic. When I get round to it, I'll be writing a new section with the right tone, and that will mention "cluesticks", I guess. Grace Note 04:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. ·:·Will Beback  ·:· 07:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Add cluebat to that. It's very confusing. BigBlueFish (talk) 16:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

AOLuser?
The word AOLuser, a contraction of AOL user, is a perjorative term sometimes attached to users of that fine service. There was even a TV ad featuring the term, although not in its contracted form. Should it be included in the article? 66.80.222.104 (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)Duncan66.80.222.104 (talk) 23:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

"user" and is usually pronounced as "loser"? International Phonetic Alphabet
I find it hard to believe luser is pronounced with a ō, (long O sound) Unless the writer meant the same as the English word "loser," which ends in -uːzə(r) sound. If I'm right, and luser and loser are pronounced identically, than it would be more accurate to say that "loser" is pronounced like Luser, rather than the other way around! Without providing an IPA International Phonetic Alphabet pronunciation, its really impossible to understand what the author means in this article. It might also be noted (although it seems obvious) that the term luser is not much used in conversation anyways-- simply because the humor can't be detected auditorily. The joke is seen visually by substituting user with luser, but in conversation; it is indistinguishable from a crass insult. I think it may be best to remove the sentence about pronunciation altogether, even if it is cited. Cuvtixo (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Really?
"There ensued a great controversy, as some of the users didn't want to be called losers every time they used the computer." Did people really care that much, or is this some troll exaggerating things? I can imagine they may have thought it looked inappropriate there, but I seriously doubt that the users were actually offended to any great degree by a computer script calling them losers. 65.78.144.189 (talk) 05:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't know if there really was, but the Jargon File has always (well, for the last dozen years or so at least) said that there was. 195.212.29.95 (talk) 16:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Speculating that it was not the MIT users who were actually bothered much by it, but concern that the external, paying (i.e..e Macsyma Consortium) users might not think it was funny. There was no controversy during my tenure as an ITS system programmer and liaison (a few years after the term was coined), but that's my guess. By the way, the :LUSER command to summon help was on all the ITS machines, not just one of them. What it did was to send an IM to a short hardcoded list of people (including me) that said, "Help me! I'm a luser!". And then one of us might elect to IM them back to ask what the problem was. (Or peek in and screen spy on them first to see...)  The command may have originally just been on the Macsyma machine; I forget.

Linux user
Matthew 11 vs 25-27, and his previous explanations of wine users. - Dirtclustit (talk) 23:09, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:LART (computer) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:02, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Evidence for dating the term
In the ToTS archive of MIT backup tapes we can see DDT version 546 source code from November 1974 did *not* use the term "luser" but just "user". However, an assembled binary does have the message saying "lusers". Subsequent versions of DDT source code has the "luser" message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larsbrinkhoff (talk • contribs) 07:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC)