Linux-Advocacy Digest #745, Volume #30 Fri, 8 Dec 00 15:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Tom Wilson")
Re: 12 bugs of the season! (Swangoremovemee)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (Anonymous)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (Anonymous)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (Anonymous)
Re: Whistler review. (Anonymous)
Re: Statistic about this bigot group (Anonymous)
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Anonymous)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Anonymous)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Anonymous)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Anonymous)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 18:41:41 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 16:41:06 GMT, Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
< Massive snip>
> >> You still don't see shit. All you are doing is spewing a lot of
> >> hot air. Weak attempts at pretense won't really change that.
> >
> >What I'm spewing are the very things people have against it. You're not
only
> >going up against MS, you're going up against a lot of misconceptions and
> >propoganda.
>
> Actually, the nature and level of propaganda directed at Linux
> is one of the things that has been radically changing over the
> last few months. While some FUD still remains, information
> outlets are considerably more diverse than they were in the
> age of the original 68K AltOS machines.
>
> Hewson and Pournelle aren't the only one's screaming these days.
The positive press it has recieved lately in the server market will
definitely help its' cause. I'd venture to say that they and the other
unices have won that war. I think the next step, home users, is going to
depend in part on the Gnome and KDE projects. They both need a lot of work
still in the idiot-proofing department What Mandrake has done with their
recent distros, in that area, is comendable. They're probably going to be
THE newbie/home user distro.
Again, getting rid of the hacker/server-only stereotype is important!
>
> >
> >>
> >> >home desktop anytime soon. Inferior as it is, it isn't going to go
away.
> >>
> >> It doesn't have to. Linux can still significantly eat into it's
> >> marketshare, and alternative applications can make headway against
> >> the those applications that are currently entrenched.
> >
> >Possible, yes. The GPL still scares the hell out of a lot of developers.
Up
>
> Despite this, really serious money players are all over
> Linux. The FUD can only go so far when people are making
> money all around with Free Software.
It shocked the hell out of me when IBM and Dell joined in. If that
experiment is successful, Linux is more than halfway there.
In IBM's case, I think their supporting Linux is their way of getting even
for screwing they recieved from MS's involvement/non-involvement in OS/2 <g>
>
> >until now, proprietary has been the name of the game. Hell, I can
remember
> >when most software products were leased rather than purchased. A company
I
> >worked for paid $10,000 a year for a VMS cost accounting and estimating
>
> Now Microsoft is in a similar position.
Exactly. The only difference is the level of entrenchment they have. I don't
think any other market in existance, outside of 1970's telecom, has been
this deeply controled by one company. They OWN the home computer OS market.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Their revenue model on the desktop is in considerable danger of
> breaking down and their revenue on servers is being thwarted by
> Linux/Sun. Their air supply is slowly dwindling while Linux is
> improving on all fronts, is gratis and is getting favorable
> press.
IMHO, they've already lost the server war. They can't match Linux's
versitility or stability. The paradigm Linux follows has been constantly
refined and tweeked since the 1970s. It's a no-brainer. All of this and
throw in *free* to boot.
If KDE and Gnome make some much needed improvements...If Linux can kick its'
"only for servers and hackers" reputation...AND if a decent browser
solution can be found, they can do it. Still a ways to go, yet.
>
> Microsoft only manages to hang onto dominance because they have
> managed to get leverage over their customers. Their mindshare
> in general and with computer users is eroding. They continue to
> alienate anyone they come in contact in the industry. Microsoft
> is currently in as bad a position or a worse one when it comes
> to negative propaganda.
Losing their anti-trust suit appeal would definitely open the door a little
wider.
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
http://counter.li.org
------------------------------
From: Swangoremovemee<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 12 bugs of the season!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 18:42:03 GMT
On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 17:49:39 GMT, sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>> The 12 Bugs Of Christmas
>>
>> A Software Developers' Version
>>
>> 1. For the first bug of Christmas, my manager said to me:
>> See if they can do it again.
They're sick and getting sicker :(
It's a dam cult this LIE-SUX thing....Where do I get my tamborine?
Swango
"It Don't Mean a Thang if it Ain't Got That Swang"
------------------------------
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:07:07 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 22 Nov
>On 22 Nov 2000 18:38:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:09:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>You Penguinista's have a difficult time reading for some reason.
