Linux-Advocacy Digest #822, Volume #25 Sun, 26 Mar 00 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] ("Michael W.
Coulson")
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] ("Michael W.
Coulson")
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] ("Michael W.
Coulson")
Re: NT vs Linux vs Whatever.... (Robert Heininger)
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] (David
Steuber)
Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser. (David Steuber)
Re: Looking For Linux Training Providers ("ax")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (When in LA)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Giving up on Tholen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Giving up on Tholen ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael W. Coulson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:49:11 GMT
jdaspinw wrote:
>
> of the world knows. Yes, Linux is hard to setup. Why?
> Because Linux has you interact with the installation, and
Hmm, some of the later installations I found no more difficult than a
typical windows install - in fact, Windows 2000 complained and gave me
more hassle than Red hat 6.1. What people fail to recognize is that
your mileage will vary. Different hardware, etc... Both will have
problems in certain situations - but given the advancements in the linux
install for several major distributions - I find it hard to believe that
people still find Linux hard to install. Not as a generalization
anyway. Each situation is it's own.
> The simple truth is that Microsoft makes a damned fine
> operating system, and if you can't run Windows without
> crashing it, then you'd better get the hell out of Linux
> before it smacks you upside the head so hard you don't even
Again - your mileage will vary. On my laptop at work friday Windows 98
SE crashed solid 3 times in the afternoon. The power button was my only
savior. Red hat on my desktop at home has crashed once - in 2 years of
constant running. (Never figured out what I did that time either :)
Yet I hear people say they never have windows crash on them. So - again
- it depends on the situation and hardware involved.
> on instant messenger to chat with some friends, then to go
> into Linux and startx and then see if your kaudioserver is
> running tonight or not.
My PC boots up in X (When it boots at all - I leave it up) and I have no
idea what a kaudioserver is though I use GNOME rather than KDE. Still -
My ICQ instant messenger is always running as is AOL IM. I don't feel
I'm missing anything. I run the same setup on my Win2k box downstairs -
I don't find it any more fun.
> they aren't the only operating systems out there on the
> market! There's MacOS, Unix varieties, and OS/2 just to
> name a few. You have to see the big picture, and that is,
> and operating system is an operating system.
But there will always be preferences. Until I found Linux (for the 3rd
time - as early versions were significantly more difficult to install :)
two years ago my preference on the above list was OS/2. Ran it almost
exclusively from OS/2 2.1 to Warp 4.0. Then IBM Dropped us. :( I've
used Windows (all versions since 3.0), Dos, OS/2, Beos, Linux, FreeBSD,
Solaris, SCO Unix, DR-Dos - They all do the same thing. But it's how
they do it that matters.
> And Linux is no more stable, secure, or easy to manipulate
> than Windows. All you're doing is regurgitating bull crap
> you picked up somewhere in a magazine, or from one of these
> discussion groups. Do any of you have what it takes to
> write an operating system? Have you contributed to the Open
That's a blanket statement - not true in all cases. I find Linux far
more stable, secure and easy to manipulate than Windows. I don't expect
others to feel the same however. And you are correct - not everyone has
what it takes to write an OS - I certainly could read the code easily
enough. There's nothing difficult about the C language. But there is
certainly differences with writing applications - vs writing OS's.
However - the thing I like most is that I COULD work on the Kernal if I
chose to. For someone wishing to learn about operating systems - where
else can you get such an oportunity?
> right to trash windows. And then late at night you sneak
> back on to good old 98 and play Unreal or Quake.
That last argument makes no sense - late at night I do play Unreal,
Quake, but mostly Heroes of might and magic 3. However - I only own the
linux versions and no one has yet written an emulator to run them on
Windows. ;)
> for Microsoft? Do you understand the pressure they are
> under to shell out the next big operating system every other
> year? If not, then shut the hell up
Pressure - only in that they need the revenue. Windows 95 was a big
event. Hell - why else would they have hung banners from the CN tower
in Toronto? That was a significant release - major upgrade from 3.1.
