Linux-Advocacy Digest #798, Volume #28 Fri, 1 Sep 00 12:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? ("D'Arcy Smith")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (2:1)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Forrest
Gehrke)
Re: Can you believe this??? (was Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$
Voluntary Split ...)) (Bob Germer)
Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?] (Bob Germer)
Re: [OT] Bob Germer's Claim Of Welfare Waste Is Highly Exaggerated (Bob Germer)
Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?] (Bob Germer)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Eric Remy)
Re: How low can they go...? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Nothing like a SECURE database, is there Bill? (Stuart Fox)
Re: How low can they go...? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: How low can they go...? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: philosophy is better than science (Perry Pip)
Re: how large corporations test on the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (Perry Pip)
Re: businesses are psychopaths (Perry Pip)
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:15:13 GMT
"Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:qILr5.467$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > They're proprietry codecs. You know, the types companies spend millions
> of
> > dollars developing and perfecting and like to see a bit of financial
> > reimbursement for their efforts.
> Then why not allow people to actually *USE* them on alternative platforms?
> If there were a DVD player for the Amiga i'd have a DVD-Rom drive by now
They do allow them to use them on alternative platforms... it is
called a license. What part of that do you not understand?
(This post reflects in no way my personal opinion on
"free" software - please do not assume that I am against "free"
software).
..darcy
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:12:50 GMT
> > I'm talking about the _graphical_representation_ of a running
program.
> > It makes sense to be able to, say, drop a .doc file on to a running
copy
> > of word and have the file opened. It should be possible to do that
if
> > the app is minimized.
>
> No, it should not be possible to do that if the app is minimized.
Dropping
> a file into a running copy of word does not open it, it embeds it at
the
> drop point. Where would word embed the document if you were allowed
to do
> what you suggest?
OK, so that's another inconsistency. In most cases, dropping a file on
to a running app opens the file. That does make more sense, but you
can't do it with the taskbar. If the app can be sent a mouseover
request, then it could raise itself if necessary (eg a bit of text was
ebing draggged, but personally I think it would be better to open the
app yourself, then drag, but that is debatable). In most cases, though,
it makes sense to be able to drop a file on to an icon.
>
> > In some cases (say, a block of text) it makes sense to raise the app
> > first but in mmost cases, it is inconsistent.
> >
> > And I've found another inconsistency. You can't DnD on to task
manager.
> > At least, not in win95.
>
> Which OS allows you to DnD onto the Task manager (or similar app)?
I don't care about other OSs. We're talking abpout consistency within
windows. Explorer lets you DwDsmD on to buttons of running apps, but
taskman.exe doesn't. Is that consistent?
> > > > Besides, they are the _only_merpresentation of running programs
that
> > > > have no window up., so it makes sense to be able to drag stuff
> > straight
> > > > on to them.
> > >
> > > Untrue. There are other representations, for instance in
TaskManager.
> >
> > They're still repersented as buttons, only less useful (see above).
>
> That depends on the OS. NT displays tasks in a list.
I don't have NT here. Can you drop stuff on to those? If you can what
does word do when it wants to imbed the thing rather than open it?
> > > Untrue. Lots of other things work that way. Drag an icon over a
> > folder,
> > > and hover. You'll see that it opens up.
> >
> > I tried it with a folder on the desktop, it doesn't open.
>
> Congratulations. You've finally found an inconsistent behavior. I've
never
> noticed that folder view icons don't open on hover. Try it in the
explorer
> tree view and you'll see that it does.
I think it makes sense not to open the folder. Opening it only really
clutters up the desktop.
> > > Drag an icon onto your Start
> > > button and hover, you'll see that the Start menu opens up.
>
> > You're saying the taskbar is consistent because it behaves like the
task
> > bar. No shit, Sherlock! (remember, the start button is _part_ of the
> > taskbar)
>
> The start button is not part of the task bar. They are two seperate
pieces
> of functionality.
If the start button is not part of the task bar, then what is it? So its
a button annd they're all the same, right? It is the same apparent
object, to the user. Remember, the behaviour of an API can be consistent
to a programmer without the app using the being consistent from the
point of view of a user who doesn't know what an API is.
> > > Any application that has flat buttons that raise use a mouseover.
>
> > Oh, yes, so they do. OK, so I've never seen an app respond to an
object
> > dragged over a button, excepting explorer. If buttons are meant to
be
> > pushed, they should only be pushed, ie no DnD. What I'm complainin
about
> > is the inconsistend DnD---it _sort of_ allows it. I know that from
an
> > API ponit of view, the behaviour is consistent (buttons can't
receive
> > drop requests) but, for the user, it is not consistent behaviour.
