Linux-Advocacy Digest #239, Volume #28 Sat, 5 Aug 00 01:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Loren Petrich)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Loren Petrich)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (Rauni)
"pure" Linux?? ("Alan Murrell")
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality (Loren Petrich)
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
post-installation SCSI setup?? ("Alan Murrell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 5 Aug 2000 04:10:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Michael S. Lorrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >> How do you "opt out" of the tax system ?
>> >Join the Tax Patriots. In the US, the Income Tax, in order to be
>> >constitutional, had to be made a voluntary tax system. Do the proper
>> >paperwork, and you don't gotta pay taxes. ...
>> Tax evasion, pure and simple.
>Actually not.
Baloney. How will your beloved armed forces be funded if
everybody evades taxes like that?
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: 5 Aug 2000 04:12:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> No one got arrested for not using Microsoft.
>If you are CEO of a OEM PC manufacturer, if you decide to withhold
>from signing a Microsoft eexclusive-sales contract, then you will
>suffer from having to purchase OS licenses at 3x that of your
>competitors, putting your company out of business (because the
>margin on desktop machines is so low to begin with). Thus,
>refusal to sign a Microsoft contract is, for a CEO, the
>business-world equivalent of signing one's own death warrant.
What M$ imposed was awkward choices; however, using Mr. Kulkis's
usual anything-goes-when-it's-business rhetoric, that would be 100%
legitimate.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: Rauni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:21:10 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:54:44 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:25:32 -0400, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> >> The government throw you in jail for tax fraud if you don't pay your
>> >> federal tax, but Microsoft can't do anything if you opt out of the
>> >> Microsoft tax ? Subtle difference.
>> >
>> >Actually, Microsoft can get the government to go crack your head for
>> >them. Its called piracy charges....
>>
>> How can they get you for piracy if you don't use their products ???
>>
>> --
>> Donovan
>
>There's the catch. If you want a pre-built Intel-based PC,
>your options are quite limited (unless you go to one of the
>until-recently-nonexistant Linux startups). 3 years ago,
>you had no choices...Windows or no computer.
Aaron proving his stupidity again. I know a lot people who use OS2.
It doesn't crash like windows. And it has been available for a
*long* time. My daughter and my ex had it on their computer over four
years ago.
------------------------------
From: "Alan Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: "pure" Linux??
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:27:29 -0800
Greetings!
I know there are many "flavours" of Linux out there (Red Hat, Mandrake,
TurboLinux, etc.), each of which have their own benefits, drawbacks, etc.
However, I was wondering if it is possible to take the kernel itself,
without any "flavour" moifications, install it on a system, and then
install different individual components, as you see fit, and thus have a
"pure" Linux system installed on your system.
Where would one get all these individual components? What would be
involved in such an undertaking??
Thanx, in advance, for your responses!
--
Alan Murrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 1147392
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Comet/1777
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:24:31 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Fri, 04 Aug 2000 20:52:20 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >Wrong. When did I ever make a case for the government living
> >ONLY on a head tax? I have ALWAYS stated that it must be
> >accompanied by a sales tax.
>
> So will the sales tax be very high, or will you have no tax revenue ?
Correct. The beauty of it is.... "class-envy" excuses for
raising taxes fall flat on their face as everyone realizes that
the only way to 'tax the rich' is to increase their own taxes
as well.
>
> >> Hardly a supportable assertion. Low unemployment levels are *NOT* causally
> >> related to low taxes.
> >
> >low taxes breed low interest rates. Low interest rates lead to
> >low unemployment.
>
> Low interest rates might contribute to low unemployment, but they don't
> cause it. Besides, the economic system *requires* a certain level of
> unemployment. Too little unemployment means businesses can't hire anyone.
In a free society, you will never have 0% unemployment, precisely
because some workers will be dissatisfied with their jobs, and
volountarily take on a new job. And businesses fail every day,
which also frees up labor (example: those businesses which failed
to switch from horse-and-buggy supplies to automobile supplies
quickly enough)
>
> >> >Have you ever considered the possibility of getting a job and EARNING
> >> >MONEY
> >>
> >> ... even if it's not enough money to pay for a hospitakl visit
> >
> >ever hear of "insurance"
>
> Sure I have. If I was in charge of a health insurance company in a
> deregulated economy, I'd refuse to accept certain clients ( that,
> or charge them a lot of money ).
Which is a prudent thing to do.
Those who are high risk should pay premiums accordingly.
>
> >> or afford the "head tax" ?
> >
> >If you can't afford the head tax, then you are a parasite.
>
> Whatever.
>
> >>
> >> Your complete and utter contempt for women is astounding.
> >
> >Are you alleging that the millions of babies born to unmarried
> >women who are on, or go on welfare are all due to some reason
> >OTHER than the women wilfully putting themselves at risk for
> >becomming pregnant?
