Linux-Advocacy Digest #707, Volume #26 Fri, 26 May 00 20:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (Marty)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Victor Wagner)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Chris Wenham)
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) (WickedDyno)
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (WickedDyno)
OT Please remember Memorial Day ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) (EdWIN)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691 (EdWIN)
Re: Tholen invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?)
(EdWIN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:12:11 GMT
EdWIN wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=) wrote:
> >Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Edwin wrote:
> >>
> >> > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > [snip]>
> >> > > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
> >> >
> >> > According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially
> >> > dead. Move along folks. No thread to see here.
> >> >
> >>
> >> And how is this "law" enforced? What happens if I keep
> >> posting to this thread?
> >
> >Like all who oppose Microsoft, you will be send to a camp.
>
> Spelling Camp. ;)
How ironic, coming from the person who recently wrote:
"Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Victor Wagner)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: 26 May 2000 21:55:49 +0400
In comp.os.linux.misc JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>I like the ability of rpm to NOT install older or matching versions
:>on top of what is running and to later tell me which files have been
:>modified or are missing compared to the installed packages.
:>
:>Also, configure scripts don't know how to satisfy dependencies when
:>you install several related things at once that must be done in a
:>certain order. Rpm gets this right if you install them all in one
:>command.
: No it doesn't. Infact that's one of the most annoying things
: about RPM. Given a collection of packages, it's unable to sort
: things out for itself.
Then why you all out there use RedHat deviatives?
When I've problems installing Linux on my notebook (due to flacky PCMCIA
net card) I've just thrown bunch of debs into would-be-/home partition
and type dpkg -i *
And this was in bare-bones base system where there was no contemporary
version of apt.
Not that Debian doesn't have some problems. Recently I've upgraded old
Debian 2.0 server to 2.1. And next day users have complained that
telnet and talk have disappeared - they was split out from netbase to
separate packages and I forget to install them. (and there was a reason
not to just run apt-get upgrade, but rather upgrade package by package).
Interesting that there was no such problem with X despite "Great X
reorganization" - it was well thought of.
--
Linux! Guerrilla UNIX Development Venimus, Vidimus, Dolavimus.
-- Mark A. Horton KA4YBR, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:29:46 GMT
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By the same token, claiming that the procedures are seriously flawed and
> difficult to use based on a personal episode can be misleading.
Which is why I didn't.
But I did say that I wanted a more granular update mechanism, and
that points to what obviously is a flawed mechanism: The hideous
amount of redundant code you download with every successive fixpack.
The FixPack system is badly flawed for this reason alone.
Regards,
Chris Wenham.
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:41:14 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>WickedDyno wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >ZnU wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Edwin wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > > news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> > > > Bill Altenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > [snip]>
>> >> > > > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially dead. Move
>> >> > > along
>> >> > > folks. No thread to see here.
>> >> >
>> >> > If I make a silly statement, llike "if someon mentions Hitler,
>> >> > the US dollar has no value" will you start insisting on payment
>> >> > only in gold and silver coin?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > You speak of Godwin's COMMENT as if it's the Law of Conservation of
>> >> > Energy.
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, we've discovered
>> >
>> >Who is "we"?
>>
>> As has been discussed elsewhere, "we" is us.
>
>Evidence, please. Where is "elsewhere"?
Here. Please ignore the inherent contradiction.
>> >> that the _real_ way to end a thread instantly
>> >
>> >How instantly is "instantly"?
>>
>> Depends.
>
>Having specificity problems, WickedDyno?
I refuse to confirm or deny that statement.
>> >> (or at least all useful discussion on one)
>> >
>> >Illogical, as discussion (useful or otherwise) occurs in a thread, not
>> >"on" it.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>
>Yet another example of your pontification.
You incorrectly presume the existence of "example".
>> >> is to turn it into a Tholenbot thread ;-)
>> >
>> >Evidence, please.
>>
>> Unnecessary.
>
>Typical unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Prove it, if you think you can.
>> Meanwhile, where is your logical argument?
>
>Open your eyes, WickedDyno.
You foolishly presume the existence of "eyes".
>> Why, nowhere to be seen!
>
>How ironic, coming from someone who is nowhere to be seen.
Typical invective.
>> Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Irrelevant.
Incorrect.
>> SCSI is *NOT* magic.
>
>Yet another example of your pontification.
Is it then your position that SCSI *IS* magic? Evidence please.
>> There are *fundamental technical reasons*
>
>Such as?
Don't you know?
>> why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain now
>> and then.
>
>How often is "now and then"?
As often as necessary.
>> -- John Woods
>
>You are presupposing the existence of "*fundamental technical reasons*".
Incorrect. I am presupposing the existence of "John Woods". Meanwhile,
where is your logical argument? Why, nowhere to be seen!
--
| Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 19:42:31 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>EdWIN wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=) wrote:
>> >Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Edwin wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:8gcd95$cd4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > [snip]>
>> >> > > Much like Adolf Hitler's policy of never retreating,
>> >> >
>> >> > According to Goodwin's law, this thread is officially
>> >> > dead. Move along folks. No thread to see here.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> And how is this "law" enforced? What happens if I keep
>> >> posting to this thread?
>> >
>> >Like all who oppose Microsoft, you will be send to a camp.
>>
>> Spelling Camp. ;)
>
>How ironic,
Typical invective.
> coming from the person
You erroneously presuppose the existence of "the person".
> who recently wrote:
>"Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood."
And where is the mispelling? Why, nowhere to be seen!
--
| Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OT Please remember Memorial Day
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:42:50 GMT
Off topic for our friends outside of the USA, but to those Americans
in the group, please take a moment and reflect on all we have in this
country that was fought for by people who believed in freedom. Many
gave their lives for our country and it is ultimately because of them
that we have our freedom to speak and more importantly the freedom to
chose, and this includes Linux for those that appreciate and enjoy it
and Windows just the same.
Say thanks to a vet this Memorial Day weekend.
He/She will appreciate it and you will feel better also.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:55:58 -0500
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thus 32bit consumer Windows with a reasonable desktop shell in
> 1995 rather than 1985.
>
> Prior to August 1995, the 'market leader' was still subjecting fools
> like you to DOS, yes that's MS-DOS, 10 YEARS after the introduction of the
> Macintosh and the 386.
My understanding is that Microsoft had several contractual limitations on
them in regards to creating an OS too similar to the Macintosh. Microsoft
signed several NDA's and non-competes when Apple contracted them to write
some of the original Mac software (such as the original Macintosh Basic).
MS was not free to create an interface too similar to the Mac until after
the contracts expired, which was why Windows 3.x had no "desktop" per se,
but just a collection of program icons.
Of course I can't prove any of this. I read it many years ago and haven't
really seen much of a reference to it since then, but it explains a lot.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:48:11 GMT
On 26 May 2000 20:22:21 GMT, "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.hardware [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>: This is exactly what makes Linux so hysterical. You have to
>: "experiment" with a piece of hardwre to make it work.
>
>Of course. How else would you get it to? It's not intelligent! It
>can't figure out what you want to do with it, because it can't read
>your mind. You're in charge, not it!
I want to print. Very simple concept. Blank paper goes in this nice
little tray and comes out with all of this writing on it.
Very simple.
>: Shit under Windows youplug it in, Windows prompts for a CD, prints a
>: test page and that's it.
>
>Uh, no. Plug it in, windows prompts for a driver, you put in cd or
>floppy, and windows says it can't find driver on cd or floppy. You
>point it at exact file as nearly as you can guess, and it refuses.
>So you try to choose some other nearly-right driver. After a few days
>of this, it finally occurs to you that maybe the cd is out of date, or
>your bios has tricked windows into a corner on something. OK. After a
>bit more downloading and trialling, you disable the help installation
>wizard by fauir means or foul, take charge of whatever the pnp thing was
>trying to do to you, and tell it where it should put its damed irqs (the
>pcmcia card manager was ON the irq it was trying to get me to use,
>once!). Thereby freeing up an irq for what's needed. Then you get the
>thing going partly, but you accidentally reboot, and windows loses
>track of the thing .... After about a week you get to half way
>understand the trick about "aggregate new hardware", enabling/disabling
>the net from both sides of what windows insists is some kind of
>ms network device, and you maybe also find the snuggling hidden option
>in the printer setup that means "produce standards conformant
>postscript" instead of the illegal MS stuff that needs dynamic font
>downloads.
