Linux-Advocacy Digest #799, Volume #31 Sun, 28 Jan 01 19:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Sound a networks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Whistler predictions... (Ed Allen)
Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:44:16 -0500
Marty wrote:
>
> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > Is anything that can be done about Kulkis and his foul mouth?
>
> Since he doesn't change his ID, I think the solution is fairly obvious if you
> don't want to read his postings.
Proving once again that most of my detractors are sub-100 IQ.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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,soc.singles
Subject: Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:44:36 -0500
Marty wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > You've been hiding in academia ever since you left mom and dad's house.
> > Why is that?
>
> You're presupposing that he's left "mom and dad's house".
My bad.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:47:51 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone noticed the new line of FUD from the Winvocates?
>
> "Linux is more stable, until you put a GUI on it."
>
> It is getting harder and harder to convince myself this is not a
> concerted effort. In just the last day or so I have seen this phrase pop
> up more than a couple times from a few users.
>
> So, in response to Windows CEMENT (CE,ME,NT) Win2K has a poor MTTF, they
> now all respond with the above party line.
>
> It isn't true at all. X, obviously, has a lower MTTF than Linux proper,
> but even the worst X server has a higher MTTF than 2K.
Sorry to be a pedantic arse, but here goes :-)
If an X server is running on Win2K (such as exceed) then its MTTF is at
most that of the OS it is running on.
Sorry.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:54:50 +0000
In article <9G1d6.66700$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chris
Clement" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess you are referring to me when you say "Windows CEMENT". Very
> clever, but check the spelling. First, let me stress that I am NOT a
> Windows
Ouch! A bit of paranoia creeping in. He was refering to an article in
geek-world (?) about The (tm) New (tm) Microsoft(tm) Windows(tm)
combining all the latest Technonogies (tm)
Windows CE + Win ME + Win NT= Windows CEMENT
> Seeing as how I am new here, I am not familiar with the acronym "MTTF".
Mean time to failure. There was a big thread on it. MS pblished MTTF
statistics for Win2K as 120 days (appauling). They alos said "look how
great iot is compared to NT" which said what many people have been saying:
NT was (by MS's own admission) really, *really* crap.
> I'd appreciate it if you could feel me in.
I hope that's a typo :-)
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:02:50 -0600
Haha... Charlie, you're just digging yourself in deeper.
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <tsKc6.45$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <GPrc6.1008$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch
wrote:
> >> >> Microsoft W2k was their attempt at creating a mono-os to replace
> >> >> the dual product lines of NT and 98/95. They needed to make
> >> >> this effort work as it IS too costly to compete with Linux
> >> >> when you HAVE to support dual os's and PAY your EMPLOYEE'S.
> >> >
> >> >MS has been trying to get rid of Win9x since the day it was released.
> >Each
> >> >successive release of WIndows brought the convergence of the NT and 9x
> >> >platforms closer. This was years before Linux was any kind of worry
to
> >MS.
> >> >
> >>
> >> This paragraph is typical EF. They have been trying to get rid of
> >> 9X since it was released! How many people on the internet would
> >> make a statement like this? If they were trying to get rid
> >> of it since the time it was released, then why did they
> >> release it in the first place!
> >
> >Because the buying public would not buy NT when they released it. It
took a
> >long time for the two OS's to converge. The biggest problem was
application
> >compatibility. Windows 95 was all about migrating users to 32 bit apps,
> >which required 16 bit compatibility in the interim.
>
> True.
I love it, after railing at me over a statement about how stupid it is, you
suddenly admit i'm right. What does that say about you, Charlie?
> >> Linux came to being before 95 did.
> >
> >And wasn't compatible with Windows.
> >
>
> True, but so what?
>
> Do things need to be compatible with Windows for
> them to be in existance?
No, but when Windows NT was released, 16 bit Windows compatiblity was all
that matterd. 32 bit Windows is still mostly what matters to people.
> >> >> And with 64 bit systems on the way, Microsoft will now have
> >> >> 4 OS's to support instead of 2.
