Linux-Advocacy Digest #728, Volume #33 Fri, 20 Apr 01 12:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman (Isaac)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (WesTralia)
Re: Red Hat has become scary? (WesTralia)
Re: Anyone have any stats on how many times RedHat 7.1 is being (jtnews)
Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested! (Martigan)
Re: Windows 98 and denial ("Tim Cain")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Martigan)
Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (At150bogomips)
Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows (Brian Langenberger)
Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 (Martigan)
Re: Anyone have any stats on how many times RedHat 7.1 is being downloaded? (Brian
Langenberger)
Re: Communism
Re: Communism
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:56:23 GMT
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:19:57 GMT, Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>My interpretation of Tim Smith's comment is that he claims the RIPEM
>authors thought they could have won the lawsuit, but decided to acceded to
>the FSF's demands to be nice. I'm perfectly willing to believe this is
>true. But the RIPEM authors' belief that they would have won is as valid
>as the FSF's belief that they would have won. Both presumably had
>competent counsel telling them that they had a good case. But they
>obviously couldn't both be right, and only an actual court case can settle
>the general issue.
>
Why do you presume that either side thought they had a good case?
Perhaps that presumption is correct, but the FSF is basically stuck
with their position regardless of its strength. I'd love to hear the
legal basis in non lay terms of the FSF's position, but so far
the best arguments I've read suggest that their position is untenable.
I don't think Tim suggested that the authors were trying to be nice.
It was pretty clear that they chose a path that would avoid being sued.
Law suits are expensive even if you win, since typically in the US
you pay your own attorney fees and costs even if you successfully
defend yourself. Cloning at least parts of gmp was definitely much
less time consuming and costly than winning a law suit.
If I recall correctly the author(s) claimed that the FSF really wasn't
happy with the resolution, which further suggests that the authors were
neither acceding to the FSF's demands or being nice. I always felt
that they were instead scewering the FSF with their own sword.
Anyway none of that was what I objected to. I understand your point,
but Tim's use of the original posters word "necessary" as a soapbox
seemed silly. Almost nothing would meet Tim's definition of
necessary. Your post wasn't as silly since you were responding
to Tim.
Isaac
------------------------------
From: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:03:27 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Brent R wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I see you failed to do as I challenged. You are a liar.
> > > > >
> > > > > JJ, I hardly think that Aaron should feel compelled to go
> > > > > through an edit-make-post-edit-make cycle just to prove
> > > > > to a prick-headed little troll such as yourself that he
> > > > > can obtain and modify source code on Linux.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > Because he has never posted with anything other than a Win 98 header,
> > > > NOT EVEN ONCE! He could make one post on a non-modified *nix newsreader,
> > > > just one, and this whole thing would stop... now.
> > > >
> > > > But that's not going to happen.
> > >
> > > I described in enough detail how to modify the headers so that THREE
> > > seperate people could replicate my results.
> > >
> > > That is sufficient.
> >
> > Too bad you can't do it yourself, since your running Windows 98.
>
> On my command, JUMP!
>
> Oh, i see you didn't jump when I commanded.
> You must be a quadraplegic....right.
>
Basement boy, you were OUTED a looooog time ago - the fat lady has sang
and left.
--
------------------------------
From: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Red Hat has become scary?
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:11:11 -0500
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> <snype>
> >
> > Actually a lot of americans ask this same question... why us?
> > (policemen) The corruption is so deep and wide spread that its no
> > wonder when an american goes overseas for a vacation that we get spit
> > on. Its really sad that we have no control over them. Its like it
> > doesn't matter anymore at the voting booth.
> > --
> > V
> After seeing the elections, I would be very scared to be an American
> citizen esp. when a court car over ride the peoples will.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
If you are to continue making disparaging comments about America and her
people at least do so with correct spelling and sentence structure.
In other words, you are not exactly making New Zealand look like the
educational mecca of the world.