>
> Did it occur to you that a man may have been involved ?
Yes. But, as women keep saying, it's *THEIR* body.
If *SHE* decides to have sex when she can get pregnant, and
*SHE* decides to carry the baby to term, then *SHE* can be
fully responsible for figuring out how to finance the kid.
If the guy runs out on her...well, then, that's not *MY*
responsibility...*SHE* is the one who decided to spread
her legs for DangerAsshole.
Demanding that politicians legalize pickpocketing out of my
paycheck is unconstitutional.
> >a) rape (In the US, only a handful of live births per year)
>
> Oh, while we're at it, what's your policy on abortion ? If you want
> to ban it, that'd be more than a handful.
I really don't care. But as long as women demand for it to be
legal, then those who do not avail themselves to it when they
can't support a child are not deserving of any public support.
PERIOD.
>
> >b) as a result of the woman's VOLOUNARY behavior
> >c) Evil fairy making a midnight visit, wielding a Magic Baby Wand.
>
> Combination of b and c. Hint: the fairy is a man. And he doesn't "tap
> her on the forhead".
Wrong
1. A man is a man, not a fairy.
2. Outside of rape, a woman doesn't get pregnant unless she
specifically WANTS him to engage in that behavior. IN that
regard, he is merely a servant to her desires.
>
> >Or do you have evidence in your posession supporting the
> >existance of evil fairies tapping unsespecting women on the
> >forehead with Magic Baby Wands?
>
> No, I just object to you blaming women, when it's clear that a man is
> equally responsible.
Oh yes, women claim they are "on the pill" when they are not,
puncture condoms so that they will leak, and play all kinds of
other games to get pregnant after telling the guy that they
are being very careful to not get pregnant.
Ultimately, the woman, and the woman alone is reponsible for
what risks she exposes her body to.
I have no problem with the woman making DangerAsshole pay
child support...and if he doesn't do it...then to put him in
custody of the state, and find useful, productive work for him
by which he can pay the support payments (PLUS the costs of
whatever custodial supervision is necessary...including armed
guards and iron-barred sleeping quarters, if need be.
>
> >> Education, health, law enforcement and defence are not just for the
> >> "lazy, irresponsible and drug-addicted".
> >
> >1. you have no right to Education.
> >2. You have no right to health care.
> >3. You have no right to law enforcement...BUT...the law
>
> I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. At least you're being
> consistent. But I think you'll have a hard time getting anyone to
> agree with you on the above points.
The right to swing your arms ends where someone else's nose begins.
YOU have a right to PURSUE education, but you do not have a
right to education. That is, you have the right to obtain an
education by any legal methods, but you do not have a right to
enslave people into teaching you
You have a right to PURSUE health care, but you do not have a
right to health care. That is, you have the right to obtain
health care by any legal methods, but you do not have a right
to enslave people to provide health care for you.
If you have to impose on other people for something, then
it is not a "right"
Is any of this getting through to you?
>
> I think most of our disagreements boil down to the fact that I disagree
> with you on each of the above points.
>
> > enforcement agencies plus courts and jails are
> > constitutionally mandated.
>
> But it's not constitutionally mandated that they be adequately financed,
> because there are problems defining this.
This is covered in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution.
Congress is DIRECTED to fund these entities.
>
> >I see no reason for society to waste resources on the self-destructive.
> >If they choose a life that leads to an early death, so be it.
>
> The problem is that your policies would have their children punished.
If they chose to terminate their genetic lineage, then that's
just fine and dandy with me.
We have too many defectives as it is...we certainly don't need
the defective children of the defectives reaching maturity
and producing defective grandchildren.
The country provides everyone with the same opportunities,
including the opportunity to help your children, or harm
your children. Killing your children is killing yourself.
People whose brains are that screwed up...we don't need
thier children around...it merely spreads the problem.
>
> >Absolutely not. EVERYBODY is free to choose a path of self
> >sufficiency. Those who choose to lollygag around at my expense
> >are worthy of contempt, not compassion.
>
> Most children are not self sufficient.
The only children who are my responsibility are
a) my children
b) any other children who are in my direct custody (either
by agreement or court order).
We have a problem: irresponsible adults are dumping the
responsibility of raising their children onto society as
a whole...and to add insult to injury, they tend to have
a far larger litter of brats than the typical law-abiding,
socially constructive citizen.
>
> >Those who are financially insolvent, and choose to fuck around
> >and have kids, and then insist that *I* pay for their kids
> >are worthy of contempt, not compassion.
>
> In other words, you want their kids punished, or at least you want
> them to suffer. If you want to punish someone, punish the parents.