Windows 98 - a few new features - not many in my opinion. And a
relatively quiet release. Worth it for the bug fixes - but the price of
the upgrade was to high IMO for what you got out of it. We don't
necessarily need a new operating system every other year. How long
between 3.1 and 95? We need it when they have significant new features
to add for us. Microsoft (and the rest too) need it when sales drop on
their existing OS.
> screw them. And hey, they made a graphic interface
> installer that doesn't really work!!! Ain't that grand!
Hell - I never got the Caldera OpenLinux 2.3 install program to get to
the point it actually installed anything. Nothing is perfect as you
point out.
------------------------------
From: "Michael W. Coulson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:52:06 GMT
Paul wrote:
>
> Funny, windows runs fine but linux takes 4 hours of setup to get a printer
> and a usb mouse working.
> Become superior before claiming you are.
Hmm - my printer was set up in about 5 minutes. Can't comment on USB as
I've not seen enough USB devices to warrant using it. (Everywhere I
look - USB hubs. No devices to plug into the damn things. :)
------------------------------
From: "Michael W. Coulson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:54:14 GMT
Eric Peterson wrote:
>
> Nope. You got it backwards.
> Windows sets up fine (usually) but then crashes a lot when you try to run
> it.
> Linux is (still) tough to set up properly, but once it is, it NEVER
> crashes.
> Which would you prefer? Personally, if everything I wanted to run had a
> Linux version, I doubt that I would EVER boot Windows again.
>
That's not entirely correct. Nothing NEVER crashes. :) I had Linux
crash on me once - but that's with 2 years + constant running. That's a
good track record don't you think. :) Personally - everything I want to
run has a Linux version. My main machine has not booted another OS in
over 2 years. My other machine runs Windows(all versions) Beos,
Freebsd, solaris,etc - only 'cause I like to tinker. :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Heininger)
Subject: Re: NT vs Linux vs Whatever....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:53:35 GMT
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 11:22:25 +0100,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `Robert Moir' wrote:
>: Isn't it amazing the amount of people who read advocacy groups just to post
>: about what a waste of time it all is. I personally have seen some
>: interesting nuggets in here and COLA, though; there might be a high signal
>: to noise ratio at times but there is the odd seam of valuable knowledge
>: worth mining too.
I agree. There is a tremendous amount of knowledge to be found in these
diatribes : if one can learn how to set emotion aside and absorb the true
meaning of why people from all over the globe with common interests have got
together to discuss and debate issues that mean allot to them. I disagree
with how some people go about doing it, but in no way shape or form want
to see anyones rights to free speech in open forums taken away, so I have to
take the good along with the bad and just deal with it.
>: > I feel that Linux is all about freedom of choice because I can do with it
>: > *anything* that my limited Unix skills to date are capable of doing, which
>: is
>: > impossible to do with the proprietary, dictatorship driven OS's that I've
>: been
>: > using for years.
>: >
>: > * Hello New Millennium ::: Sayonara Microsoft! * :-)
>:
>: *g* well i could claim (and do) that I can do whatever I like with
>: NT/windows 2000. Isn't choice wonderful, we both got what we wanted?
>:
>: [...]
I'm not satisfied *yet*. I need to be able to use Linux as a CAD/CAM platform
in manufacturing for stability / performance related reasons, and if others
and I don't speak up it would never happen. Unigraphics Solutions (one of the
leaders in cad/cam/cae technology) has already got the ball rolling by porting
their Parasolid solid modeling engine to Linux. It's only going to be a matter
of time before there will be some robust Linux applications available that are
developed, using it.
http://www.ugsolutions.com/products/parasolid/press/pr_linux.shtml
>: Well some might argue (and I'm not suggesting you are guilty of this) that
>: some Linux advocates are hopping on a bandwagon merely trying to be trendy.
Guilty as charged. :-)
What's wrong with being trendy? I'm proud to be part of the Linux trend /
community, but my quest for knowledge is the primary reason I replaced NT4 with
it four months ago, and I'm rather quite disappointed in myself for waiting
so damn long to do it.