Printers irq7, pretty standard.
The Windows world does not speak Postscript, and judging by the size
of Ghostscript for Windows, it's a good thing.
>: Tell me again how Linux is easier to use?
>
>A lot. I remember my struggles with the 3c589 under windows. A 10s
>operation in linux. As for the ne2000 I have currently stuck in the
>slot, windows just tells me that the driver on the manufacturers floppy
>won't do for it.
Obviously I can't speak for your experiences, but mine have differed
greatly.
Plug in card (Linksys PCI) and away it goes. Check off printer sharing
and instant network.
>Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:50:07 GMT
I prefer to have the latest driver. Most hardware is supported out of
the box under Windows anyway. I like to be able to switch paper trays,
switch resolutions, clean the nozzle, switch landscape and portrait
easily without having to set up 15 different printer ques to do it.
On Fri, 26 May 2000 20:46:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Fri, 26 May 2000 20:02:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>This is exactly what makes Linux so hysterical. You have to
>>"experiment" with a piece of hardwre to make it work.
>>
>>Shit under Windows youplug it in, Windows prompts for a CD, prints a
>>test page and that's it.
>>
>>Tell me again how Linux is easier to use?
>
> Easier would be not needing the 'extra' CD to begin with.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, 26 May 2000 09:05:42 -0600, Chris Webster
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Is there any way to make a Poscript "hello world" file to experiment with?
>>>> I'm sure a Postscript guru could hand-make a "Hello World" file.
>>>
>>>
>>>%!PS-Adobe-1.0
>>>% Print Hello world in lower left corner, portrait
>>>/Times-Roman findfont 20 scalefont setfont
>>>10 10 moveto
>>>(Hello, world) show
>>>showpage
>>>
>>>
>>>--Chris
>>
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:43:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> EdWIN wrote:
>
> > In article <53YW4.10754$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >Mayor writes:
> > >
> > >>>>> Christopher Smith writes:
> > >
> > >>>>>>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
> > >
> > >>>>>>> Who is "we"?
> > >
> > >>>>>> We is us.
> > >
> > >>>>> Who is "us"?
> > >
> > >>>> Us is "we", obviously.
> > >
> > >>> Classic circular reasoning.
> > >
> > >> If A=B does not B=A?
> > >
> > >Typical inappropriate analogy.
> >
> > Incorrect.
> >
> > >I was doing the equivalent of asking for the value of A.
> >
> > You're erroneously presupposed the existence of "A."
>
> Actually, no.
Irrelevant.
> It was Mr. Smith who presupposed the
> existence of A.
Prove it, if you think you can.
> >
> >
> > >Your response does nothing to provide me with that
> > >value.
> >
> > Unnecessary. Meanwhile, where is your logical argument? Why,
> > nowhere to be seen!
> >
>
> Why is it unnecessary?
Don't you know?
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
> Colin Day
>
>
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:59:45 -0500
EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Microsoft may have gotten the idea that the judge was biased
> against them,
> >and that they had no hope of getting a fair trial.
>
> It's more likely Microsoft got the idea it would be a good dodge
> if they could convince enough people this was the case, or at
> least sow reasonable doubt about it.
It's looking more and more like the judge is burying himself. Denying MS
the time to review the governments proposed remedies shocked most of the
legal by-standers (including the DOJ, which expected the judge to give MS
the time). Due process may have been compromised, and will certainly give
them a lot more firepower in the appeals process.
> >> It could be, you know, that they put up a weak defense
> because that's all
> >> they had. Just maybe.
> >
> >Time will tell.
>
> Time has told. Now it's time for Microsoft to puck blood.
I've never heard the phrase "puck blood" before. Whatever it means, it's
probably not true yet. There are at least 2 years of appeals processes
going on, and it will take a minimum of 2 years after appeals for the
supreme court to hear it. Nothing much will happen until that time, which
is possibly up to 4 years away.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:51:06 GMT
Defacto standard? Based on what? The number of users?
I doubt that....
On Fri, 26 May 2000 20:49:54 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
> Ghostscript is typically what translates the defacto standard
>Linux/Unix page layout language into something a particular printer
>will understand.