>>>Maybe your eyes are worn out from reading all of those How-Not-To's.
>>>
>>>He said MENU BASED.
>>
>>Not in the post I followed up to, he didn't.
>
>Everybody seems to miss the menu part, I wonder why?
Because it is a figment of your imagination (or maybe one of your other
personality's imaginations). He asked, after it was explained how to
cut and paste (which is all he asked for and all he needed), why it
didn't use a menu-based mechanism, and the answer (no need) was
provided.
>Maybe because it doesn't work correctly?
It doesn't work like Windows. For a WinTroll like yourself, I know
that's the same thing, but most people aren't as brain-dead as you are.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:07:11 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 21 Nov 2000
>"Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> If you'd done any work on a Unix box, you'd know. Click at the beginning
>> of the text you want to copy, drag to the end (DO NOT click there!),
>> go to where you want to paste the text, click the middle button. Voila.
>> If you have only a two-button mouse, click both buttons at once.
>
>This annoys me. One of my most common paste operations is to copy some
>text, highlight some other text and paste, deleting the text in the second
>document and replacing it with the pasted text. Can't do that.
>
>It also seems that you can't have highlighted text in more than one
>document.
This is correct. You have very well described the difference between
the Windows mechanism and the X mechanism for copying and pasting text.
There is a clipboard (several, actually), as well, but their use is not
universal. Its expected that the integrator (what in today's world
would be the OEM) to clean this sort of stuff up, with the help of the
ISV.
The fact is, though, that to those who are familiar with it, the X
method is much more efficient, effective, and expedient. The only real
issue you've brought up is that it doesn't work like Windows, and
therefore doesn't work the one way you expect it to work.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:07:13 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Stephen Cornell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 21 Nov 2000 12:46:38
>"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> This annoys me. One of my most common paste operations is to copy some
>> text, highlight some other text and paste, deleting the text in the second
>> document and replacing it with the pasted text. Can't do that.
>
>Rather a contorted way of doing things, don't you think? Surely the
>intuitive way of doing things is to delete the text you don't want, go
>find the text you do, and then paste it in? Or, paste in the text you
>do want, then select and delete the text you don't? This idea of
>exchanging bits of text requires a rather higher level of abstraction,
>and appears somewhat prone to errors.
But it is, nevertheless, quite consistent in terms of selection
handling, as "input replaces selection" is behavior that cannot be
implemented the way Erik is used to using here. Personally, I have
mixed feelings on this; I also find the fact that you cannot paste to a
selection, replacing the text, to be a bit disconcerting, since I use
the same technique Erik describes quite routinely, and it is indeed more
efficient.
>Besides, xclipboard (and, more recently, KDE2's Klipper) allows you to
>reuse any previously selected object at will, in any application.
>Emacs users have known how to access all previously cut bits of text
>for a long time.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:07:18 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 06 Dec
>On Tue, 05 Dec 2000 11:45:45 -0500, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Is this you trying to be reasonable and jovial, you lying sack of shit?
>
>How did you get out of my kill file? Must have the expire feature set.
>I've saved hours of bandwidth by kill filing your senseless posts.
>
>Back in the bozo bin with you.
COOL! Did you hear that, everyone? I'm in "claire lynn the WinTrolls"
kill file! Ha, ha. I bet you wished *you* rated such a high honor.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Statistic about this bigot group
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:07:29 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:43:46
>On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 18:25:24 GMT, Gerson Kurz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>I evaluated 1335 mails including the heavy traffic threads "Of course
>>there is a downside" and "The sixth sense". This is a list of the top
>>ten newsreaders used to post messages.
>
>I guess now I have to go back to gnus just to stand out in your list.
I am more than happy to claim responsibility for probably the entirety
of that Agent 1.8 listing. ;-)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 19:01:32 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Tom Wilson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:05:18
> >"Black Dragon " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 21:00:10 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' said:
> >>
> >> : On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 20:15:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> : (Black Dragon ) wrote:
> >> :
> >> : >
> >> : >On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 19:49:31 GMT in alt.linux,
> >> : ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' said:
> >> : >
> >> : >[cross posts trimmed claire's current whore house]
> >> : >
> >> : >: On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 11:50:49 -0500, Chas2K
> >> : >: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> : >:
> >> : >:
> >> : >: >over and over to get just these reactions from you. I will build
a
> >kill
> >> : >: >filter for Clair the Troll as soon as this post goes out. It will
> >reside
> >> : >: >along side the one for pencil-dick Rev. Kool who trolls the BSD
> >> : >: >newgroups.