How about, instead of paying welfare checks to slobs in
government housing in the inner city, we collect them,
have them construct new housing in some remote area, and
do some constructive task (such as building a road, etc)
to earn their "welfare" pay. Those who get sick of it
can go to work in the private sector if they agree to
renounce any claims on the government to support them.
I am sick of paying for generations of freeloaders.
If they wanna party all night, they can pay for it themselves.
>
> >> Which was taxed when he (grandpa) earned it. And taxed again when it was
> >> inherited.
> >
> >True. It's still a lousy system, though. The reason is that
> >it builds a great-affinity with freeloaders of all wealth levels.
>
> I don't get your point.
The Kennedys are as much a bunch of freeloaders as your
average Welfare Queen. This is, of course, why Senator
Teddy has such an affinity for Welfare Queens...because
he shares so much in common with them.
Neither of them work--they both expect that the taxpayers
should pay for their existance, while doing nothing in
return for the very same taxpayers who are the hands that
feed them.
>
> >> The inheritence is also taxed. Quite steeply ( probably more than 50% )
> >
> >True. The problem is, the inheritance tax is destructive to
> >small businesses because the heirs usually have to liquidate the
> >business to pay the inheritance taxes. This is utterly stupid.
>
> So have a threshold or something if you're concerned about this. But
> you know, inheritence is inheritence, whether it's a business or money.
No...thresholds are arbitrary and subject to manipulation (like
devaluing the currency and other political chicanery). Also,
the inheritance tax is morally repugnant if the recipient would
have put the inheritance to productive use (given the chance).
A sales tax, on the other hand, eats up an inheritance just
as efficiently as an inheritance tax, without being destructive
to small businesses.
Sales taxes also remind the public to keep an eye on how
the politicians are spending the money...because they are
reminded EVERY TIME THEY GO TO THE STORE.
>
> >Are you saying that if a millionaire is given a $100,000 fine
> >by a court, that he has not been punished, because he still
> >has $900,000 left?
>
> a penalty is probably a better word for it. I wouldn't call a fine
> "punishment".
Sophistry is not victory.
>
> >> The real sellouts are those that are unwilling to fund a decent education
> >> system.
> >
> >Money has very little to do with education.
>
> It helps quite a lot. It's obviously not causally related to quality of
> education, but it's a contributing factor.
Here is what you need for education:
1) Competent teachers. (this has been pretty much destroyed in
the last couple of decades as communist agitators have
thoroughly taken over the colleges of education across
the country)
2) Students with a curiousity about the world around them.
The Army is an example of an organization which spends VERY
little on education itself. 75% of my "classroom" time has
been in some empty field....sometimes, standing in the rain.
Ironically, those classes which were under the most miserable
of conditions were the lessons which I learned best.
Now, I am not advocating that we let our schools get dilapidated,
or have children huddled in a mob in the middle of a snowdrift.
What I'm saying is that the "more money for education" mantra
is a smokescreen. The money is being fucking WASTED through
payoffs, kickbacks, embezzlement and all other sorts of
corruption.
It's really amazing that even kids from inner city schools
attending Catholic schools often out perform many of their
suburban counterparts, even though the per-pupil budgets for
the Catholic schools are only 30% of the suburban schools.
And, as we have seen, for genetic reasons, these kids are
usually not nearly as capable (as a whole) of high academic
performance.
In other words..the Catholic schools are MUCH better at getting
kids to reach their potential than are the public schools,
INCLUDING the suburban school districts.
The primary difference: The Catholic schools don't require
their teachers to have gone through the indoctrination
bullshit of an "Education Degree" that public schools require.
>
> >The pride and joy of the Detroit Public Schools is Cass Technical
> >High School (named after the first governor of Michigan). Although
> >a public school, it has competitive entry, like a private school.
>
> evidently, not competitive enough. Schools help students realise their
> potential but to claim they turn dunces into Einsteins is false advertising.
>
> >> (*) The top private schools are usually better funded than the top
> >> public schools.
> >
> >And all of them (Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, MIT) are ranked ahead
> >of the best public shools.
>
> Yeah, but how do they do the rankings ? Take away some advantages that
> the private schools tend to have ( for example, better funding resulting
> in smaller class sizes ) and some state schools start to look pretty good.
>
> >> (*) Most of the schools in Europe are better than most of the private
> >> schools in the US.
> >
> >That's because they don't have a core of communist-agitating
> >adherents who are doing anything possible to cause their
> >societies to collapse from within. Conversely, there is a
> >very active and aggresive campaign to cause US society to
> >collapse from within by sabotaging the education system at
> >all levels.
>
> Yeah, i know. I saw a round of public executions of high school teachers
> last night. Then I met the new teachers, and their first names were all
> "comrade" and their last names ended with "sky" and "ov"
Obviously, you're one of those people who can't see the forest
because there are two many trees blocking the view.