--
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have any stats on how many times RedHat 7.1 is being
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:13:59 GMT
I wonder how RedHat will continue to grow
and make money as broadband connections
become more widespread and everyone downloads it.
"Norman D. Megill" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Anyone have any stats on how many times
> >RedHat 7.1 is being downloaded?
>
> Don't know about the downloads but I ordered it on the web April 17 and
> it arrived (UPS 2nd day air) yesterday, April 19. Their site says "Red
> Hat Linux 7.1 products will begin shipping Monday, April 23" so I guess
> they lied. :)
>
> --Norm
------------------------------
From: Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested!
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:20:17 GMT
Donn Miller wrote:
> "Public " wrote:
>
> > lungs. The man was allegedly became irrate shortly after entering the
> > store and discovering that CompuUSA was no longer carrying the Windows
> > 98 Operating System.
>
> Are you kidding?! If Windows 98 suddenly became extinct, Mr. Military
> Man would go on a Windows-sized rampage, wiping out all Linux, FreeBSD,
> and Solaris users.
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
O.k. Pal let get one thing down right now! Mr. Military Man is not such
an ignorant, Id servant as you think!
Maybe the upper management, but DON"T accuse all military people of
praying to the Bill Ga(y)tes god.
Just cuz we work with it doesn't me we like it! Of course M$ is the only
OS company that will offer the Military all the "support" they need.
------------------------------
From: "Tim Cain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 98 and denial
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:29:37 +0100
Donn Miller wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Are there any Windows 98 addicts in here so addicted to this infectious
>drug, that they begin hallucinating that they're not really running
>Netscape on Windows 98, but some other newsreader with modified
>headers?
Dunno about that, but I switched back to 98 from Mandrake 7 yesterday
because I couldn't get my laserjet iiip working.
I was glorying in all the beautiful fonts and dancing paperclips for
about 3 hours before I saw my first BSOD.
Win98's a bit like an abusive parent who controls their offspring via a
combination
of bombardment with affection and tons of candy and cookies, interspersed
with savage beatings!
>
>And yes, sed really DOES work on binary executables. That's how I did
>it.
>
You'd have to make damn sure you replaced the string with an exact length
matching
string wouldn't you, or all the data offsets in the executable would be
screwed?
Tim.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: 20 Apr 2001 15:23:06 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert O'Dowd posted:
>Yeah, right. Few paying customers would be willing to go to
>the internet, grab a 50ish Meg file with star office, install
>the package, rewrite a document using that package, and then
>send you that file. Particularly when they are using a
>widespread package such as microsoft word, and know you can
>obtain it easily.
Don't be deliberately obtuse. Microsoft Word can save
documents in a several somewhat portable formats. What's fun is
trying to figure out which proprietary Word/.doc format to use
when your Word versions don't match.
>While I agree that going to open protocols and interfaces can be
>a good thing, the real world includes customers who don't want
>to go that route.
I don't think they don't want to. They just don't know why it's
advantagious or how to go about it.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:24:19 GMT
JS PL wrote:
> As hard as it may be to believe, even in Washington, price and quality
> have some value. When a reporter asked why her agency uses Microsoft
> products, Reno explained that her procurement policy is to "buy the best
> equipment possible at the lowest price possible to benefit the American
> taxpayers."
>
> That's quite a concession. The purpose of American anti-trust law is not
> to prop up corporations that are losing market share, but to protect
> consumers. If Windows is the "best" available operating system at the
> "lowest possible price," it's hard to see what good it does Microsoft
> customers to split the company in half.
>
>
>
The only bit I can offer is, why even arguee this point? We, intelligent
amercans, know that money runs polotics, and bill gates has plenty of it.
Any senator that gets $150K a year will gladly listen to Gates' $100k idea
of why M$ can help the military the best.