> >> : >: >
> >> : >:
> >> : >: There is your first problem.
> >> : >:
> >> : >: " Building" a kill filter.
> >> : >:
> >> : >: I just killfiled you with 2 mouse clicks..
> >> : >:
> >> : >: Bamm...into the Bozo bin...
> >> : >:
> >> : >: claire
> >> : >:
> >> : >: Linux "The only OS you have to build as you go along".
> >> : >
> >> : >Fuck'n blow me you cheap cock sucking whore. Why don't you go fuck
> >> : >around in Pimp Billy's news groups with all the other skanky
> >> : >whores, and let the Linux folk go about their business.
> >> : >
> >> : >5 keystrokes later ....
> >> : >
> >> : >*PLONK*
> >>
> >>
> >> : Another fine example of a Penguinista in his native environment.
> >>
> >> Not quite bitch. I adminsister a heterogeneous network, using the best
> >> tools for the jobs, and Windows is one of them. You really ought to
> >> get youself some netiqutte and learn how to post properly, ya' skanky
> >> fucking cunt.
> >
> >Pot. Kettle. Black.
> >Good Lord, kid...You're more in need of that advice than she. This is an
OS
> >advocacy group, not an open forum for pimp wannabes. Grow up!
>
> I think that's the point. Whether "clair lynn" is a she to begin with
> is rather up for grabs, it being only one of more than a dozen aliases
> used by a resident troll. I can understand many might find the language
> rather shocking, but personally, I got a *huge* laugh out of reading
> someone call clair a "skanky fucking whore". :-D
I wasn't so much shocked as I was annoyed. There are classier ways to flame
a confrontational, gender-confused, technically-challenged,
artistically-bankrupt, cross-posting, troll.
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
http://counter.li.org
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:20:22 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 08 Dec 2000
12:36:46 GMT;
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> > Which version of Windows are you talking about? There is no "disable"
>> > button for protocols on NT, and I don't recall seeing one on WinDOS,
>> > either. I think you might be talking about disabling the binding of the
>> > protocol to the adapter, rather than removing either the protocol or the
>> > adapter. As you are so fond of saying, that's not what the discussion
>> > is about.
>>
>> Yes there is. I already described this in detail, and will do so again.
>>
>> In NT4, go to network properties. Click the Bindings tab, choose "All
>> protocols" from the "Show bindings for" drop down. Click on TCP/IP
>> Protocol, and click the Disable button. Likewise there is an Enable button.
>
>You guys say the same thing so well!
But Erik doesn't seem to recognize that the protocol can only be
removed; there is no disable button on the Protocols tab.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:20:40 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 8 Dec 2000
01:15:43 -0600;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >I already stated specifically how you disable TCP/IP in NT4 without
>> >rebooting, I don't have to say it again.
>>
>> So I take it you are purposely ignoring the issue? Yes, you can disable
>> TCP/IP without rebooting, and then enable it again without rebooting.
>> Unfortunately, you cannot disable it and then reboot, and then enable it
>> without rebooting. Get it?
>
>You're still wrong.
No, I'm not. Nor am I mistaken in any way. I am using the term
"disable TCP/IP" to mean disabling the protocol entirely, which requires
removing the protocol driver, not merely disabling all TCP/IP bindings
on the adapters. And you are not mistaken when you say that the
equivalent would require a reboot in Linux, as it requires recompiling
the kernel.
So stop squirming, and just admit that you want to narrow the issue down
until you are right, and I'm just pointing out how much you are
belaboring the matter so that you can pretend that Windows isn't a piece
of crap.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:21:06 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 8 Dec 2000
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Dec 2000
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> reflect's Erik's own argument, that you can't 'remove' TCP/IP, like you
>> >> can in Windows. Erik undermined his argument, of course, by pointing
>> >> out that 'removing' TCP/IP doesn't remove it, but merely disables it,
>> >
>> >No I didn't. I said you *CAN* disable it if that's all you want to do.
