Linux-Advocacy Digest #648, Volume #28 Sat, 26 Aug 00 13:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Ted Brown)
Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows (Bob Hauck)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chad Irby)
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Re: GUI vs Command Line: The useless war
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chad Irby)
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows (Craig Kelley)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft Linux: what if? (Craig Kelley)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ted Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:29:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Eric
Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would never vote for Nader but I would love to see him and Buchanan
> allowed into at least one of the debates. I saw Nader on Crossfire a
> couple weeks ago and it was interesting to see him hilight some of
> Gore's hypocritical behavior. That's a good thing. Buchanan can to the
> same to Bush.
>
> It forces the major candidates to fully justify all of their positions,
> instead of just being able to ignore certain things because they assume
> they have all the extremist voters locked up and don't need to defend
> their moves toward the center. Of course, the major parties got burned
> by Perot and Ventura when they were allowed into the debates, so forget
> about either of them allowing a real discussion anymore...
Nader and Buchanan would be a great asset in the debates. Sadly I agree
that the major parties will do what they can to keep them away.
There probably should be a debate that is just Gore and Bush, after all we
know that one of the two will win, but it's nice to see some of the
alternatives get some major air time.
Of course it seems that Bush is trying to avoid as many debates as
possible. Let's see if Gore who is trying to pin Bush down for some
debates, will be as open to debate Nader and Buchanan as he was to debate
Bradley.
I'd gain more respect for Gore if he conceeded to debate Buchanan and Nader
even w/o Bush present.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:47:26 -0500
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >All that is irrelevant. Your argument was lack of source code. My
argument
> >is that it's available if you absolutely need it. Price is not an issue
for
> >a company like AT&T.
>
> Price is an issue for all companies. The idea that large companies have,
> simply because they are large, infinite funds, is at best flawed.
Price is not an issue in a situation like this. Companies spend billions of
dollars on redundant hardware. A fraction of that for source liscensing is
par for the course.
> Or were you joking?
AT&T spends more money on research that it shelves and never uses than it
would cost to buy a windows source liscense.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:51:40 -0500
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> I have several Linux servers that run quite comfortably in 64 Meg plus
> >> as large (128 meg) swap area. High performance workstations running
> >> Netscape with Memory leaks tends to suck up more memory.
> >>
> >Linux certainly does have lower memory requirements. Given that memory
> >is so cheap it really isn't an issue
>
> No, I guess it just pushes up the price of running win2k compared to
> linux. If you're a small organisation, maybe that's not a problem.
> If you have several thousands of 'seats', that could come into
> millions.
>
> Not really an issue? Buy Microsoft and keep paying, it looks to me.
You completely missed the point of the statment. It was about *SERVERS*
You don't have "several thousand seats" of servers unless you are running a
massively clustered server farm.
Linux Workstations take up the same amount of memory as Windows does if you
configure them similarly (running X with applications like Netscape, KDE,
etc..).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:43:40 GMT
On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:52:59 GMT, paul snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perhaps the developer doesn't WANT me to know what they are going to do to
>my computer's storage in order to install their program. Well, in that
>case, I don't want their product. I am sick and tired of having a dead
>machine because some stinking DLL or registry setting is screwed up, and I
>haven't got any reasonable way of figuring it out. In fact, I have such a
>laptop (a four week old, top of the line Dell with a dead Windows 98)
>sitting right over there in the corner.
Oh, so you're trying to solve the *Windows* install problem. Oh, I see
now. Well, that *is* a problem. Not for me, as I avoid Windows, but
apparently for lots of people. And while the install problem isn't
just a Windows problem, that system does seem to do things less well
than others.
Since you posted this to a bunch of non-Windows groups, I should point
out that here are existing system-level installers for Linux and
FreeBSD that more or less provide what you want. They will give you a
list of files that are to be installed, tell you what other packages
this one depends on (and in some systems they will install those for
you too). The file formats are documented and tools are provided to
extract various information. You can extract all the components and
install them by hand if you want, if not the software keeps a database
of what is installed where so you can do upgrades, a clean uninstall
(modulo files that the program creates at runtime), get verification
that files have not been tampered with, and the like.
These programs are not perfect, but they are vastly better than the
one's I've seen for Windows. Perhaps you should look at these before
you go off redesigning the world in XML. You might get some good ideas
at least, even if they don't do everything you dream of.
>My point is we have gotten past the idea that the writer is responsible
>for laying out each page in a document.
We have? You'd better explain that concept to the 75% of webmasters
who think HTML is a page-layout language.
>Let's get over the idea that each developer has the responsibility for
>laying out my storage.
In his copious spare time, the developer will program so that you can
install any components anywhere and it'll still work.
Clearly, you *aren't* a developer.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 15:57:21 GMT
Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could maintain it if the market is too small to support more than
> one supplier. You could maintain it if you have a valuable trade secret
> that nobody else has been able to figure out. Fair Isaac would be a
> candidate for an example of the latter; they are the people who
> calculate your credit worthiness. Their formula for evaluating credit
> worthiness is their trade secret. All three of the national credit
> bureaus use Fair Isaac. All somebody has to do to break their hold on
> the market is invent a better formula. Nobody has done so.
