Linux-Advocacy Digest #894, Volume #32 Mon, 19 Mar 01 16:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Mindless suicide! Rediculous Dumbasses! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: the mismeasure of scale (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month ("Poptarts")
Re: What is user friendly? (Barry Manilow)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (Edward Rosten)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: What is user friendly? (Barry Manilow)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Mig)
Re: Yet more XBox bogification... (Jim Naylor)
Re: Yet more XBox bogification... (Jim Naylor)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (WesTralia)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Mindless suicide! Rediculous Dumbasses!
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 15:27:57 -0500
Anonymous wrote:
>
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Said Anonymous in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 15 Mar 2001 01:10:08
> > -0700;
> > >"Masha Ku' Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> You know, the really scary thing about Charlie's enthusiasm is that it feels
> > >> so much like the "You GOTTA be saved, Jesus LOVES you!.." enthusiasm of some
> > >> religious sects.
> > >>
> > >> Or is "Linus loves you," more accurate?
> > >
> > >windows is a pretty cool system. easy to install and easy to use. i like
> > >it just fine.
> > > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> > >
> > >men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> > >more even than death
> > >- bertrand russell
> >
> > When I recently changed my .sig, I received several lame comments about
> > how I wasn't following my own advice, using such a sig while flaming
> > trollers rather callously. But that's nothing compared to "Jackie"
> > here; one must presume he hasn't even managed to read his own sig, let
> > alone understand what it says and its applicability to his own comments.
>
> what part of my comment do you dispute?
> that i think windows is cool?
> if so, how can this be considered evidence of fear of thought when it
> expresses nothing more than a subjective response - ie 'that's pretty
> cool'
> or do you have a dispute that windows is easy to use and easy to install?
> if you do i suspect you define 'easy' in an idiosyncratic way which makes
> the byzantine world of unix look good - such as 'it won't crash'
> ignoring the fact that a system which doesn't crash but which requires
> more investment in time and effort than most people are willing to make
> just to get started with is, for most people, effectively useless.
Hey, Jackie....Unix has had easy-to-use GUI's since BEFORE Microsoft
ever release LoseDOS 1.0, 2.0, 3.1, and 3.11.
Hope that fucking helps.
> or perhaps you think liking windows is itself evidence that i fear thought?
eeeeeeeeh, could beee
> well, that may have an element of truth if you define 'thought' strictly
> as human cpu cycles. my observations indictate that learning to use unix
..circa 1985
> well requires an immense amount of what is for most people (myself
> included) tedious and unpleasant mental work. this is the underlying
> reason for the high value placed on unix savvy people by the market in
> that it tends to restrict the supply. (the other side of this is, of
> course, increased demand)
> now it may be that you, like a lot of people on usenet, love working with
> computers. but you should not let this blind you to the fact that for most
> people working with computers has only been made just barely tolerable by
> things like windows.
> and until this is fully understood by the linux evangelists bill gates
> needn't lose any sleep fretting over microsoft losing thier total desktop
> enduser market domination.
Jackie...why do you consider an evaluation of the 1985 incarnation
of a product to have any relevance to that which it has evolved into
in the year 2001?
By your argument, Windows is difficult becuase not only did DOS have
a similarly cryptic command line...but the commands were far less
powerful, and many useful ones were completely MISSING.
As long as you continue to make comparisons to OBSOLETE unix products,
you will convince nobody other than people who are just as clueless
as you are...i.e. you're preaching to the choir, Jackie.
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
>
> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> more even than death
> - bertrand russell
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: the mismeasure of scale
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:29:16 GMT
Said The Danimal in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:07:33
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> Said The Danimal in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:34:27
>> >Anonymous wrote:
>> >> aaron wrote:
>> >> > Anonymous wrote:
>> >> > > then there are those who are in business and understand economies of
>> >> > > scale. not to mention the cost of paying a headcase unix guru to be snotty
>> >> > > and obnoxious whilst smelling up the office and dripping twinkie crumbs on
>> >> > > the server and making rtfm sounds with his porcine cakehole.