>: Of course, you can also argue that some Windows users are just sheep who
>: don't know better. I suspect there is some people on both sides who you can
>: say this is true about however. But if you do what you want, who cares about
>: other people right?
I like hearing (seeing?) both sides of the issue as it gives me better
perspective and the ability to be objective when the need arises, and yes :
there are many clueless people on both sides of the fence, IMO.
>: I personally prefer Windows 2000/ NT 4.0 to *nix. I've spent quite a
>: reasonable chunk of my 10 years in computing supporting various Unix
>: dialects and never really got "into" *nix. I don't like it. However, I don't
>: think that "unix = bad for me" is "unix = just plain bad" and there are some
>: cases where *nix based solutions are better than NT based solutions; and the
>: reverse is true too sometimes.
Well, I've spent the past 20 years in manufacturing, the last 10 doing it with
computers running Microsoft OS's starting with MsDOS 3 on a 80286 and before I
started using Linux, I had no idea, thanks to Microsoft, of how much power
could be extracted out of a computer, and by that I mean having the ability to
be able to customize an OS to suite specific tasks on a workstation by being
able to tinker under the hood.
>: > See above. IMHO: "Freedom" is what Linux and the OSS movement is all
>: about.
>:
>: Well unless you can cook your own code then you are being forced into doing
>: things however debian or red hat or corel or whoever decided to do them,
>: surely?
Writing my own code is something that I plan on pursuing education for this
fall. How can you say that I'm being forced to use a particular flavor of
Linux when the are many quality choices available : unlike the what - you - see
- is - what - you - get - one - desktop - fits - all - bloat - ware : that
originates in Redmond?
>: I can do the Win for you, but I try not to Troll.... You are halfway there!
It 'aint over 'till the fat lady sings. . . ;-)
>: Rob Moir
--
Robert Heininger __
# / / __ _ _ _ _ __ __ #
# / /__ / / / \// //_// \ \/ / #
# /____/ /_/ /_/\/ /___/ /_/\_\ #
# The Choice of the GNU Generation #
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:59:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Len Philpot) writes:
' And the scary part is that Win98 is even worse...
Don't fret, Win2K
will make your problems go away!
Are you ready for online registration to make your server work?
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
http://www.packetphone.org/
Hain't we got all the fools in town on our side? And hain't that a big
enough majority in any town?
-- Mark Twain, "Huckleberry Finn"
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.misc,comp.infosystems.www.browsers.x,comp.infosystems.www.browsers,comp.infosystems.www.browswers.misc
Subject: Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser.
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 18:59:59 GMT
So, why don't you guys get together and write a better web browser for
X? Yes, it would be a _huge_ project. You will also want to pass on
the MPL code. Better to stick with a BSD license or GPL.
I would do it myself, but I am working on another project that turns
out to be more complicated than I first expected.
Just a thought.
PS: No such thing as a WYSIWYG editor for HTML.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
http://www.packetphone.org/
Alden's Laws:
(1) Giving away baby clothes and furniture is the major cause
of pregnancy.
(2) Always be backlit.
(3) Sit down whenever possible.
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Looking For Linux Training Providers
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 19:16:31 GMT
"Richard Storey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> But there are more administrator types looking for training than
programmers.
>
Why?
------------------------------
From: When in LA
Reply-To: When in LA
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: 26 Mar 2000 20:19:20 GMT
On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 10:47:12, Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|
|
|When, in, LA wrote:
|>
|> On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 01:01:40, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|> said:
|>
|> |On 03/26/2000 at 02:14 AM,
|> | When in LA said:
|> |
|> |> If you tune into TV forecasters you will find a big falling off of
|> |> forecast accuracy from the real meteorologists who actually man the
|> |> weather stations, run the forecast models, etc. I dislike listening to
|
|> |Also, the ABC affiliate is tied in with Accuweather which is usually a bit
|> |more accurate than NOAA. Until recently the CBS outlet had as its chief
|> |met guy a former Navy pilot who was a trained meteorologist and also did
|> |extremely well day to day.