>
>[deletia]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:53:24 GMT
ypical Linux bullshit...Config, config, config and waste more time
with each config.
On 26 May 2000 15:52:20 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>And the problem with that would be???? You don't actually need to
>>>run GNOME, you just need the shared libs.
>>
>>You don't see a problem with requiring both Gnome and KDE? Oh, I take your
>>point about the shared libs.
>
>Especially for your first look at Linux you should take both. You
>can build a 'lean' version but not until you have seen enough
>to know what to discard. If you want to go 'really lean', toss
>all the config tools and just copy in working config files from
>another system and edit to please.
Yawwwnnnn...
>>>Doesn't ghostscript take -r1440x720 as an argument?
>>
>>How does that help me?
>
>I thought that was the resolution you wanted on your epson.
>Most graphic-capable programs are going to generate postscript
>and since you don't have a postscript printer the lpr setup
>will filter though ghostscript to render for the device.
>Rendering at that resolution will be slow but it should work.
>You might want to configure a 2nd printer with a different
>name for the higher resolution so you don't take the extra
>time for everything.
So now we need 2 printers and 15 different printer ques to do what can
easily be done with a $99.00 printer under Windows...
Spare me please.....
>>>Your network card vendor has the driver. Install it just like
>>>you would have a few months ago under windows.
>>
>>Ah I found the problem - I was using lnx4win. This I assumed was a working
>>version of Linux. When I bought an extra disk for Linux and installed Linux
>>on it, hey presto, the network is working.
>
>Heh - I'm glad you posted that. I would not have thought of it
>but the real difference here is -only- that by the time linux
>loads under lnx4wn, windows has already poked the p-n-p cards.
>Other than the boot loader and driver for the 'partition in a file'
>the Linux side is all the same.
Linux4Win sucks..Even I agree with that
>And now that you mention it, I have seen a similar thing with
>a laptop PCMCIA network card. That one would install and work
>after the first reboot on lnx4win, then not after subsequent
>reboots.
>
>>>>The driver running AHA1510, AHA1520 SCSI
>>>>cards is the same one I saw years ago, what progress there?
>>>
>>>Those cards don't do much of anything. What's wrong with the
>>>driver. (And, hmmm... do you have a mix of ISA non-pnp cards
>>>and PCI pnp in that box?).
>>
>>The 1520 is in a P166 box, the AHA2940 is in the PII-400MHz.
>
>Is there a feature the 1520 has that the driver doesn't handle?
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:54:37 GMT
Good for you. Mandrake is the best distro so far as I have seen..
When you see how much you are giving up running Linux, however you
will be back to Windows.
On Fri, 26 May 2000 20:10:44 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>I appear to have solved this one. I had installed lnx4win in the mistaken
>assumption it was a working version of Linux. When I added a big disk to my
>system and created a Linux Mandrake 7.0 system on it using standard
>installation, I found the following:
>
>1. Date/time is now working.
>
>2. The network is working.
>
>3. Kppp is sorta working.
>
>4. Sound card is working fine.
>
>5. 128Mbytes of RAM is being used (instead of 64M).
>
>Pete
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:47:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Today's Tholen digest...and all he can is repeat a few phrases which
> he has "popularized" and add a few words here or there.
On what basis do you make this claim?
> The sum total of them:
You're erroneously presupposing the existence of a sum total.
> [move along, c'mon, move along, there's nothing to see here]
Taking inappropriate posting lessons again? How typical.
> Thanks for reading!
You're erroneously presupposing the existence of readers.
> --
>
> "USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
> output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
>
>
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 23:53:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Joe Malloy writes:
> >
> > > The Tholen tholens:
> >
> > Still using made-up words, eh Malloy?
How ironic coming from someone who writes "allleged."
> > >>> We sic Tholen onto you.
> >
> > >> Who is "we"?
Don't you know?
> > > The *real* question is how sic [sic!] is Tholen?
> >
> > How ironic, coming from the person who just wrote that.
>
> Liar.
Classic invective.
>There is no evidence in his posting of your claim that he just wrote
> "that".
Incorrect.
> Seeing things that aren't there again, Tholen?
Posting for entertainment purposes again, eh Malloy?
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