Remember when the money runs out, M$ will be in trouble, but Open Source
(OS...interesting...) will ALWAYS be there.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows
Date: 20 Apr 2001 15:25:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Langenberger posted:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roy Culley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>: PC keyboards are crap full stop. Here I am typing on my Sun type-5
>: keyboard on a PC running linux. A mate built the adapter and it
>: works like a dream. Sun keyboards are second to none IMHO simply
>: because they have that wonderful keypad on the left.
>
>Or, for $60(US), get a nice Sun Type 6 keyboard with USB:
>
>http://store.sun.com/catalog/doc/BrowsePage.jhtml?catid=32807
IBM still made a keyboard w/out the Windows keys on it a couple
of years ago when I went hunting for one. However, it turned out
to cost $54 dollars so I decided I could coexist with Microsoft
keys on my keyboard.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (At150bogomips)
Date: 20 Apr 2001 15:32:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
>If you work on something for two hours on any system and don't save it every
>few minutes you're getting your due.
>
But vim does this for you--at least in keeping temp files (and alerting you
that a temp file is present for a file one is opening).
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:36:08 +0000 (UTC)
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip!>
: IBM still made a keyboard w/out the Windows keys on it a couple
: of years ago when I went hunting for one. However, it turned out
: to cost $54 dollars so I decided I could coexist with Microsoft
: keys on my keyboard.
IBM doesn't seem to put Windows keys on any of their high-end stuff.
For instance, their T, A and X series ThinkPads have no Windows keys
on them whatsoever, whereas the i series still does (IIRC). Of course,
most of these products have other benefits besides the exclusion of
that stupid key, but its non-presence is a nice bonus.
------------------------------
From: Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:36:39 GMT
O.k. now that I have your attention,.
I have posted a few times here and there, but what amuses me is this;
Windows trolls complain about how useless, unfriendly, incomprehensable
linux is, but most linux users have used windows for an extensive amount of
time. So after all the bashing of whom has the "lazzy" os I say it is
Windows. Can you do "True" OS maintanence in the CLI? Can you get any
good documentation with windoze? At least I can type "info rm" and get a
FULL DETAILED discription of usage and envocations for the command! Have
you tryed "help fdisk" in windoze?
Argue as you will but Linux has taken my blood and I shall give my energy
to the revalotuion. Because people deserve the best! And with Millions of
beta testers how can you complain.
P.s. Ya Windoze might have better games, but why buy a $1.5K piece of
silicon to play games when you can buy a PSX2 for $300?
P.s.s. If windows is so "great" why can it be brought down with a
"dumb-ass.txt.vbs"??????
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have any stats on how many times RedHat 7.1 is being downloaded?
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:49:17 +0000 (UTC)
jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I wonder how RedHat will continue to grow
: and make money as broadband connections
: become more widespread and everyone downloads it.
Of course, RedHat's distribution will also continue to grow ;)
But seriously, just transferring the two main binary ISOs
across a 100base-T LAN and then burning them to CD took me
quite awhile - chances are simply buying the boxed set would
be just as cost-effective considering the time I spent.
So, if many simply go for the convenience route of buying the
boxed set (which, if one takes half an hour to get to the store
and buy 4 CDs of stuff, works out to about 1.5KB/sec), RedHat
should be okay.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:52:52 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> >>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> >> >>
Rob> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> >>
snip>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> what a maroon.
>> >> >>
Rob> Stop playing "More Libertarian than thou". It's unseemly.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Kulkis is not vaguely libertarian. He repeatedly calls for the
>> >> >> murder of people that disagree with him.
>> >>
Rob> When reason fails, weapons prevail. I think his trip-wire temper
Rob> works against him, but for the most part I understand the attitude.
>> >>
>> >> I do not understand advocating killing people for their beliefs.
>> >> I only understand killing in self defense. And I only consider
>> >> physical force in defending oneself or another innocent from real
>> >> harm. Ideas should be fought with other ideas. He also recently
>> >> advocated a modern version of debtor prison. He is not fond of
>> >> liberty.