...and all Fair Isaac has to do to get in trouble with the Feds is
something simple, like telling their customers "if you buy information
from any new competitor, we'll increase our rates by 50%," or any of a
number of simple anticompetitive things.
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:05:01 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
paul snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:L4Pp5.19468$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> This is really getting close to what the origional post was all about!
Only
> it is isn't what is in the document that I want to know, but the
information
> that is typically "encrypted" into the installation program! I want to
know
> what files, directories, configuration settings, etc. that a program
relies
> on in order to be operational. I know this information is in the install
> program the developer provided. Thus I often uninstall and reinstall the
> program to try to fix the program (success rate: 20 percent).
>
> The problem is that every software component is handed to me in the same,
> encrypted format (a pile of installs from various venders). No meta
> information about how these structures are supposed to be interrelated.
No
> single and separate "installation" facility (or what I would call a
> "Software Rendering Facility") for collecting and tracking this
information.
>
> Perhaps the developer doesn't WANT me to know what they are going to do to
> my computer's storage in order to install their program. Well, in that
> case, I don't want their product. I am sick and tired of having a dead
> machine because some stinking DLL or registry setting is screwed up, and I
> haven't got any reasonable way of figuring it out. In fact, I have such a
> laptop (a four week old, top of the line Dell with a dead Windows 98)
> sitting right over there in the corner.
>
> My point is we have gotten past the idea that the writer is responsible
for
> laying out each page in a document. Let's get over the idea that each
> developer has the responsibility for laying out my storage.
>
> There is little to hide when it comes to how to install software. So why
> don't developers just lay out what they need done in plain English (or
> swahili whatever) already!
If that is your concern, then you didn't word it very well and bringing XML
in to the discussion was pointless side issue that you gave center stage to.
If all you want is information and control over your system when installing
new software and have the power to override bad installation ideas in
relations to your hosts needs; then WELCOME TO THE ALMOST FORGOTTEN PAST OF
COMPUTING! That is just the way things were before Microsoft along with a
few other companies together desided that we neither needed to know or even
could handle these issues.
To fix thing we don't need a redesigned package manager as you now seem to
be championing. All we need is for the software to be delivered in a format
that we can control its installation. At one time all we had to do was copy
the programs and their supporting files onto our systems, we were in control
of that process, we knew what was being done and could select to locations
of the programs. Then they started to be shipped in standard compressed
archives. We could still examine the contents of the archives and control
and override the installation process as we saw fit.
Over time the process has become more and more automated with less and less
control on the part of the humans responsible for the installation. What we
need is to reject Redmond's way of doing thing and a return to the past.
When you depend on a standard installation program/package manager you are
surrendering control. You are right if you believe we need to eliminate
installation programs for most cases, but you don't do that by just
introducing another package manager. You do that by returning to the way
things were done right before the installation programs and package managers
came along.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GUI vs Command Line: The useless war
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 08:25:12 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Raul Iglesias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:2%Mp5.74$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> While I am fully agree to your points, I think that most users
> do not want anything but a "Please wait ..." window, perhaps it
> could be a configurable option ? (I mean, to show things or not).
Please don't assume just because that is they way things have been done on
other systems by a few corporations, that it is the way people want it.
Many may not be aware that anything different is possible since that is all
they have had to work with.
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 16:12:49 GMT
Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The problem is that most people can't manage to overcome the
> > "distractions" of poverty, so they end up poor. In contrast, anyone
> > born into an "elite" family has their success virtually guaranteed,
> > even if they're not very bright (take a look at George W. Bush).
>
>
> Tell that to Michael Andreas:
>
> http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/business/dailynews/adm980917/index.ht
> ml
You mean the dolt who was making huge amounts of money as an exec at
ADM, but who was so dumb he got caught in a price-fixing scandal?
The big question is what's going to happen to him after he gets out of
prison. Most folks who go to prison for stealing never work in that
field again. You wanna bet he steps into another job of about the same
pay scale, for some other crony of his dad?
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 09:17:15 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:52:59 GMT, paul snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Clearly, you *aren't* a developer.
And that give him the perfect qualifications to determine what developers
should be doing. Read a little about the latest fad, like XML,
understanding less than half of the information, credit it with magical
properties to solve all ills and then direct developers to make it work
somehow. Sounds familiar?
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:27:32 -0400
Courageous wrote:
>
> > I'd rather see them starve to death before they start doing damage.
>
> You are a hazard to the liberatarian party. With adherents
> like you, it's no wonder our support is so low.
You don't understand the dynamics of multi-generational welfare
families,
do you
>
> C//
--
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 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:29:48 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 05:45:58 GMT, Courageous wrote:
> >
> >> >Wrong. I oppose feudalism.
> >>
> >> What aspects of feudalism do you oppose ?
> >
> >A more telling question would be to ask the poster who originally
> >accused Mr. Kulkis of being a "feudalist" what they believe
> >feudalism actually means...