>> >> >
>> >> > It takes a minimum of FIVE Windows adminstrators to get the same productivity
>> >> > of ONE Unix administrator.
>> >
>> >That's because Unix administrators don't have to cope with the
>> >same types of users. The daunting complexity of Unix selects for
>> >highly self-sufficient users. This is like comparing the productivity
>> >of two physicians, one who treats terminally ill elderlies and
>> >the other who treats healthy young people. You'd be naive to think
>> >the doctor with the higher patient death rate is inferior. You have
>> >to compare them on the same patients.
>>
>> Any fool who thinks a physician using a professionally administered Unix
>> box needs to care a wit about Unix's "daunting complexity" is obviously
>> entirely ignorant of what "professionally administered" means.
>
>Speaking of "fool" where did you see any reference to physicians using
>a computer in the analogy of two physicians treating different types
>of patients?
I had a feeling someone would get hung up on that. It was a convenient
example which occurred to me because of your lame analogy.
>In any case, "professionally administered" means a box cannot function
>except from behind a thick layer of scarce expensive specialized human
>intelligence.
No, it means you get someone who knows what they're doing to run the box
for you, and confine your "use" to data-entry type interactions.
>In other words it's not a GUI or a CLI but HEMI (Human-Expert-Mediated
>Interface). That's not something to be proud of; rather, it's
>an embarrassment.
No, that's the way computers work, unless you want to learn the details
yourself to get rid of the professional admins. Amateurs generally do a
poor job of it, we've seen, whether Windows or Unix.
>Back when a useful computer cost about one MILLion dollars it was
>no big deal to throw in a trained technician to run it. Hardly anyone
>could buy such a machine, and anybody who could buy one could afford
>to pay someone to do nothing other than learn how to run it. But today
>the average person can buy a computer with decent power for less than
>a month's disposable income.
>
>The fact that cheap computers require any administration at all is
>a horrid design defect.
The fact that people using cheap computers don't realize they should be
capable of administrating it themselves is a horrid marketing defect.
>It's going to get even sillier in another ten years when computers
>become cheap enough to give away as prizes in breakfast cereal. The ratio
>of administrative labor to hardware cost will be thousands to one
>by then if the current trend of design idiocy continues.
Yea, that makes sense. Guffaw.
>> >The low level of real-world compatibility in Unix systems discourages
>> >people from connecting them to random hardware devices and relentlessly
>> >installing new kinds of application software as is routine with Windows
>> >computers. [...]
>>
>> "Low level of real-world compatibility in Unix systems"? Guffaw!
>
>Any box requiring professional administration is incompatible with
>most of the real world and getting steadily more incompatible as hardware
>costs continue to decrease and labor costs continue to increase.
And this would explain the MCSE program, I presume?
>Most small to medium-sized businesses cannot afford to pay a
>Unix administrator $100K/yr. For most home users the maximum budget
>for administration is even less: zero.
>
>For Unix to achieve a mass market it needs to incorporate AI technology
>capable of accurately simulating most of what a human Unix administrator
>does.
For any OS to achieve "a mass market", it needs the illegal monopoly to
be remedied. Get a clue.
>Until that happens, Bill Gates' world domination is probably secure.
>Not that this makes me happy. I'm just laying it out there
>for you. If you want to rock Bill Gates' world it's going to take
>more than tossing insults on Usenet. Bill will just keep getting
>richer while you just keep getting angrier.
Actually, all it takes to rock Bill Gates' world is mention of the word
"penguin", these days, from what I hear. ;-)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:30:29 GMT
Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 19 Mar 2001
[...]
>The effects are the same; the wording is different. Get a clue, Maxine.
Are you honestly trying to tell us the only problem you have with the
GPL is in the wording? Get for real, Austin; nobody's buying it.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Poptarts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:36:54 -0800
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-03-19-007-20-NW-RH
first, the fees only apply if you use RedHat desktop management services,
the updates are still free via good old fashioned download.
the base set iso image used for burning a cd set is also still free.
quote:
" Marshall also noted that downloading Red Hat updates without the benefit
of the RHN's management tools will remain an option for all users. "
this is the charge for service based business model that eric raymond talked
about in action, it's a fee implemented for the service not a fee based on
the value of the software.
it's a big linux user base out there, if they object to the fees they can
switch to a linux distro that offers free updates.Mandrake, SuSE , Debian
ect.
this is no big thing.