|> |
|> |Now, in the Washington and Baltimore markets, the locals are not so good.
|> |Ditto for New York with the exception of WNBC.
|>
|> Very interesting Bob, have you actually done a rigorous test of your
|> hypothesis though? Advertising is a great way to tell the public all
|> you are doing, but often it is just fluff with no real substance.
|>
|> For instance, a guy who used to be with NOAA, is in fact a guy that
|> used to be with NOAA. He now has a new job, and it is almost
|> certainly not a job to pour over the various weather products and come
|> up with a forecast. He is doing his joke rehearsals, he is in the
|> make-up room, he is getting his suit pressed, and when not at the
|> station he is out doing public appearances, sponsoring charities,
|> attending events, doing other reporting duties to promote the station.
|> I have never heard of a TV company actually giving the guy a full
|> lab.
|
|The federal government's National Weather Serivice (Dept. of Commerce)
|is the only entity allowed by law to produce weather forecats. NWS use
|a mix of techniques (emperical and physical models) and participants to
|produce the technologies (federal, private and university). The results
|(multiple forecsts from different forecasting models) are published and
|national the local weather forecasters interpret the results.
NWS is a subdivision of NOAA which in turn is a subdivision of the
Dept of Commerce.
|A local person is expected to understand which forecasts are more
|accurate for a location and also if some are better as mesoscale weather
|conditions change over the year.
Precisely. Except that the data is so complete coming from the
weather service that mostly all the local person has to do is know how
to use the information correctly. The only difficulty for the layman
in getting a good forecast from the NWS is in properly interpreting
what portions of the forecast are relevant to his particular location.
Each office of the NWS provides forecasts for quite a large number of
regions and subregions. An astute reader understands that a all most
all locations lie in a cusp zone between major forecast centers. Thus
when reading a forecast for a specific area, one must properly
evaluate how two or three or more forecasts for adjoining areas might
influence the forecast for the specific area the reader is interested
in.
Unfortunately, the population centers of Los Angeles and vicinty are
so wide spread the TV forecasters here do not make a lot of effort to
refine forecasts for specific zones, instead they give generalized
forecasts covering the broadcast area of their station, which in LA
can extend for about 300 miles of coastline and they try to sometimes
give general northerly/southerly and beach/mountain/desert variations.
However, it is pretty rough as for instance beach/mountain variations
in Santa Barbara can deviate, and more often than not does,
substantially from San Diego beach/mountain variations.
Finally, where the forecasters on TV really embarrass themselves is
the fact that the NWS issues updates only about every 6 hours, unless
a warning is called for. The TV guy at 4pm may find himself having
setup the 9:30 am forecast for his show, and because he has been in
the studio all day maybe he hasn't even looked outside nor looked at
the 3:30 pm update from the NWS before starting his program segment.
Thus he will report showers starting in the early evening which might
have been the a.m. forecast and there won't be a cloud in the sky.
|That is why a local forecast can be
|more acccurate - they apply experience to interpret from the general
|forecast. Other entities like WeatherUnderground use Java programs to
|suck in this forecast data and automatically produce local weather maps
|for newspapaers.
|
|I've seen a trend towards longer term, 3+ day forecasts. These are less
|reliable because they are longer term and therefore are less accurate
|than short term, 3 day, forecasts. Overall, weather forecasting has
|been improving.
I agree, weather systems are very complex and we still do not have
enough observation data coming from enough directions, nor have models
been developed to predict weather patterns with a great deal of
accuracy. You might have a giant storm bearing down on you at about
90mph and the reasonable thing to do is predict a storm. However,
there are a lot of unmeasured factors that could suddenly steer the
storm off course, slow it down, or even stop it before it arrives at
your location.
A person standing and gazing at the sky is not going to inpute much of
that data, if any either. What we usually see is people mistakenly
using a personal observation at 4pm and comparing it to a forecast
made at 9am and then claiming their ability to forecast weather is
more reliable than the NWS. Just doesn't usually wash under close
scrutiny.
