Linux-Advocacy Digest #789, Volume #30 Sun, 10 Dec 00 14:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why don't I use Linux? ("Richard J. Donovan")
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Linuxgruven is Deceptive in their Ad ("Bracy")
Re: Linux lacks- an Agent-like newsreader. (nf)
Re: Whistler review. (J.C.)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Uptimes ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Patent Free...but not for long? ("Mike")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:59:59 -0500
JFW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 03:33:47 -0500, Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Static66 wrote:
>>
>>> I read that they haven't built a power plant in over
>>> 15 years, yet in that same time the population of
>>> california has basically doubled...piss poor
>>> government planning..
>>
>>Nobody will ever allow one to be built near their
>>homes; neither Republican nor Democrat, neither
>>black nor white, neither WinTroll nor Maccie.
>And of course, in say California, there aren't areas which _aren't_ by
>anyone's homes, right? Sorry, that's a provably false argument. Yeesh, there
>are areas where you could test gigaton thermonuclear weapons, and the only
>impact to humans would be secondary. I think if any state can support
>nuclear development, it's CA.
>Not to mention the fact that other states, which have embraced nuclear power,
>like IL, etc. don't seem to the radioactive wastelands the arguments of the
>anti-nuclear folks insist they'd become.
>>We can't build them in the cities or in the
>>suburbs. Even when they're proposed for some
>>out-of-the-way spot where very few people live,
>>the proposals meet heavy opposition.
>They meet heavy opposition by folks who, quite frankly, will not tolerate ANY
>new power plant construction. I'm sorry, if new plants MUST be constructed,
>the first group of people I'd stop listening to is the folks who object to
>ANY new construction at all.
>Power outages kill people. People die from hypothermia, they die from the
>lack of power to provide important medical services, they die from the
>intrinsic breakdowns of communication and regulation (think traffic lights)
>that occur during power outages.
>"No more, at ALL" is killing people. I'm tired of supporting folks who by
>their actions demonstrate a depraved indifference to the death of others.
>There is NO logically supportable argument which justifies "No more, at all."
Nice rant, but take a look at the how, why and effects of utility
deregulation. It's the important 85-90 percent of the problem; the real
culprit, e.g., everyone knew 10 years ago that utilities were not going to
build the needed plants or upgrade existing ones because there was no
provision in the law for them to recover the costs under de-regulation.
Now everyone is acting surprised that the short-term -- lets make today's
profit the prime objective -- didn't build new plants for the long-term.
Utilities were once regulated in-part so there would be an incentive to build
into the future. The public need hasn't changed, but the politicians and money
grabbers don't care about that. -- Not that the right, who spear-headed
deregulation ever did. I consider it poetic justice for those who voted for
the nuts.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: "Richard J. Donovan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:17:28 GMT
> >Word is not my favourite tool and there is Star Office on Linux.
> There is also LYX and numerous others, you have to get out more Goodwin.
Ahh, man, you should be using WordPerfect 9 in Windows, if not
WordPerfect 8 in Linux. Word, not one's favorite tool, indeed!
>
> >
> >The unreliability of Windows 98 SE. I'm not talking about Windows NT or
> >2000 here, just 95/98/ME. My system is currently getting crankier every
> >day. I put up with it because of the lack of software on Linux but I
> >could try switching to Windows 2000. Everything I've mentioned above
> >works on Windows 2000 (except possibly CD writing and the scanner, dunno
> >about those).
> Just get your $400 out and buy Win2k, then you can find out ?
> After all money is no problen for you, your a Windows user, used to paying
> endless dollars for upgrades and faster hardware.
>
> >
> >--
> >Pete Goodwin
>
> --
> Kind Regards
> Terry
> --
> **** ****
> My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
> up 1 week 5 days 23 hours 22 minutes
> ** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:22:29 -0700
> Sorry I misread your site referrence. I translated as I would reading
> Matt's sloppy typing. Glad you agree about Netcraft's stats. You
wouldn't
> now how uptime gets their figures would you?
I don't agree with you completely on Netcraft's numbers. I hoped my
clarifying post would make that clear. I merely wanted to point out that
you and sfcybear were talking about different numbers.