>>
Rob> Self-defense in the face of rising totalitarianism is not a cut-and-dried
Rob> matter of facing down some jackbooted thug from a militia bunker; there is
Rob> the question of the initiation of violence and whether taxes taken at the
Rob> (implied) point of a gun constitutes the first strike against freedom. If
Rob> someone is merely parking their barrel-filled Ryder truck right next to
Rob> your car in a parking lot, how long do you wait before taking defensive
Rob> action, even to the point of 'violating' their right of personal property
Rob> by opening up the back of the truck to disarm the bomb?
>>
Rob> I think the same holds true regarding the subversion of the Constitution
Rob> and individual liberties in America, and the question of when to act and
Rob> what actions to take in response to that very real threat deserves some
Rob> thoughtful consideration, though I have always held to the notion that
Rob> every rational response must be exhausted before taking the next step.
>>
>> Yes, and advocating shooting people because they are democrats
>> does not qualify. Ever.
Aaron> Wrong. I advocate taking a VOTE on whether democrats should be shot,
Aaron> according to Democrat ideals (will of the majority = final decision).
In the past you have advocated shooting people just for being
democrats.
Do you deny this?
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.liberalism,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:55:21 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> Rob Robertson wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> > >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> >
>> > Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> > >>
>> > Rob> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > >>
>> > snip>
>> > >>
>> > >> >> what a maroon.
>> > >>
>> > Rob> Stop playing "More Libertarian than thou". It's unseemly.
>> > >>
>> > >> Kulkis is not vaguely libertarian. He repeatedly calls for the
>> > >> murder of people that disagree with him.
>> >
>> > Rob> When reason fails, weapons prevail. I think his trip-wire temper
>> > Rob> works against him, but for the most part I understand the attitude.
>> >
>> > I do not understand advocating killing people for their beliefs.
>> > I only understand killing in self defense. And I only consider
>> > physical force in defending oneself or another innocent from real
>> > harm. Ideas should be fought with other ideas. He also recently
>> > advocated a modern version of debtor prison. He is not fond of
>> > liberty.
>>
>> Self-defense in the face of rising totalitarianism is not a cut-and-dried
>> matter of facing down some jackbooted thug from a militia bunker; there is
>> the question of the initiation of violence and whether taxes taken at the
>> (implied) point of a gun constitutes the first strike against freedom. If
>> someone is merely parking their barrel-filled Ryder truck right next to
>> your car in a parking lot, how long do you wait before taking defensive
>> action, even to the point of 'violating' their right of personal property
>> by opening up the back of the truck to disarm the bomb?
>>
>> I think the same holds true regarding the subversion of the Constitution
>> and individual liberties in America, and the question of when to act and
>> what actions to take in response to that very real threat deserves some
>> thoughtful consideration, though I have always held to the notion that
>> every rational response must be exhausted before taking the next step.
>>
>> > >> He is also deeply dishonest, stooping to forgery (of his own words
>> > >> no less) to cover up his own disability to read his own words.
>> >
>> > Rob> What did he forge?
>> >
>> > http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > http://groups.google.com/groups?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > Check the progression of his question to me in the thread. He later
>> > claimed that I was the one that had forged the post, but that would
>> > make no sense, as the forgery just covered up his own stupidity in
>> > not having read his own words carefully.
>>
>> It boils down to this;
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Aaron> You know...name some Communist-style government policies that
>> > Aaron> you disagree with.
>> > >>
>> > >> Can't think of any in the real world.
>> >
>> > Aaron> then you're a Communist.
>> >
>> > Because I do not agree with any of their policies?
>>
>> You just said that you can't think of any that you do disagree with.
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> His original statement read "name some Communist-style government
>> policies that you AGREE with" [emph. mine] and it does appear that
>> he changed it to "disagree" after he realized that you weren't
>> saying what he'd thought you said.
>>
>> What's the deal with the forgery, Kulkis?
