Linux-Advocacy Digest #848, Volume #25 Tue, 28 Mar 00 00:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (Marty)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (When in LA)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (Marty)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (Marty)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (When in LA)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again) (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:36:57 GMT
Can't make up your mind before you post, Bobo? Again you employ your usual
tactic to fragment a thread to further obscure its purpose. How much more
transparent can you get?
Interesting how you've determined that I'm not being reasonable:
BO> Obviously you are not going to be reasonable.
Yet, you responded to me anyway in spite of your rhetoric:
BO> I will not reply to you until such time as you direct yourself to at
BO> least a statement of position on the above issues. Until such time,
BO> I will hold my opinion, and you may hold your own, but I am not going
BO> to continue to engage you in irrelevant prattle on the subjects.
Predictably, just more Bobo hot air.
Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 02:07:55, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
"[more flak deleted]"
> 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.
Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrasing! No
matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
H. I ask again (noting the lack of previous response), where is the part that
proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find
that part, can you? Too bad.
I see your signature is unchanged. So much for:
BO> See I am not such an unreasonable guy Marty. I will work with you
BO> on this.
More hot air. How convenient that you lied about my response to this
statement.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
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 (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: 28 Mar 2000 04:41:45 GMT
On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 04:23:31, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|Interesting how you've determined that I'm not being reasonable:
|BO> Obviously you are not going to be reasonable.
|
|Yet, you responded to me anyway in spite of your rhetoric:
|BO> I will not reply to you until such time as you direct yourself to at
|BO> least a statement of position on the above issues. Until such time,
|BO> I will hold my opinion, and you may hold your own, but I am not going
|BO> to continue to engage you in irrelevant prattle on the subjects.
|
|Predictably, just more evidence of Bobo's hot air.
|
|Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
|>
|> On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 02:07:55, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|>
|> |>Note how Mr Interference for the Usenet Spy can easly determine
|> |>what the Usenet Spy meant by "getting flogged" but he has trouble
|> |>inferring what he intended by contacting Tholen's employer and
|> |>complaining about Tholen's use of the word "queer."
|>
|> |> Have trouble with inferences that require more than one word?
|> |
|> |Not at all, Bobo. One does not infer to decide guilt. One deduces and proves
|> |guilt. One can only infer from a metaphor. You obviously still have no
|> |concept what a metaphor is nor how one works, so I'm not surprised that this
|> |fact is lost on you.
|>
|> Hmmm, you must use the same dictionary as Fatglatt.
|
|Now you've really lost the argument. Disregarding all salient points and
|resorting to the dictionary to prove a "point". I see your transparent
|tactics haven't changed one bit and are not about to. Does your dictionary
|still justify your use of the words "moron" and "idiot" to describe retarded
|persons? We've all seen the value of your "definitions" in the past.
|
|> Merriam Webster, 10th Edition
|> Deduce: 1, Determine by deduction; specif: to infer from a general
|> principle.
|>Next time you try correcting my usage of words, try educating yourself
|>first. Much to your chagrin, inferences and deductions are not
|>mutually exclusive.
|http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=deduce
|
|That's #2, taking a back-seat to:
|"1. To reach (a conclusion) by reasoning."
Taking a backseat? Do you understand how a dictionary works Marty?
These are not contradictory definitions. The first definition for
"infer" IN YOUR DICTIONARY is:
1.To conclude from evidence or premises.
I suppose you think that reaching a conclusion by reasoning does not
include using evidence or premises? Your ignorance is becoming
legendary Marty. Keep up the good work!! Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
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.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:38:44 GMT
Can't make up your mind before you post, Bobo? Again you employ your usual
tactic to fragment a thread to further obscure its purpose. How much more
transparent can you get?
Interesting how you've determined that I'm not being reasonable:
BO> Obviously you are not going to be reasonable.
Yet, you responded to me anyway in spite of your rhetoric:
BO> I will not reply to you until such time as you direct yourself to at
BO> least a statement of position on the above issues. Until such time,
BO> I will hold my opinion, and you may hold your own, but I am not going
BO> to continue to engage you in irrelevant prattle on the subjects.
Predictably, just more Bobo hot air.
Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 02:07:55, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
"[more flak deleted]"
> 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.
Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrasing! No
matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
H. I ask again (noting the lack of previous response), where is the part that
proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find
that part, can you? Too bad.
I see your signature is unchanged. So much for:
BO> See I am not such an unreasonable guy Marty. I will work with you
BO> on this.