I do agree that as we do not know how Netcraft get's their numbers one
cannot make specific claim of veracity. But by the same token, since we do
not know how Netcraft get's their numbers one cannot make specific claims
about their falsehood. It is, unfortunately, an unknown quantity.
I do know, however, how uptime get's their figures, so one can make claims
of veracity. Their number are arrived at by individual system
administrators running scripts on thier systems periodically that send
uptime information to a central database. This would, of course, have
several advantages over Netcraft:
1) Systems within a company, and not only front line web servers, can be
monitored.
2) The method of gathering is a known quantity.
3) The method of gathering is accurate, in that the uptime numbers are read
directly, not derived by some as yet unknown algorithm.
But uptime's method does have the following disadvantages.
1) They are open to fraud.
2) The survey is voluntary, and one must consider what type of people would
respond, and how this would affect the outcome
This is true of any voluntary survey. All hope is not lost however. There
are standard statistical algorithms designed specifically to correct for
such weaknesses, as surveys of one type or another have been analyzed for
decades. Uptime.net, or anyone else for that matter, would do us all a
great favor if they would apply these algorithms to their numbers. I would
certainly be interested.
In the end, I do not think it wise to completely discount the numbers of
Netcraft or Uptime.net without specific claims of error. I do not think,
also, that they can be taken as gospel. Sfcybear does make a good point,
though: since these are, to date, the only numbers we have which aren't
strictly anecdotal, they must be given some weight.
I'm the one who started this thread and so far I see it as: one side has
brought numbers to the table, and the other side has now to bring its own
numbers or specifically refute the numbers already brought. Neither of
which has yet to be done.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linuxgruven is Deceptive in their Ad
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:17:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 45k per year?
>
> Do you like starving?
It's more than your mother is giving you for an allowance.
Bracy
------------------------------
From: nf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lacks- an Agent-like newsreader.
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:59:02 -0500
In article <9106p1$kjl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Pedro Coto wrote:
> >
> > > 4) Outlook Express is my favourite news reader
> >
> > Outlook Express? Agent completely takes the piss out of Outlook
> > Express when it comes to news.
>
> I'm sure it does, but is Agent fully threaded yet, esp wrt full
> control of connections? If you want to really experience all of
> this in a seamless manner ala Agent you have ProNews/2 for OS/2
> as the newsreader to beat- in any OS. And of course Agent has yet
> to be ported to Linux, so why really, do you mention it here? If
> you have it running under Odin/Samba let us know!!
>
> Why more Linux users don't investigate OS/2 I'll never
> understand. Just to see how good the WPS is. Might take their
> obsessed focus off M$ for a bit. :)
>
> Vacuo
>
OS/2 had a TON of potential.
IBM's kind of abandoned it though. (And it's development tools are a
bit lacking).
I used it and programmed for it from 1.0 (16-bit no GUI!) through Warp
4.0. I was sorry to have to leave it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J.C.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 11 Dec 2000 05:06:49 +1100
On Sat, 02 Dec 2000 02:01:48 GMT, Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 01 Dec 2000 06:57:51 GMT, Chad C. Mulligan
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> >> Uh huh. You're a NT/2k admin, I presume? How many hits/day do _you_
>get?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Not that many
>>
>> Well, that's my fucking point. For a living, I admin high-traffic boxes.
>NT/2k
>> just can't keep up with the load -- unix/clones can.
>>
>
>Benchmarks seem to prove otherwise.
It appears you've retreated into the same cosy little bunker as Ayende. When you
can't come up with anything, the super-duper comeback is to mumble something
about `benchmarks', as if benchmarks are going to keep NT/2k up, or as if
benchmarks actually disprove my administrative experiences with NT/2k.
>> > because business runs on more than a web server.
>>
>> So? First, my job description ventures far further than administrating
>just webservers, I'm
>> just using webserving as one (1) example of where NT/2k can't keep up. In
>any case, though, my
>> point is, if NT/2k can't handle the stress of being a webserver, how is it
>going to handle an
>> equal amount of _any_ activity, webserving-related or not?
>>
>
>Then your question is moot.
Really. Care to elaborate, or would you rather dodge the unconfortable task
of replying by mumbling something about my question being `moot'? The latter,
presumably...