In the US, they knew that killing the teachers would cause
an outright revulsion, and probably trials and executions for
treason for ALL Communist Party Members if they ever tried such
a stunt. So, they did something else,... instead of immediate
replacement of everyone, they took a much more low-key approach:
they directed the "true believers" to go into "education"...
specifically, to get PhD's and become Doctors of Education.
This, they have done, and they now have almost complete control
of our education system.
The pattern and effects are the same. The only thing difference
is that there were a lot less knives and bullets involved.
>
> >> >Wrong. Both families consist of nothing but parasitic scum, who
> >> >pay nary a penny in taxes while being a great burden to society.
> >>
> >> Wrong.
> >
> >Name one Kennedy or Rockefeller who isn't a parasite.
>
> I was referring to your claim that they don't pay taxes
They don't pay taxes in accordance with how much of a burden
which they place on society (that is, consumption of scarce
resources).
>
> --
> Donovan
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: 5 Aug 2000 04:27:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Then please explain for everyone here any substantial
>disagreements you hold with Communist philosophy.
[...]
>Once again, I ask you to suggest in ANY way where you defer
>from the those who openly admit that they advocate Communism.
>As far as I can tell, the only difference is...you're too
>much of a fucking coward to stand up and state exactly what
>it is you believe in.
This depends on what Mr. Kulkis considers Communism, and it's
apparently anything to the left of groves of birch trees. For all we
know, many Republican politicians could count as Communists.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:16:02 GMT
In article <8lr616$r65$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Serge J.Luca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.microsoft.com/solutions/ecommerce/lycoscs.htm
>
Microsoft has managed to create enough incentives to get
Lycos to try Microsoft (for the third time). And even this
is only for the "Face" or "Glamour Server". Essentially,
Lycos can use a CISCO router (UNIX) to scatter search requests
to an array of 1000 Windows 2000 machines, which will then
forward requests to the "Real" UNIX servers that run the text-search
engines.
>From the article (near the end of the story).
MSFT> Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
MSFT> Interoperability
MSFT> Utilizing the Microsoft Web platform, Lycos will be
MSFT> able to maintain existing non-Microsoft components
MSFT> while standardizing on Microsoft technologies.
MSFT> Lycos plans to keep its existing Unix database
MSFT> servers, but with open standards such as HTTP and
MSFT> XML, is finding few problems integrating them with
MSFT> Microsoft Windows® 2000, COM, and Microsoft
MSFT> Visual Studio® development system tools. And by
MSFT> adopting the Windows 2000 platform, Lycos is
MSFT> enabling a rich XML environment in its Web
MSFT> solutions that will help Lycos capitalize on .NET
MSFT> opportunities with software and services as they
MSFT> become available.
Put simply, Microsoft plans to impose a bunch of perverted
.Net protocols in it's servers and IE 6.0 and Lycos needs
Windows 2000 front-ends to support the connections. It's
likely that many sites will have to come up with a separate
host-id (net.lycos.com) to support the Microsoft wierdness
while the (www.lycos.com) continues to support the open
standards.
Right now, Microsoft is staging a huge push to get Windows 2000
onto the most prestigeous sites as the "front end" servers to
attempt to shift the Netcraft surveys. This way Microsoft can say
"According to Netcraft information, Windows 2000 serves 90% of
the Fortune 500 (largest corporations) and 90% of the E-100 (largest
web sites).
Lycos has tried Windows NT three times. The first time, they tried
to run an array of NT 3.51 servers against Sun servers. The were
allowed to announce that they were using NT, and users were given
the options and counts for each server. You could pick either.
NT failed so badly that Lycos pulled the plug on it. They issued
a carefully worded announcement (designed to slip past the Microsoft
NDA censors) which - if you read between the lines - said "We had
so many problems we just decided that we couldn't afford the hassle,
no matter how much free stuff Microsft was willing to give us".
When NT 4.0 came out, Lycos waited until after Service pak 3, and
again tried using NT 4.0 strictly as a front-end server. Again,
they found that the overhead was too expensive. The trial was
unplugged before they even got out.
This time, Microsoft is pulling out all the stops. They are planning
to support 1000 Windows 2000 servers as "front-ends". Lycos could
still pull the plug and switch to Linux or FreeBSD, but this way
they get free hardware, software, installation, and support.
Don't expect to find either of the above tests on the Microsoft
site. Microsoft burns the dead bodies.
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 42 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Alan Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: post-installation SCSI setup??
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:42:43 -0800
Greetings!
I have another question for you all: how do you set up a SCSI device
*after* installation?
Again, Thanx in advance!
--
Alan Murrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 1147392
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Comet/1777
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