"Jon Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3ab63151$0$70694$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> http://www.redhat.com/products/network/service_changes.html
>
> I guess this is where it'll be going... can't afford to keep leaking money
> out of every oriface forever...
>
> So, this is like paying $19.95 per month to use Windows Update - MS
updates
> have been, are and will always be free.
>
> Wonder what trojan's can be hacked onto the back of their subscription
> agent... time will tell...
>
>
------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:34:47 -0800
> > > > >> > > Anonymous wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > amiga: dead
Oh not really. Anyway, the Amiga OS is still one of the best OS's
ever made. Is there yet anything that has surpassed it? QNX?
> > > > >> > beos: fringe
It is an excellent OS and much better than any MS OS. The latest BeOS
Personal Edition got 1 million downloads in its first month. Of
course, you are right, nobody uses it.
> > > > >> > mac: fringe
Hmmm. Mercedes Benz - fringe. Think I will go with the Gremlin
instead. ;)
> > > > >> > os2: dead
http://rover.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~meile/all.html
Are you sure now?
> > > > >> > next: dead
Ok. Still better than any MS OS tho. And one of the most awesome
OS's ever made.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:36:15 GMT
Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 19 Mar 2001
[...]
>Something in the public domain does not have a copyright on it. There
>is no "exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, and sell" on works
>in the public domain. You're attempting to reduce a distinction between
>a copyright and the protections of copyright: they are one and the same
>thing. [...]
Oh, well, if *you* say so, then I guess they must be, huh?
The reason it matters, in case you haven't caught on yet, Austin, is
that you are arguing, as others have noted, that you would to be able to
do with software which has a copyright (and copyright protection) [GPL
software] what you can do with software which has a copyright, but no
protection (BSD) and software which "has no copyright", and therefore no
protection (public domain, according to your definition).
I just wanted to make sure everything was laid out for you, so you could
see where the conflicts are. Just because BSD software can be exploited
as easily as public domain software does not mean that the BSDL is more
'free' than GPL; merely that it is more exploitable, as it does not have
any copyright *protection*, regardless of whether it has a copyright.
>>> Your distinction is, like everything else you manage to
>>> spew about this matter, false and completely without an erg of rational
>>> thought behind it.
>> Which is to say you either didn't understand it, or haven't figured out
>> why it might be important. No bother.
>
>THERE IS NO SUCH DISTINCTION. I encourage you to point to the specific
>part of the law which makes such a distinction.
The part of copyright law which defines what "public domain" works are.
Now as to the importance of the distinction, I refer you to the previous
paragraph.
>>> It's meaningless tripe, just like everything else you say. You invent
>>> these foolish and worthless "distinctions" on points which aren't
>>> distinctions at all -- you did this the last time someone brought the
>>> conversations from where you reside to gmd, and you eventually left
>>> with your tail between your legs (only you called it a victory instead
>>> of the shaming it was). The "difference" you bring up is only in your
>>> own mind.
>> And potentially in the minds of others I communicate with; this is
>> called "a concept". If you're not interested, then just don't respond,
>> OK?
>
>You don't communicate. You blather. The "concept" is yours, but that
>doesn't mean that it's sensible -- because it isn't.
Nor is yours, so we're even, eh?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:33:46 +0000
> Um...
>
> No.
Yes.
> Unless you consider most of Eurpoe, and a smidgen of Northern Africa to have
> practically conquered the "world" would I agree.
>
> But no.
Yes
> They over ran a good part of Eurpoe, paraded in Paris, goose-stepped almost
> to Moscow, and played in the Sahara, babysat Mussolini, and tried to wipe
> out the whole of Eurpoe's various "non-Aryan" ethnicities.