--
J.C.
"The free flow of information along data highways being piped into our
homes and offices will permit unimaginable control by a small elite..."
-- 'The Thunder of Justice', pg. 264
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 12:21:13 -0500
Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> >> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> >> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> >> in the 1970's.
>>
>> Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
>> by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
>>
>Not by the utilities, but by State and Federal regulators. The utilities
>would like to build more plants : they make more money. In the absence of
>more plants, they will just raise prices. That is a dead end for them, as
>older plants break down and become obsolete.
Sorry but it was the utilities that canceled every single Nuke plant after
Three Mile Island. The effect of the regulators was not the prime cause. The
utilities knew that the design changes that would come from the TMI meltdown
would make nuks to costly.
The same is somewhat true for fossil fueled plants, in that emission standards
were starting to take effect in the 70s and the older plants would be retiring
-- but there was little incentive to build new plants and no agreement on how
to recover the capital costs under the coming deregulation -- so there just
wasn't a good business to fight for new plants.
>> >> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> >> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> >> would STILL have surplus capacity.
>>
>> >Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
>> >for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
>> >suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
>> >going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
>> >grows by that much more?
>>
>> >I shudder to think.
>>
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:04:22 -0700
> No, PWS stands for Personal Web Server.
Strangely enough, it also stands for Peer Web Services. Which is what I
meant.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:08:13 -0700
> PWS can also mean Personal Web Server, which is what is available for
Win9x.
Agreed, I was merely clarifying what I meant. I say PWS meaning any non
true IIS version which includes Personal Web Server and Peer Web Services.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:15:05 -0700
I just came up with a potential solution:
I rebooted my web server (running Linux and Apache) on Monday. I just went
and checked it with Netcraft. Lo and behold! They recorded my reboot
correctly!
(http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=&site=www.intercation.com) I
propose a more thorough test.
Everyone who reads this, go to Netcraft and query my server
www.intercation.com. This will keep them checking my uptime. I will reboot
the machine at 5 pm Mountain Time this Tuesday 12/12/00. We'll see if they
figure it out.
Then, after that, we need to do a test with IIS on Windows. I don't
currently have access to a machine that I can test and reboot, does anyone
else? I'll see if I can round one up. If anyone has access to one post it
on here and we can perform the same test.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:15:23 -0700
I just came up with a potential solution:
I rebooted my web server (running Linux and Apache) on Monday. I just went
and checked it with Netcraft. Lo and behold! They recorded my reboot
correctly!
(http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=&site=www.intercation.com) I
propose a more thorough test.
Everyone who reads this, go to Netcraft and query my server
www.intercation.com. This will keep them checking my uptime. I will reboot
the machine at 5 pm Mountain Time this Tuesday 12/12/00. We'll see if they
figure it out.
Then, after that, we need to do a test with IIS on Windows. I don't
currently have access to a machine that I can test and reboot, does anyone
else? I'll see if I can round one up. If anyone has access to one post it
on here and we can perform the same test.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:16:00 -0700
I just came up with a potential solution:
I rebooted my web server (running Linux and Apache) on Monday. I just went
and checked it with Netcraft. Lo and behold! They recorded my reboot
correctly!
(http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=&site=www.intercation.com) I
propose a more thorough test.
Everyone who reads this, go to Netcraft and query my server
www.intercation.com. This will keep them checking my uptime. I will reboot
the machine at 5 pm Mountain Time this Tuesday 12/12/00. We'll see if they
figure it out.
Then, after that, we need to do a test with IIS on Windows. I don't
currently have access to a machine that I can test and reboot, does anyone
else? I'll see if I can round one up. If anyone has access to one post it
on here and we can perform the same test.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Patent Free...but not for long?
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 18:23:52 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9109f3$fv9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Whenever I see something advertised today as "patent-free", I worry
> about it.
>
> After all, other people are patenting "obvious ideas" in the computer
> industry every day. Folks who are releasing "patent-free" things don't
> have the money or the resources to fight someone else who chooses to
> patent the contents of their "patent-free" software.
>
> It seems to me that rather than simply fight software patents in the
> legislature and the courts, folks writing the "patent-free" stuff would
> be better off doing their OWN patents on their stuff, then specifically
> refusing to collect royalties on their patents.