More hot air. How convenient that you lied about my response to this
statement.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: 28 Mar 2000 04:44:05 GMT
On 27 Mar 2000 23:20:36 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:
>Yet, the root account still exists on the system. You seem to have
>overlooked that little fact. The very existence of root is a problem.
Why is it a problem that it exists if it is not used ?
>Erik isn't saying that root is too much power to handle. He's saying that
>it doesn't make sense that some sysadmin, drunk on power, can just
>carelessly delete data files of other users at random, if he/she so
>wishes.
If the systems administrators are "drunk on power", the users are pretty
screwed regardless. And as it's already been pointed out, you have the
same kind of issues with the Adminstrator account on NT ( take ownership )
The point is that *someone* has to have control over the system.
Sure, you can abuse "rm". You can also abuse a hammer and bash the case
with it. The point being ?
>: Me, I make typos, but I never destroy my system, 'cause I've learned to
>: think before I hit return. Especially if the command I'm typing is
>: potentially dangerous.
>
>I see. You never make mistakes.
He didn't say he "never made mistakes". He said that he doesn't hose his
system due to carelessnes. This is not about being infallible, it's about
being careful with priveliged accounts.
But like he said, if the "dangers" of root are scary, make an admin account.
Sure, it's not on the default setting, but if you want to talk about
default settings and file protections ... hmmm ...
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:42:20 GMT
Can't make up your mind before you post, Bobo? Again you employ your usual
tactic to fragment a thread to further obscure its purpose. How much more
transparent can you get?
Interesting how you've determined that I'm not being reasonable:
BO> Obviously you are not going to be reasonable.
Yet, you responded to me anyway in spite of your rhetoric:
BO> I will not reply to you until such time as you direct yourself to at
BO> least a statement of position on the above issues. Until such time,
BO> I will hold my opinion, and you may hold your own, but I am not going
BO> to continue to engage you in irrelevant prattle on the subjects.
Predictably, just more Bobo hot air.
Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 02:07:55, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> I don't read Tholen's posts
Then you have absolutely no basis for even having this discussion!! You
haven't even view all of the evidence by your own moronic admission! Please
stop making a fool out of yourself, Bobo.
"[more flak deleted]"
> 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.
Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrasing! No
matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
H. I ask again (noting the lack of previous response), where is the part that
proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find
that part, can you? Too bad.
I see your signature is unchanged. So much for:
BO> See I am not such an unreasonable guy Marty. I will work with you
BO> on this.
More hot air. How convenient that you lied about my response to this
statement.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:37:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Wed, 08 Mar 2000 04:10:16
GMT
> >On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:46:36 GMT, someone claiming to be me" wrote:
> > I certainly don't call that proof
> > that MS pressures hardware
> > manufacturers not to support any
> > other OS, which is the claim in this
> > thread.
> >
> >Care to address that topic? Without the ad hominem this time?
>
> No, the ad hominem stays; you're an idiot, Roger.
Max, I had to ask you to mind you manners :-).
But you do catch more flies with honey. While you write
to Roger, there are others lurking.
Try to be a representative of Linux, not a marauding teen-ager.
> The particular refute for your particular pedantic idiocy
> is the neo-per-processor-licensing.
Actually, the most dramatic examples of this behavior - as disclosed
in Judge Jackson's "Findings of Fact" include Microsoft's specific
targeting of IBM - the only OEM that did not have a license until
15 minutes before the release of Windows 95.
Microsoft demanded that IBM stop shipping machines with OS/2, and
even insisted that unless IBM agreed, that Microsoft would insist
on a license audit (extortion) which it threatened to disclose to
the public (blackmail). Eventually, to get the license, IBM paid
nearly $30 million - for nearly 4 million licenses - machines sold
with OS/2 instead of Windows.
Microsoft also used it's pricing and discount structure to make it
more cost-effective to purchase more licenses than you needed than
to buy too few. At the same time, this obligated the OEM to use
the licenses that were purchased - especially if they wanted a rebate
in the event of a sales short-fall.
According to Judge Jackson, and Microsoft's testimony in both the
Java and the Novell case, Microsofts primary purpose for many of
it's tactics was to protect it's market share from unnamed competitors.
This was stated in the Sunsoft vs Microsoft Java case in so many words.