>
> But they had far more to conquer if they were to conquer the world.
They were very close to conqueroring Europe and Russia, it could easily
have gone either way. Had they succeeded, they would have been very
powerful and could have had a fair crack at the rest of the world.
Had they defeated Russia and the rest of Europe, they would have been in
a very, very strong position.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the oldest known rock is the famous |u98ejr
Hackenthorpe rock, which is over three trillion years |@
old? |eng.ox
-The Hackenthorpe Book of Lies |.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:38:13 GMT
Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 19 Mar 2001
>On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 19 Mar 2001
>> 07:39:19 -0500;
>>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>>> Said Les Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 17 Mar 2001 06:21:56
>>>>> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>>>> Why is it a good thing to force people to do something against
>>>>>>> their will?
>>>>>> Because it maintains freedom.
>>>>> I guess logic isn't a requirement here....
>>>> The statement is perfectly logical. The ability to handle complex
>>>> abstractions is, unfortunately, a requirement, though.
>>> It's logical to the degree that it's a circular statement. You've advanced
>>> nothing, Maxie.
>> No, it simply requires the understanding of complex abstractions, such
>> as "freedom" and "will". You've learned nothing, Austin.
>
>I've learned that you're a fool who thinks that a circular statement
>advances an argument.
Only the self-evident truth merits the claim of truth, I'm afraid.
>Oh, sorry, I learned that LAST time you made your
>foolishness apparent. I guess I'm a fool because I thought you might have
>actually learned some logic since then.
Perhaps you should address my logic, then, if it is so easily refuted,
rather than simply declaring it is "circular" and indicating you didn't
understand it to begin with?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:40:26 -0800
Coralie Naumann wrote:
>
> "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:994h97$7jv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :
> : BSOD must be computer specific.
>
> i think it is specific to machines with shared
> memory for graphics and less than 48mb ram
> overall.
>
Hmmm. I just got 5 last nite with 128 MB RAM. So where is ur
theory?
> :
> : I only ever got compleate freezzes (mouse don't move. alt ctrl del
> don't
> : work. power button don't work)
>
> Sounds like out of memory and low disk space
> so virtual memory can't work either.
Hmmmm. How come I used to get those on Windows 95 with a 4.9 GB
virtual swap file? R u honestly trying to tell me that 5 fuckin Gigs
of VM is not enuf? Are you kidding?
>
> :
> : note power button soft off. hold 5 sec's powers of fine as thats low
> level
> : hardware.
>
> If you have enough disk space then try ME
> i think you will be pleasantly surprised.
It is not that great tho it is better in some ways. For one thing, it
is a memory hog and about 10% slower. It is still based on DOS tho it
has no command line. Still lots of incompatibilities. Stay away.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:51:26 +0100
mlw wrote:
> Jon Johanson wrote:
>
>> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Andy Walker wrote:
>> >
>> > "Blue Screen of Death" has a whole new meaning.
>>
>> Fortunately that's not an issue with any properly configured system,
>> especially not a W2K system hardened for military use - silly boy...
>
> Look who is being silly. According to Microsoft's sponsored tests, by
> NSTL, Windows 2000 has a MTTF of 2839. That's 118 days. So, just before
> they enter battle, they should reboot. Or they should never be out at
> sea for more than three months. Give me a break.
Silly you - you just forgot that those 2839 hours without failure are only
achieved by turning the PC off when the users go home.
------------------------------
From: Jim Naylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yet more XBox bogification...
Date: 19 Mar 2001 21:02:22 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edwin wrote:
> >
> > Jim Naylor wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jim Naylor wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > [snip]
> > > > >
> > > > > There's no "lying" going on at all. I've seen
> > > > > protypes from other game companies. This is
> > > > > common practice.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Edwin
> > > > >
> > > > > "I have never outrightly lied on this group in
> > > > > spite of whatever you think to the contrary.