Either
> > you can DnD or you can't. The DwDsmD (drag, wait, drag some more,
drop)
> > should be scrapped.
>
> The message box that appears is a nasty hack. Would you rather it did
> nothing when you try and drop on it? You'll notice that the cursor
doesn't
> change to the drop cursor when over those buttons.
True, but in my opinion, it should (ie, DnD, not DwDsmD) work on the
task bar buttons. If they're going to have inconsistent bahaviour, they
could minimize the inconsistencies and increase the utility by making
part of it work well.
> And BTW, the drag-hover method is also now present in MacOS 9.
Apparently
> they liked it.
See if you can understand this: just because the guys at Apple
introduces the same inconsistency does not make it consistent. It does
not validate it or make it right or wrong. Besides, it was YOU earlier
who pointed out that this was a discussion about windows ONLY, and thet
I should leave other systems out of it.
-Ed
--
BBC Computer 32K
Acorn DFS
Basic
>*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Forrest Gehrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [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: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:26:11 GMT
david raoul derbes wrote:
> A correspondent mailed me with a valuable url that cited the oft-
> quoted number that the top 1% of the country (income-wise) paid
> 31.3% of the tax. Sounds really progressive, doesn't it? Turns out
> that the actual rate of tax paid by this group was on the order
> of 24% (I will attempt to cite the appropriate url in a bit.)
> That's well under what I paid, even with all the deductions I
> could manage. That is, the top 1%, though they paid 31.3% of the
> tax, may have earned significantly more than 31.3% of the income.
David, I think you are misreading the import of the tax data published
by the Tax Foundation. www.taxfoundation.org is the URL which
published a chart comparing 1987 data with 1997 (the latest available
from the IRS).
What this data shows is that the top 1% of filers earned 17.4% of the
total AGI reported by all taxpayers for 1997. That percentage paid
was 33.2% of all taxes paid. Their average tax rate on their AGI
was 27.6%. This latter percentage was the highest of all the
percentile groups.
So while their AGI was 17.4% of the total AGI reported by all taxpayers,
they paid 33.2% of all tax revenue garnered by the IRS. Their average
tax rate was 27.6%. Compare this with the bottom 50% of filers whose
AGI share was 13.8% on which they paid 4.3% of total revenue at an
average tax rate of 4.5%. Any mystery why many polls tell us that
most Americans don't give a rat's ass for a tax reduction?
I think David makes too much of "rich" people paying zero taxes.
I believe the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax enacted by Congress
some years ago corrected this situation).
It is important to keep in mind that this data is dealing with AGI (Adjusted
Gross Income), that is, reported earnings AFTER all deductions.
BTW this data also provides the totals for the number of filers in each
percentile group including the grand total for all filers.
//
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can you believe this??? (was Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re:
Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...))
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:26:55 GMT
On 09/01/2000 at 07:47 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stephen) said:
> Hey Germer.... Your true colours are again showing you for what you
> are. A bigotted redneck. I will refrain from referring to you in the
> same manner that you refer to others, but suffice it to say, I am
> delighted the Canadian authorities have made you no longer welcome in
> my country.
What a true idiot you are. I am posting this from our suite in Toronto!
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?]
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:46:31 GMT
On 09/01/2000 at 01:21 PM,
"Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> For Max, the mere fact of having a monopoly should make you guilty.
> So much for encouraging people to create new products or open new
> markets. In Max's world, they're guilty of monopolization the minute
> they sell their first widget.
Poor sad stupid Max cannot get beyond the wording of Section 1 of the
Sherman Act. It would *appear* to make possession of a monopoly in and of
itself a crime. However, he fails to read that sentence in light of court
decisions dating back to the late 19th century. In one of the railroad
cases, the Court pointed out, inter alia, that one cannot be guilty of a
crime if one is not responsible for merely having a monopoly. It also
noted IIRC that continuing to do business after achieving monopoly status
was not per se criminal. As long as the company holding monopoly did
nothing to harm potential competitors, it was not guilty of a violation of
the Act.
One of the prime tenets of Capitalism is "Profits breed competition and
excessive profits breed ruinous competition." A case in point is the law
regarding cable television franchises in New Jersey. Our law allows
municipalities to grant franchises to two companies. A few municipalities
have chosen to do so in the past. In virtually every instance, the first
franchisee has taken extraordinary measures to try to prevent the second
franchisee actually getting its system setup and in operation. Very few
second franchisees managed to do so without being bought out by the first.
(The measures have even extended to purchasing the bank holding the debt
of the newcomer by the original franchisee and calling the debt!) However,
in the few municipalities in which the newcomer had the wherewithall and
desire to persist, rates dropped to less than $5.00 per month from around
$20 when the new system was about to come on line.