>
> I was the one who asked the question. This has already been discussed in
> previous threads, use deja if you care that much. I believe that Mr Kulkis
> and I are more or less in agreement as to what it means, the disagreement
> is over whether or not he supports it.
feudalism is a rigid caste society...which is wrong. I support no such
thing... on the other hand, I don't think that the government has any
business directly intervening to move someone from one social stratus
to another... capable people are perfectly able to advance on their own.
>
> --
> 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 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.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 26 Aug 2000 10:36:22 -0600
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> BRILLIANTLY writes:
> If all you want is information and control over your system when installing
> new software and have the power to override bad installation ideas in
> relations to your hosts needs; then WELCOME TO THE ALMOST FORGOTTEN PAST OF
> COMPUTING! That is just the way things were before Microsoft along with a
> few other companies together desided that we neither needed to know or even
> could handle these issues.
>
> To fix thing we don't need a redesigned package manager as you now seem to
> be championing. All we need is for the software to be delivered in a format
> that we can control its installation. At one time all we had to do was copy
> the programs and their supporting files onto our systems, we were in control
> of that process, we knew what was being done and could select to locations
> of the programs. Then they started to be shipped in standard compressed
> archives. We could still examine the contents of the archives and control
> and override the installation process as we saw fit.
>
> Over time the process has become more and more automated with less and less
> control on the part of the humans responsible for the installation. What we
> need is to reject Redmond's way of doing thing and a return to the past.
> When you depend on a standard installation program/package manager you are
> surrendering control. You are right if you believe we need to eliminate
> installation programs for most cases, but you don't do that by just
> introducing another package manager. You do that by returning to the way
> things were done right before the installation programs and package managers
> came along.
Amen brother!
NeXT-style bundles are one of the few ways in which we can appease
both the UNIX tradionalist *and* go back to the days of using REAL
FILESYSTEM TOOLS (like cp and a mouse pointer) to install software.
Package managers may be very sophisticated, but they are always going
to be a nusance, be it InstallShield, RPM or dpkg. We've already seen
horrible naming conflicts (SuSE vs. RedHat), unbelievable circular
dependencies (GNOME) and near-impossible-to-solve chicken-egg problems
(RPM 3.0.4 -> RPM 4.0+db3).
With bundles, you can pop in a CD and drag it to wherever you want to
put it, and it will all work. I hope Apple hasn't screwed them up in
MacOS X, but we'll see.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:31:16 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 02:25:53 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >subsidize-the-reproduction-of-out-of-wedlock-breeding-sluts programs.
>
> May I remind you that men are also partly responsible for pregnancy ?
True. And if these sluts start to realize that if they get pregnant
by DangerAsshole who runs out on them...that they're going to be in
one hell of a mess...they're less likely to give the human debris the
time of day, let alone spread her legs for him.
>
> I don't know what you learned in high school, but I recommend that
> you retake junior high sex-ed if you don't know better.
See above.
>
> --
> 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 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.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft Linux: what if?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 26 Aug 2000 10:38:39 -0600
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Microsoft L++?
>
> Microsoft L@ :-)
Or, they could use the name that eveyone else wil:
Microsoft L!#*%*!!
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:33:35 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 02:17:22 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >> Unfortunately society does have an interest in making sure that these
> >> kids grow up to be productive citizens instead of criminals. Yes, it
> >
> >A fat chance that will happen.
>
> A perfect example of Mr Kulkis's opposition to meritocracy, and his firm
> belief that the children of the wealthy are "entitled" to rule. The basic
> accumption is that if your parents aren't filthy rich, you're "stupid" and
> don't "deserve" an education.
One doesn't need to be "filthy rich" to get an education for your kids.
Hell, in some inner cities, cash-strapped parents are paying TWICE
for education..once through property taxes, and AGAIN to put the kid
into a local catholic school so that the kid will actually be taught
the essentials.
>
> >I'd rather see them starve to death before they start doing damage.
>
> Unfortunately for you, Mr Kulkis, they will not starve. There's so much
> food lying around in the US that you could sustain yourself just from
> eating from trash cans ( as some people do ). Under your proposed system,
> you would have a large beggar/criminal underclass doing considerably
> more damage.
We already have such...and worse...we are subsidizing them.
>
> --
> 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 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 12:35:27 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 20:46:55 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >> -Children are already the responsibility of their parents.
> >>
> >> And children are punished for the sins of their parents?
> >
> >Darwinism in action.
>
> Darwinism is about "survival of the fittest", not "survival of the fattest".
Those who can't feed themselves and their children are not fit.
QED.
>
> Your support for children being punished for their parents sins places you
> in direct opposition with true meritocracy.
>
>
> >> A large and angry underclass that will resent the upper class.
> >
> >And how is this any different from current conditions?
> >
> >Welfare slobs resent the upper class right now.
>
> "Welfare slobs" are not a "large" class.
Significant enough that transfer-of-wealth payments to them amount
to a several BILLION dollars each year.
>
> --
> 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 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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