> > > > > Alright I lied. But except in the case of Macsbug
> > > > > and DONK nobody had me dead to rights. I lied. So
> > > > > sue me." -- EdWIN Thorne
> > > >
> > > > Jim Naylor once again trots out his cut-and-paste
> > > > creation. He wants to make certain no one will
> > > > ever mistake him for one who pocesses morals or
> > > > ethics.
> > >
> > > Hey EdLOOPS, what's a protype?
> >
> > Go get an education.
> >
>
> Using words you dont (and nobody else does) undestand?
> Tch, tch.
>
> > > "I have never outrightly lied on this group in spite
> > > of whatever you think to the contrary. Alright I
> > > lied. But except in the case of Macsbug and DONK
> > > nobody had me dead to rights. I lied. So sue me."
> > > -- EdWIN Thorne
> > >
> > If Jim can do it, so can I:
> >
>
> I see you are a liar again.
>
> > -- I'm a pedophile. I've been locked up for years for
> > molesting little boys, but I just can't stop. I wish
> > somebody would kill me. -- Jim Naylor
>
> You might want to ba a little careful about this quote.
> It seems very close to libel.
I know you realize that the above construction is not a
quote, Rick. But your observation is absolutely on. My first
reaction was to simply point out the absurdity of it. After
sleeping on it, however, I'm wondering if that is adequate
with this collection of personas, which behave collectively
as if they have total freedom to emerge, lie, duck down
while a new one pops out to deny, then pretend that nothing
has happened.
I'll be getting some legal advice today. Free speech does
have its limits, no matter how many "faces of EdWIN" there
are.
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I have never outrightly lied on this group in spite of whatever
you think to the contrary. Alright I lied. But except in the case
of Macsbug and DONK nobody had me dead to rights. I lied. So sue me."
-- EdWIN Thorne
------------------------------
From: Jim Naylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yet more XBox bogification...
Date: 19 Mar 2001 21:06:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Naylor wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Jim Naylor wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [snip]
> > > >
> > > > There's no "lying" going on at all. I've seen
> > > > protypes from other game companies. This is common
> > > > practice.
> > > > >
> > > > > Edwin
> > > >
> > > > "I have never outrightly lied on this group in
> > > > spite of whatever you think to the contrary.
> > > > Alright I lied. But except in the case of Macsbug
> > > > and DONK nobody had me dead to rights. I lied. So
> > > > sue me." -- EdWIN Thorne
> > >
> > > Jim Naylor once again trots out his cut-and-paste
> > > creation. He wants to make certain no one will ever
> > > mistake him for one who pocesses morals or ethics.
> >
> > Hey EdLOOPS, what's a protype?
>
> Go get an education.
I'll admit it's not complete yet (after all, I'm only in my
early 60's), but I have a fairly functional BS detector.
That's why I think you're such a gas (CH4, naturally). And
it's such fun to spork your spelling flames. Are you
annoyed yet, EdWINnies? Why don't you flame _my_ spelling
like you're so fond of doing to others? By the way, I don't
use a spell checker. Or a dictionary. And that's _not_ an
analogy, by the way.
> > "I have never outrightly lied on this group in spite of
> > whatever you think to the contrary. Alright I lied. But
> > except in the case of Macsbug and DONK nobody had me
> > dead to rights. I lied. So sue me." -- EdWIN Thorne
> >
> If Jim can do it, so can I:
>
> -- I'm a pedophile. I've been locked up for years for
> molesting little boys, but I just can't stop. I wish
> somebody would kill me. -- Jim Naylor
You're such a cute little tyke, all eight of you. Just get
in the bus here, and don't tell each other. Everything will
be all right as soon as the nice man gets the backwards
canvas jacket tied on... ;-) ;-) ;-)
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I have never outrightly lied on this group in spite of whatever
you think to the contrary. Alright I lied. But except in the case
of Macsbug and DONK nobody had me dead to rights. I lied. So sue me."
-- EdWIN Thorne
------------------------------
From: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:58:44 -0600
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
>
> As I hold a security clearance myself, I understand entirely.
>
> No "need to know"
>
What pray tell is a sys admin for Kinko Kopiers doing with a
security clearance?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