>
> Linux almost was copyrighted by a complete stranger thanks to people
> who were against the concept of copyrighting software being the prime
> authors of Linux. The system needs to be reworked, but until it is,
> folks doing the free software and the "patent-free" software have to
> realize that a patent which they don't do anything about is
> *** necessary *** in today's world of patents on "A Tactile System Of
> Entering Data Into A Computing System." (i.e., a KEYBOARD)
You probably don't need to get a patent if you don't plan to collect
royalties. It's been a while since I got involved in the details of patents,
but I believe it's the case that in the US, once an idea has been disclosed
publicly, the original inventor has one year to file a patent. Others are
precluded from obtaining a patent on the idea once it has been publicly
disclosed. As I recall, most other countries are more restrictive: your
rights to file end when the public disclosure is made.
In any event, it seems to me that GNU software is more or less publicly
disclosed on release.
There is an argument to be made that the free software movement should start
patenting, so that they would have some leverage against commercial firms
who do patent. It's not clear how valuable this would be, or how feasible.
Many of the people working on free software are also working for
Universities or corporations who might make legitimate claims on the
invention. And, in general, a patent portfolio doesn't have infinite weight.
When a large company shows up at our door and wants to talk about patents,
what they really want to talk about is royalties. As a smaller company, we
use our patent portfolio to reduce the royalty payments, but we don't
eliminate them. It's not clear how a free software organization would pay
royalties, or even how they would defend themselves in a legal proceeding.
As for the patent you mention, there are no patents with that title in the
US patent database, and there are only two that include the words "tactile"
and "data" in the title. I suspect that it doesn't exist, and that it's
progenitor was an article in Linux Journal by Bryan Pfaffenberger [1].
Pfaffenberger doesn't seem to know much about the patent system, and was
using his make-believe patent, "A Method for Transposing Tactile Pressure On
Alphanumeric Keys Into Representable Screen Displays in Hypermedia Systems,"
as an example of a patent that could be issued on an obvious device (a
keyboard) which could then be used to force every company that manufactures
computers to place all their patents in the public domain. Not likely, but
there's nothing like FUD to get the indignancy flowing.
It's worth noting that the patent office does not consist of experts in
every field, and the role of the patent examiner is not to make a decision
about obviousness or originality. In most cases, the patent examiner doesn't
have the expertise to make that judgement. They do try to find other patents
that cover similar things, and ask the inventor to explain the differences.
If you don't understand that, then you tend to think of patents as
enforceable by virtue of having been granted. That's not the case: a patent
is only your statement of claims.
The actual value and validity of a patent is determined by its
enforceability - something that will be determined by the courts, not the
patent office. There is little doubt that a generic patent for a keyboard
used to enter data into a computer would be unenforceable. Not because it's
obvious (proving obviousness is rather difficult), but because keyboards
have been attached to computers for such a long time. Similarly, if I was to
patent the searching algorithms used by gnu grep, the patent would be
unenforceable.
-- Mike --
1. "The Coming Software Patent Crisis: Can Linux Survive?" by Bryan
Pfaffenberger Aug 10, 1999
(http://www2.linuxjournal.com/articles/currents/003.html)
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 18:23:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Marty writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Joe Malloy wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The Tholen tholes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any microwaves with an on/off button lately.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay then, "Start/Stop", if you must be pedantic.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Whoa, this is the pot calling the kettle black! Pedantic to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> point of silliness, Tholen now turns around and uses pedanticism as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> an attack. Great going, Tholen, you're really low on the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> consistency list now!
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> There's a reason why Tholen, in 12 years, has never budged from
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the TOP of my list as "GODDAMN STUPIDEST FUCKING IDIOT ON USENET"
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Has he really been at it for TWELVE YEARS?!
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Of course not, Marty. Aaron is simply another in a series of liars.
>
> >>>>>>>>> I've seen nothing that leads me to agree with you.
>
> >>>>>>>> And you've seen nothing that leads you to agree with Aaron.
>
> >>>>>>> Classic pontification.