>>
>> But you can't! All you can do is remove it, and then take advantage of
>> the fact that it fails to do so, and call it "disabled" because even
>> though you shouldn't be able to, you can still enable and then continue
>> to use it. You have to actually reboot if you really want it removed.
>
>No, Max. Enabling and Disabling is an entirely different process from
>removing and adding.
>
>They do different things.
Precisely. And in Linux, removing requires recompiling the kernel. It
does not in Windows, because TCP/IP isn't built into the kernel. Which
only leaves the question (which you are so desperately avoiding) "Why do
you have to reboot to *remove* TCP/IP in Windows?" You are correct you
don't need to reboot to disable it, but frankly that's trivial, and all
the more ironic as an argument, since Windows says you do, and in the
most common circumstances I've already described (having rebooted after
disabling TCP/IP) you do need to reboot in order to enable TCP/IP.
At least AFAIK from eight years of experience. I'm not in the habit of
alpha-testing Microsoft's products for them, at least not more than I
have to.
>> >Simply click the Disable button rather than the Remove button.
>>
>> Which version of Windows are you talking about? There is no "disable"
>> button for protocols on NT, and I don't recall seeing one on WinDOS,
>> either. I think you might be talking about disabling the binding of the
>> protocol to the adapter, rather than removing either the protocol or the
>> adapter. As you are so fond of saying, that's not what the discussion
>> is about.
>
>Yes there is. I already described this in detail, and will do so again.
>
>In NT4, go to network properties. Click the Bindings tab, choose "All
>protocols" from the "Show bindings for" drop down. Click on TCP/IP
>Protocol, and click the Disable button. Likewise there is an Enable button.
You do realize you are not disabling the protocol, but disabling the
binding, right?
>You don't know what you're talking about.
Apparently, you don't know what you're clicking on, despite your ability
to read the labels.
>> >And I said
>> >that this disables without requireing a reboot. And also clicking the
>> >Enable button enables without requiring a reboot. This is different from
>> >removing the stack, which does remove it, not just disable it.
>>
>> No, it doesn't disable the stack at all; it disables the binding of the
>> protocol to an adapter.
>
>Or all adapters, disabling TCP/IP. Notice the circle with the slash through
>it over the TCP/IP Protocol name.
Where, in the bindings? I don't believe the protocol itself is listed
with any such icon. I'd test it, but I only have my personal system
handy, and I'm certainly not going to disable my bindings for no reason.
I'd have to rebuild them, and there's really no telling if they'd work,
it being crapware and all.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 01:31:21 -0500
From: Anonymous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 08 Dec 2000 06:32:28 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
>| >| Quite true. That's why people (like me, I'll admit) get incensed about
>| >| the current state of affairs. Its also what drives the move to the GPL.
>| >| So if you don't like GPL, then don't do it. We know that'll never work,
>| >| and the GPL software will eventually take over the planet, but its only
>| >| fair to warn them.
>| >
>| >Let's see what happens shall we?
>|
>| Well, we can hardly avoid that, I would expect. Does this mean you
>| concede the point?
>
>No. I cannot say that it will not take over. I can only wait and see.
An argument from ignorance. Why bother thinking at all?
>Analysts have made all sorts of predictions in the past and many have
>not come to pass.
The trick, obviously, is knowing which analysts are right most often.
Check Nick Petroli (sp?) for someone with an impressive batting average.
Big Linux fan.
>[.........]
>| I don't know what argument you are referring to; perhaps you're unaware
>| you've just invented something entirely unrelated to what we've been
>| discussing. Frankly, sir, you should get your head out of your ass.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I was just admiring the fact that you kept such statements out of your
>posts for so long.
>
>So long.
Bye. Good luck with that cranial rectumotomy.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 19:52:10 +0000
Steve Mading wrote:
> I didn't say you did. I said that this is what is *percieved*, and it's
> why people get hostile. They assume you are advoacting the first part
> of a long, slippery slope toward gui-only tools, whether you know it or
> not.
Then people ought not to read things into what I say. Am I responsible for
that? No, of course not!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