> >> >
> >> >It's the same OS whether it's 64 bit or 32 bit. 64 bit simply has
wider
> >> >parameters. There are no new functions and no unsupported functions
that
> >> >are different between 32 bit and 64 bit NT.
> >>
> >> Boy! You really ARE a foolish child aren't you.
> >> The god damn instruction sets aren't the same and
> >> neither is the compiler. The entire structure
> >> of the kernel and a good deal of the OS will
> >> change with this chip.
> >
> >Yet for some reason, you think that Linux is immune to this. Any change
> >Windows had to go through for Itanium, Linux also had to go through.
>
> Yes it did, I told you that EF.
> And it is running and ready for release.
No, it's not quite ready for release. In fact, Linux 2.4 still needs
several key patches to make it work properly under Itanium.
> Where is fucking Windows!
>
> >> I suggest you examine the work for the 64 bit
> >> version of Linux.
> >
> >Actually, I have. I've diffed the ia64 and i386 kernel files, and there
are
> >huge differences. You seem to think it was a simple recompile.
> >
>
> NO, you did.
No, I didn't. Simply quote me if you intend to continue this charade.
Provide a deja link and an exact quote. Go on.. Go ahead. You can't.
> >> If they are merely re-compiling with a 64 bit
> >> compiler, then Whistler will be the lamest peice
> >> of shit ever released from Microsoft.
> >
> >That's not what I said. I said that the API's are the same, except for
> >wider parameters. It's the same OS from an applications point of view,
> >except for parameters.
>
> That *IS* what you said.
No, it's not. Again, provide the quote. You can't, so quit saying I did.
> >> Further! If all it took was recompiling the same
> >> code with a 64 bit compiler, how come it's taken
> >> these fuckwads 2 years to come out with a beta
> >> of Whistler?
> >
> >I never said any such thing. This is more of your halucinagenic haze
which
> >makes you think i've said things which I haven't.
>
> Demonizing me for your *STUPID* comments won't save you EF.
You demonize yourself. Stop claiming people say things they haven't.
Either you're lying or you're delusional. Take your pick.
> >> Can you manage to answer any of these questions
> >> truthfully and without the capt. kangaroo.
> >
> >You only asked one question, moron.
>
> Answer the questions.
You only asked one question. Stop making it plural.
> >And the answer is that the chip is not yet finished. Duh! MS had betas
for
> >quite some time, and both MS and the Linux camp announced versions of
> >windows running on simulators at the same time.
> >
>
> The CHIP IS FINISHED YOU CLUELESS DIPSHIT!
> IT'S BEEN RUNNING IN PRODUCTION HP-9000 FOR ALMOST
> 2 YEARS NOW!
More delusions. HP doesn't seem to agree with you.
http://www.ia-64.hp.com/
"ItaniumT is at the heart of the next generation of computing technology,
and will be available in servers and workstations within six months."
> You don't know your fucking head from your ass on anything
> do you EF.
Amazingly enough, everytime you say something like this, it's just after you
prove how little you know.
> >> >> Funny but, in Linux land there is only ONE OS which is
> >> >> supported and that's Linux. No-matter what machine
> >> >> you may be running on, Linux is consistent on all of
> >> >> them. You could be running a mac or an S390, the
> >> >> OS base is the same to the user.
> >> >
> >> >Spoken like someone that's never run Linux under multiple platforms.
> >That
> >> >one OS is significantly different depending on which hardware you're
> >running
> >> >under.
> >>
> >> Well, actually I am and no it's not.
>
> That's very BIG BOY of you EF.
????? That was *YOUR* comment. Not mine. You don't even know what you've
said, how can you possibly know what anyone else does?
> >Apparently *YOU* have not diffed the kernel sources then. Otherwise you
> >wouldn't say this.
>
> I am the ONE who started saying it fuckwad!
> You are the dipshit who thought you could just
> recompile the sources with a 64 bit ready compiler.