The fact that cable systems have monopolies, granted by governments so
entirely legal, and that their rates are no longer subject to regulation
has enabled an entirely new industry, satellite TV, to arise. Now that
satellite companies can carry local channels, rates are coming down thanks
to viable competition.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Bob Germer's Claim Of Welfare Waste Is Highly Exaggerated
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:51:36 GMT
On 09/01/2000 at 09:51 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) said:
> * Maintenance Assistance Administrative
> Expenditures per Expenditures per
> Case Recipient Case Recipient
> 1987 $359.46 $122.93 $45.33 $15.50
> 1988 370.50 127.17 50.92 17.48
> 1989 380.98 131.39 53.69 18.52
Typical Algore Democratic lies. Those figures neatly omit the employee
salaries, office expenses, etc. of the local government agencies which
administer the federal programs. Add in those costs and my figures are
well supported as evidenced by Lieberman's own figures at a Senate hearing
in 1997.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?]
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:52:57 GMT
On 09/01/2000 at 07:42 AM,
Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Interestingly, however, I've noticed that in the last 20 or so messages
> that I've read, it appears to be the one who stoops to insults and
> epithets is YOU.
Everyone, even stupid fools like you , has a right to moronic opinions and
the right to express them. Your nonsense gives intelligent folks the
electronic equivalent of a comic book.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 10:58:00 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sandman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > And I've found another inconsistency. You can't DnD on to task
>> > manager.
>> > At least, not in win95.
>> Which OS allows you to DnD onto the Task manager (or similar app)?
>
>If "DnD" means Drag-n-Drop, MacOS does. It's built-in task manager allows
>for
>documents to be dragged and opened in a running application.
You're confusing things. MacOS has no equivalent to the Task Manager in
NT/W2K. The app list you can tear off from the application menu is the
equivalent of the Windows task bar. The Task Manager does far more than
than application tear-off, quite a bit of which is not even possible in
MacOS. (MacOS has no idea of priorities, for example, and so can't have
functionality to set them.)
Anyone who's used OSX know if Apple ripped off TM? Please tell me they
did- it's the single nicest piece of system software shipped with NT/W2K.
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: 1 Sep 2000 15:02:38 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:><cut>
:>
:>> >Did he attack me? When? I missed it...
:>> >
:>> >Amon_Re
:>>
:>> Here, turn around and I'll pull that dart/knife out of
:>> your back :-).
:>
:>Ah! I tought it was a musqueto bite <Grin>
:>
:>Amon_Re
: You must have spent some time in Minnesota if you think
: that!
: I used to live there, and it was widely claimed that the
: state bird was the mosquito.
Belive me, it is:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/kids/c-july98.html
Of course, the "official" state bird is the common loon,
which is quite apt:
http://www.50states.com/bird/loon.htm
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nothing like a SECURE database, is there Bill?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:04:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If the admin is that stupid, he should be fired.
>
Which was my argument before for having default passwords. If they're
stupid enough to leave them default, they should be fired.
<Snip overlong, ridiculous, completely pointless, (no matter what aaron
says) sig>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:10:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> >Likewise, Apple's marketshare would have been loads bigger had they gone
> >for volume instead of margin. But they didn't. in teh early days (Win
>
> Then why didn't Commodore or Atari clean up?
>
Better marketing.
> For any actual characteristic, at any time in the history of WinDOS
> there have been competing products that were superior to WinDOS in
> one or all characteristics of merit.
>
> >1.x, 2.x) MS didn't dominate anything other than DOS. It was only with
> >Windows 3.0 that they leaped forward. And there was a fair bit of time
> >for other vendors to respond; they didn't.
>
> Actually, the original consent decree against Microsoft contradicts
> this nasty bit of historical revisionism.
>
> Competing OS and system vendors never had to merely compete against
> what Microsoft was doing but what the entire collection of 3rd party
> vendors associated with Microsoft was doing and the compatibility
> issues that kept that entire cabal working for Microsoft.
>
Try again. Lotus 1-2-3 and WordPerfect were the dominant spreadsheet
and doc software prior to Windows. MS was getting killed in that
space. Then they introduced Windows, and Lotus (and WordPerfect)
basically ignored Windows, preferring to ship DOS versions. Go back and
look at PC Magazine articles of the day.
> --
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
Gee, you mean like Mac and AppleWorks (which my father uses)?
Or Linux and StarOffice (which is free)?
You can use other stuff - what bothers you is that most people choose
not to, for reasons of inertia. MS won by making Windows the successful
successor to DOS, and then being the first to have apps on it. The
other vendors of the day ignored Windows for too long, and lost.