However, sometimes someone might live in an area underserved by the
NWS. I can recall such an instance in 1979 when I lived in Oregon.
The NWS was I believe located in the northern part of the state and in
the southern part there was a big valley and a town called Roseburg
that had some pretty unique weather patterns. The local radio station
took to opening their door and noting how high on an adjacent hill the
goats were grazing. The had noticed that if the goats were moving up
towards the top, the weather was turning fair and if they were moving
down the hill inclement weather was on the way. They also noted this
was turning out to be more reliable than the forecasts for their area
from the TV stations in Portland. Although I never investigated the
matter the problem might have been that the Portland TV stations may
have been taking their data from a Portland area NWS office and the
appropriate one for Roseburg might have been the office in Eureka in
Nocal.
BobO
Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
act."
David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
Dejanews:
If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
*will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
*will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
admission to personal notification of employer]
Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
contacting employer]
Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:38:56 GMT
Jason Bowen writes:
> Don't you understand? Dave sets the context and decides the topic of
> discussion.
Incorrect, Jason. What the other person wrote sets the context and
decides the topic of discussion.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on Tholen
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:39:51 GMT
Jason Bowen writes:
> He just likes to show that he is what he claims not to be.
What did I allegedly claim I'm "not to be", Jason?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on Tholen
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:45:40 GMT
George Marengo writes:
> Here is an opportunity to clearly state what happened:
I already have, George. Nobody from the University contacted me about
any complaint submitted by Jeff Glatt. I did not receive any
reprimand from the University over some alleged complaint submitted by
Jeff Glatt. Is that clear enough for you? Glatt is a liar.
> For years you have posted from the University of Hawaii.
I still am posting from the University, George.
> Now you are posting from a Road Runner account.
Gosh, the service I requested long ago finally became available following
the upgrade of the wiring in this building.
> Why are you no longer posting from the University of Hawaii account
You're erroneously presupposing that I am no longer posting from my
University account, George.
> and are instead posting from a Road Runner account?
Why shouldn't I use a service that I requested long ago, George?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:48:06 GMT
George Marengo writes [to Bob Germer]:
> You're absolutely correct -- but what does that have to do with the
> Judges opinion being just that, an opinion?
You called that opinion a fact.
> That's the problem... as well as the technology allows. I can see to
> the coast, and if the coast is clear -- well, you tell me what today's
> weather should be like, assuming a west to east pattern.
I had asked you about tomorrow's qeather, George.
> I'm referring to a very specific case of the weather in my
> neighborhood -- not the percentages for the county or area.
And I referred to the weather tomorrow, not today.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 20:50:48 GMT
George Marengo writes:
>>>>>>> No, I'm not a die-hard supporter of any OS. The OS is simply a means
>>>>>>> to an end for me -- using software that I want or need to use.
>>>>>> Then what is your participation in this newsgroup for you?
>>>>> I didn't say I don't advocate particular OS's from time to time.
>>>> You did say that you gave up on OS/2.
>>> Correct.
>> So what's the interest in this newsgroup due to?
> We've already been there -- please pay attention.
Your "didn't notice" accidents are continuing?
>>>>> I said I'm not a die-hard supporter; i.e., I will switch an OS when
>>>>> my needs dictate that I should do so.
>>>> What a novel concept. I've been telling people to use the right tool
>>>> for the job for years.
>>> Great, then we at least agree on that.
>> Is there something we don't agree on?
> You tell me...
Well, let's find out:
Is a fact an opinion?
Is today tomorrow?
>>>>> My posting to os2.advocacy was because I didn't notice that
>>>>> someone had cross-posted to nt.advocacy.
>>>> Correction: postings. Multiple instances of "didn't notice"?
>>> Of course I noticed in subsequent messages, but by then I
>>> was caught up in the dialog. Do you make it a habit to post to
>>> *.nt.avocacy?
>> No, but I do believe that responses should reach the same audience.
> So do I... what's your point?
So what does it matter that you "didn't notice"? You made it sound
like an unintentional accident.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