No, you're the one that said Linux is one OS and just needs to be recompiled
for each platform. While it's true that after the port is done, that's all
it takes, but then the same is true for Windows. Here's your quote:
> Funny but, in Linux land there is only ONE OS which is
> supported and that's Linux. No-matter what machine
> you may be running on, Linux is consistent on all of
> them. You could be running a mac or an S390, the
> OS base is the same to the user.
And this is exactly the same thing for NT based 32 bit Windows and 64 bit
Windows.
> >> >> Truely Microsoft is insaine.
> >> >
> >> >Pot calling the kettle black.
> >>
> >> With followership such as you EF the conclusion
> >> is nearly an automatic one.
> >
> >No, you're the one making insane statements that are easily countered
with
> >facts, yet you continue to believe in your fantasy world where things
don't
> >exist and people say things you want them to have said.
>
> This doesn't help unbury your position on this matter.
To be quite frank, I'm not srue you even know what your position is.
> >> >> They are insaine to even believe they can compete with an OS
> >> >> like Linux. There are just a FEW computers left which don't
> >> >> have a Linux port working for them. Just a few.
> >> >
> >> >spelling it the same way twice isn't a typo. Insane has no i in the
last
> >> >half of the word.
> >> >
> >> >Just a few? How many is a few? Apple II, Commodore 64, PET, trs-80,
> >color
> >> >computer, Altair, TS-1000/ZX-81, Unisys A and B systems, CDC Cyber
> >systems,
> >> >Cray I, II, III, XMP and YMP, ETA 1, Connection Machines, RS-6000,
> >AS/400,
> >> >IBM System 36/38, Any number of VAX systems, IBM 43xx, Tandems, HP
9000,
> >> >Psion...
> >> >
> >> >I could go on for quite some time you know for systems that don't have
> >Linux
> >> >ports.
> >>
> >> Yeah, and you could easily double the list talking about Microsoft's
> >> lack of portage. That was the whole point of this.
> >
> >MS has ported a version of Windows to every architecture that Linux has
been
> >ported to, except 3. That's not "double".
>
> They run Intel and Alpha. No more.
>
> Linux runs on dozens of chips.
Why do you ignore the list of processors that I posted that Windows CE was
ported to (and still supported on)?
> >> >> Microsoft is supporting Intel and Alpha and nothing else.
> >> >
> >> >Never looked at the number of processors supported by CE, have you?
> >>
> >> You've obviously never built a god damn computer boy.
> >
> >I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is you think I said here. What
> >does building a computer have to do with knowing what architectures an OS
> >supports?
>
> Well, you've made enough god damn comments about it
> so far, I would have thought you would know!
How could I possibly know what your delusional mind thinks?
> Fuck EF! You mean to tell me you've been calling me a fucking
> liar for paragraphs now and you admit you don't exactly know what
> it is we're talking about here!
No, I admit that I don't know what *YOU* think you're talking about. It's
certainly not what this subject is about.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sound a networks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:57:11 GMT
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 22:48:40 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 20:12:18 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >I've seen messages like this from mail clients, and they always
>> >say something like "mail spool in use, if this is in error please
>> >remove lock file /tmp/.408-jjs"
>>
>> Can't wait to see Joe Sixpack attempt to do that when :
>>
>> 1. He can't find the file.
>
>The fullpath specified, and he can't find it?
/ \ not starting from / and so forth.
>>
>> 2. He doesn't have the correct permission to remove it.
>
>The file is owned by the owner of the mailbox, get it?
I can't tell you the number of times I get "locked file messages",
usually with ppp, and the file is owned by root.
>> BTW Netscape does this all the time when you try and use 2 instances
>> of it at the same time.
>
>accessing the mail spool from 2 different clients?
Nope, 2 instances under the same client and not accessing mail but
browsing the web.
>> Works fine under Windows though..
>
>The OS of the client makes no difference -
>oops, you didn't know that, did you?