>
> >>>>>> On the contrary, the lack of Aaron's evidence is precisely the
> >>>>>> evidence that you've seen nothing that leads you to agree with
> >>>>>> Aaron, Marty.
>
> >>>>> Balderdash, Dave.
>
> >>>> Oh really? Where's Aaron's evidence, allegedly?
>
> >>> Non sequitur.
>
> >> Incorrect, Marty.
>
> > Classic incorrect pontification.
>
> How ironic.
Where is the alleged irony?
> >>>>> Truly amazing that you think you know more about what I've
> >>>>> seen from Aaron than I do.
>
> >>>> What's so amazing about knowing that Aaron hasn't presented any
> >>>> evidence to anyone about when I allegedly started posting to
> >>>> USENET, Marty?
>
> >>> Non sequitur.
>
> >> Incorrect, Marty.
>
> > Classic incorrect pontification.
>
> How ironic.
Where is the alleged irony?
> >>>>> "Arrogance and stupidity in a single package. How efficient of you."
> >>>>> --Londo Mollari
>
> >>>> Applies to you, Marty. And Aaron.
>
> >>> Applies to you, Dave.
>
> >> What is allegedly arrogant or stupid about knowing when I started
> >> posting to USENET, Marty?
>
> > Non sequitur.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Classic pontification.
> >>>>>>>> Of course, if you can find a USENET posting from me that dates back
> >>>>>>>> to 1988, feel free to repost it. I know you can't. I know Aaron
> >>>>>>>> can't.
>
> >>>>>>> That doesn't prove that no postings were made by you in that time period.
>
> >>>>>> What would you consider as proof, Marty?
>
> >>>>> That's not my problem, now is it?
>
> >>>> Sure it is, Marty, given that you're the one who wants prove that I
> >>>> didn't post anything in that time period.
>
> >>> You're erroneously presupposing that I want to prove that you didn't post
> >>> anything in that time period.
>
> >> Incorrect, Marty:
> >>
> >> "That doesn't prove that no postings were made by you in that
> >> time period."
> >> --Marty Amodeo
>
> > And where is the quote that's supposed to show that I want to prove that you
> > didn't post anything in that time period?
>
> "That doesn't prove that no postings were made by you in that
> time period."
> --Marty Amodeo
Repeating the same inappropriate quotation doesn't make it more appropriate,
Dave.
> >>> I'm content to believe what Aaron said.
>
> >> Why are you content with a lie, Marty?
>
> > Non sequitur.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Classic pontification.
> >>>>>> Truly amazing that both you and Aaron think you know more about when
> >>>>>> I started posting to USENET than I do.
>
> >>>>> I don't "think I know" anything about when you started posting. I
> >>>>> simply take Aaron's word over yours,
>
> >>>> Illogical, given that he doesn't know what he's talking about, Marty.
>
> >>> I don't accept this weak and unsupported premise.
>
> >> Why don't you accept the truth, Marty?
>
> > Non sequitur.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Yet another example of your pontification.
> >>>>> since neither of you can present evidence.
>
> >>>> Above you considered it truly amazing that I think I know more about
> >>>> what you've seen from Aaron, Marty,
>
> >>> Very good, Dave.
>
> >> What is very good about your inconsistency, Marty?
>
> > Another non sequitur.
>
> Another incorrect statement.
Still another example of your pontification.
> >>>> but here you just confirmed what I said about Aaron.
>
> >>> I did no such thing.
>
> >> Reread what you wrote, Marty.
>
> > Unnecessary.
>
> Then why did you say "I did no such thing", Marty?
Because I've done no such thing, Dave.
> >>>> Typical inconsistency.
>
> >>> Typical illogical conclusion.
>
> >> Balderdash, Marty.
>
> > Oh really? What is allegedly logical about jumping to a conclusion?
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I jumped to a conclusion, Marty.
Not at all.
> >>>>>> "Arrogance and stupidity in a single package. How efficient of you."
> >>>>>> --Londo Mollari
>
> >>>>> How ironic.
>
> >>>> Where's the alleged irony, Marty?
>
> >>> See my usage of said quote.
>
> >> I already saw your inappropriate usage, Marty.
>
> > Impossible, given that there was no such inappropriate usage.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Classic pontification.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