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
>
>
--
James A. Robertson
Senior Sales Engineer, Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 15:12:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In other words "building a national phone network" is not a
> barrier to market entry? Sorry, but those that actually make
> those kinds of decisions have dissagreed with you for over a
> century now.
And because of those mutton heads, I'm still stuck with a governmentally
protected RBOC monopoly. MS is starting to see real competition due to
a change in the market - they won the earlier battle (DOS --> Windows),
but are in the process of losing the next one (Wireless clients and
internet servers).
>
> --
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
>
>
--
James A. Robertson
Senior Sales Engineer, Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: philosophy is better than science
Date: 1 Sep 2000 15:18:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 04:10:28 GMT,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Corporations do not exploit their
>> employees any more than their employees exploit them.
>
>Yet another example of your inability to comprehend natural human
>language. Did you miss the significance of "as assets *ONLY*"?
Translation: you can't find a decent job so you say corporations
exploit people.
>Do you even know what the definition of exploitation is?
More semantics.
>You cretin, corporations are *not* human!!
Then a corporation can't be a psychopath, dummy.
>In any case, since my project is pre-alpha, unre-
>leased and I'm the sole developer (Chief Architect, Chief Designer
>and Chief Programmer),
Uh...hum...
>Other people have only to open their eyes to verify what I say.
I don't see other people defending you.
>Incorrect, that's only the criterion the dominant faction of scientists
>believes in. Neither Einstein nor anyone seriously interested in the
>theory that used to be known as superstrings believe it. The only
>reason the general population believes anything like that is because
>of a brilliant PR job on the part of physicists (who are on the whole
>contemptible of said population -- hey, there's a reason why there
>are so many Stalinists in academia) coupled with internal politicking.
>But that's the kind of shit you get when physicists have the galling
>arrogance to believe they can do philosophy better than philosophers.
>
The reason the general public believes in science is because to the
tangible results produced by engineering and medicine.
>and of course, this is not at all what philosophy is about.
For you philosophy is about justifying your hatred of the world.
>And you seek to define the word so broadly that it includes
>EVERYTHING so long as the moron involved has some
>kind of pathetic rationalization for why his actions are in
>society's interest!
You're the one with the pathetic rationalizations.
>So the historical fact that 1) populations have always gone to war to
>destroy increased wealth, and the technical fact that 2) we are heading
>towards prosperity beyond the dreams of avarice, these things do not
>bother you any, right? You're one of those people who, when confron-
>ted with the observation that 100 million people have died in wars in
>this century alone, just stares blankly like a slack-jawed yokel, right?
>To you, people who point out that the 20th century has been the most
>bloody in human history and that North America's labour situation is
>*worse* than a Dickensonian world where orphans beg in the streets
>(propaganda and mind control being undreamed of in his day), to you
>these people have "emotional hang ups", right? Is attachment to reality
>an emotional hang up or have you redefined that word too?
No, I said *you* have an emotional hangup. Not these poeple and not
the world that you hate so much.
>For the record, there's a better than even chance that we will off
>humanity in the 21st century all by ourselves, not by any AIs.
>
I suggest you start with the one you hate the most: yourself.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: how large corporations test on the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised
Date: 1 Sep 2000 15:18:41 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:20:03 GMT,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Clinical Description of the Psychopath
>
> No loyalty to any person, group, code, organization, or philosophy;
Most CEO's are actually quite loyal to the corporation, their
families, and their philosphies.
>
>[Let's score the Typical Corporation owned by Mr. Ty Coon]
Your stupid stretch of imagination could be applied to anyone. Your
post is just another expression of your anger at the world.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: businesses are psychopaths
Date: 1 Sep 2000 15:18:53 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 01:57:24 GMT,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> that is "psychotic;"
>
>PsychoPATHIC! Let me guess, you don't know the difference, right?
In your case, Richard, it doesn't matter. You're both.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: 1 Sep 2000 15:19:02 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:46:04 -0400,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>OK, the South is devastated. Rather than help it rebuild, the government
>spends money on a transcontinental railroad.
>The painful political consequences I meant were the Jim Crow laws, not
>the threat of another secession.
>
So now your are blaming Jim Crow Laws on the transcontinental
railroad?? Why should the settlers in the West be forced to live in
the Dark Ages so that someone's (your?) lazy asshole ancestors
wouldn't have as much phoney justification to keep their *lazy*
*asshole* Dark Ages tradition of exploiting another race??
>History threads don't fare too badly in c.o.l.a.,
Not to badly for people like you who want to rewrite 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
******************************