I can open 2 instances of Netscape under Windows and browse and get
access to favorites and updating of favorites and so forth.
Can't do it under Linux tough.
I get a "Netscape already open error" and although Netscape opens and
works none of my bookmarks are usable.
>jjs
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ websites down again - Problem solved -> use Linux!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:55:31 -0500
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:RLKc6.86$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "CR Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > This is too funny! MS has outsourced its DNS to a company servers are
> > > using a "networking implementation very similar to that of Linux."
> > >
> > > This is even worse for them than the original event. They now have to
> > > admit they can't run a big network and switch to people running Linux!
> >
> > MS outsourced part of it's DNS to provide geographical seperation of it's
> > DNS servers. It hardly matters what servers the outsourcing firm uses, so
> > long as they can provide the service. MS has done similar things before,
> > for instance it's MSN user homepages are outsourced to a company running
> > FreeBSD or Linux IIRC.
> >
> > Outsourcing is not a sign of "Our products can't handle this" but rather
> "We
> > can't do everything in one location, and we don't have any other
> datacenters
> > in other parts of the country".
>
> What I'd like to know about this particular incident is how many calls
> did Microsoft's customer service take about the problem, and how
> did they dismiss each one for a whole day before anyone bothered
> to investigate and fix the problem?
>
> A mistake in router configuration is easy enough to make, and probably
> everyone who works with them has made a mistake or two, so I
> don't think the fact that a mistake happened should be taken too
> seriously (although a design that allows such a simple mistake to
> take down access to a large network is certainly a bad thing).
> However, this kind of mistake can be fixed in minutes once someone
> realizes there is a problem. My question, and I hope some magazines
> will answer this in public, is: why and how did the telephone support
> people who must have been fielding thousands of calls about this
> keep the fact that a problem existed away from the people who could
> have fixed it? I think this foretells the future of .NET better than
> anything we could have imagined, and is also the problem I have with
> most commercial products. The main thing you pay for is a huge front
> line of telephone support people that not only can't do anything to solve
> a real problem, but consider it their job to keep the issue away from the
> people who can.
Fortunately, my experiences with HP and Sun have been diametrically opposite.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:00:14 GMT
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:28:15 GMT, Giuliano Colla
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Key word here is "good"
>>
>
>When that's the keyword, MS crap falls out of the picture.
Tell that to the 95 percent of the world that is using MS.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 00:00:14 GMT
In article <XI_c6.5159$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Nik Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>> If you have A company which is running Linux on last years
>> Pentium II and using Gnome to conduct business, that company
>> will be *more* profitable than the company who's thrown all
>> their Pentium II's out to buy a new machine with W2k installed.
>>
>
>Not if you throw in the cost to retrain all the staff etc. If the economics
>were so clear, it would have already happened., but in any real business
>decision you take into account more than just raw hardware/software costs,
>otherwise SUN would have been out of business years ago.
>
At some point that old "retraining" FUD falls to the cost
differential, otherwise DOS would still be the thing most businesses
use.
Businesses will use whatever they believe will be most cost
effective and their employees will use the company supplied tools.
--
FYI. When you do type "make" on the Windows NT source tree, it takes almost
38 hours for it to complete on a 4-way 400 Mhz PII System, as opposed to
about 5 minutes on Linux. Linux is not Doomed!!!!!! -- Jeff Merkey
http://boudicca.tux.org/hypermail/linux-kernel/1999/1999week26/0787.html
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft DEATH NECKLESS is COMPLETE!!!
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 18:57:41 -0500
"Seán Ó Donnchadha" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 20:16:46 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Sure, just like I see the raw power behind a million backyard
> >> mechanics over the mere few at BMW.
> >
> >microsoft is not the BMW of OSes, it is the yugo.
> >
>
> Ah, that would explain the Yugo's prolonged dominance of the
> automobile industry.
When the Yugo manufacturer has a 20-year history of firebombing any
dealership which dares to sell any other car...would you expect
anything different?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: 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 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
******************************