Microsoft even stated that it had to protect it's market share from
all sorts of competitors. Microsoft's market share at the time
this testimony was given was nearly 95% of the market. Microsoft
specifically named OS/2 and Linux as competitors. Even the most
generous estimates (mine) give Linux less than 7% of the market
and even then Linux SHARES the hard drive with Microsoft Windows
due to the application barrier to entry.
> This is what 'pressures' MS applies to manufacturers
> to prevent them from supporting any other OS.
Notice also that when Windows 98 autoinstalls it removes all
partitions, creates a single partition that fills the hard drive,
and then overwrites the Master Boot Record. Furthermore, the
OEM is not allowed to alter the installation once it is completed.
Specifically, the OEM can't shrink the partition (which would
alter the boot sequence (the boot partition would have to be checked).
The OEM can't add a partition (another alteration of the boot
sequence). The OEM can't alter which partition boots.
In fact, if I understand the language correctly, the OEM cannot even
alter which drive boots first, since this would alter the boot sequence
from what it was when the software was first installed.
Simply put, OEMs must install Windows OR Linux, but not both.
> It is public record that this exists; the proof will
> nevertheless skitter out from under your hawkish gaze, as always.
Max,
What I have noticed in my dialogues with Roger is than when I have
provided new information, within a matter of days, the DOJ is acting
on that information. I don't know if Roger works for the DOJ, but
he is a good investigator rather than the usual "Microsoft lackie".
Roger.
Other Microsoft activities worth investigating:
The use of nondisclosure agreements during the development of the
USB standards.
The use of nondisclosure agreements during the development of the
DVD-CSS standards.
In both cases, the contributing parties/organizations would
have been better protected by a software patent and hardware
patents or patent applications, but were prevented from doing
so by the agreement with Microsoft.
Note that DVD and USB were both key strategic additions to
Windows 98.
Note also that Microsofts efforts delayed the introduction of
Fire-Wire, which was a public standard published by the IEEE.
Linux supports FireWire and simple functions of USB. The lawsuit
over DeCSS was not initiated by Microsoft, but what role did Microsoft
have in it's enforcement? Did Microsoft have any influence on the
sites that advertized DeCSS as a piracy tool? Did Microsoft issue
any communications to the DVD-CSS or MPAA organizations requesting
or demanding enforcement? Are Microsoft lawyer in any way involved
with the civil actions intended to block the dissemination of DeCSS
as a legitimate Linux driver?
I'm asking these as questions - that Roger might want to have his
people ask - not as questions I expect anyone to answer.
> >>Roger wrote:
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 1%/week!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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 (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: 28 Mar 2000 04:50:13 GMT
On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 04:42:20, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
|> I don't read Tholen's posts
|
|Then you have absolutely no basis for even having this discussion!! You
|haven't even view all of the evidence by your own moronic admission! Please
|stop making a fool out of yourself, Bobo.
You are really funny Marty. What does reading Tholen's posts have to
do with being able to identify juvenile insults? Do you really think
that if you copy Tholen, you are immune to being juvenile?
All I can say is. . . .now juvenile!
|
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.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bobo shows his hypocrisy yet again)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 04:47:16 GMT
Are you *still* posting on a topic about which you know, at most, 50%? You've
already admitted:
BO> I don't read Tholen's posts
So how then can anything you say have relevance on this topic?
I also continue to find it interesting how you've determined that I'm not
being reasonable:
BO> Obviously you are not going to be reasonable.
Yet, you responded to me anyway in spite of your rhetoric:
BO> I will not reply to you until such time as you direct yourself to at
BO> least a statement of position on the above issues. Until such time,
BO> I will hold my opinion, and you may hold your own, but I am not going
BO> to continue to engage you in irrelevant prattle on the subjects.
Predictably, just more Bobo hot air.
Bobo wrote (using a pseudonym again):
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 3900 04:23:31, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
"[more flak deleted]"
> 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.
Still demonstrating your inability to prove your claims? How embarrasing! No
matter how many times you repeat it, it does not magically produce evidence
that Sutherland tried to get Tholen fired for using a word, especially in
light of Sutherland's reproduction of the letter he actually sent to the U of
H. I ask again (noting the lack of previous response), where is the part that
proves that Sutherland tried to get him fired for using a word? Can't find
that part, can you? Too bad.
I see your signature is unchanged. So much for:
BO> See I am not such an unreasonable guy Marty. I will work with you
BO> on this.
More hot air. How convenient that you lied about my response to this
statement.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