Aaron> Hall changed disagree to agree
There you have it Mr. Robertson, a point blank lie from
Mr. Kulkis. Note that even if I were as dishonest as Mr.
Kulkis, I would have had no motive to forge his words, as
he was the only one to benefit from the forgery (it covered
up his stupid inability to read his own words).
I consider my point proven.
Kulkis is a liar.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:57:18 GMT
>>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
snip>
Rob> I think you're off-base on this.
>>
>> Perhaps in this case. Do you want me to dig up some of his
>> many calls for killing on the basis of political views?
>>
>> How about his version of debtor prisons?
Rob> No, that's alright.
Rob> I think I've seen (and <ahem> NOT seen) enough.
I did not think it would take you long to see it, once
given a small pointer.
Did you see his lie about the forgery? (One he made several
times in the past, thinking we would be too stupid to notice
that only he had any motive to do the forgery).
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who votes for Sliverdick to be executed: AYEs:3 NAYS:0 (1 ABSTAIN)
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:00:17 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>>>> Rob Robertson writes:
>> >>
Rob> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>> >> >>
Aaron> Rob Robertson wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Rob Robertson wrote:
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > Henry Glenworthy wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > "Rob Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > "Let's take a nice, Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon style
pure-democratic
>> >> >> >> > > > > vote:
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > All for putting Glen "Sliverdick" Yeadon up against the wall,
and
>> >> >> >> > > > > filling him full of lead, say "AYE!" All opposed, say "NAY"
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now."
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > AYES:3
>> >> >> >> > > > > > NAYS:0
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > ABSTAIN:1
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > An example of the dangers of pure democracy is all well and
good,
>> >> >> >> > > > > but I reject pure democracy even if Glen advocates it and
wouldn't
>> >> >> >> > > > > vote either way on the matter; there is no moral justification
for
>> >> >> >> > > > > the action or the mass decision behind it.
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > >>>>
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > What!? You don't believe in "one person - one vote", even if
>> >> >> >> > > > the result is the trampling of individual rights? Tsk, tsk.
Shouldn't
>> >> >> >> > > > the easily swayed, fickle general public get to determine the fate
>> >> >> >> > > > of minorities it has suddenly grown to dislike? Shouldn't people
>> >> >> >> > > > who drive while using a cell phone and drinking their Starbuck's
>> >> >> >> > > > latte be shot on the spot?
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > Heavens, no! That's just,... it's immoral, first of all, and
entirely
>> >> >> >> > > incommensurate with the actual crime. What if we just firehosed
them,
>> >> >> >> > > instead?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Should not the murderer be subjected to the loss of his own life?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Therefore, someone (like Sliverdick) who advocates democracy (mob
rule),
>> >> >> >> > should be subjected to mob rule.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I agree completely that Glen should be responsible for his actions, but
>> >> >> >> I wanted to point out that since *I* don't believe in mob rule and view
>> >> >> >> it as an abdication of moral responsibility, I'm not voting 'aye' -- I'm
>> >> >> >> not voting at all on the question.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
Aaron> I think Sliverdick should be made to serve as an example to all others
Aaron> who believe in his idiotic shit.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yes, by mocking his views and exposing his lies.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Killing him for his ideas, as you advocate, is the
>> >> >> act of a totalitarian, which you have often shown
>> >> >> signs of.
>> >>
Rob> Aaron is not advocating killing Yeadon *directly* for his
Rob> ideas, Andrew; he's putting Glen in a position of evaluating
Rob> a system (pure democracy) that rejects inherent individual
Rob> rights and uphold political, mass-derived rights. If Glen
>> >>
>> >> That was your idea, and not one I believe Mr. Kulkis smart enough
>> >> to think up on his own. He has repeatedly called for the killing
>> >> of people for their political beliefs, and I think that is exactly
>> >> what he had in mind when he started this.
>>
Rob> It's right up there at the top of the post, Andrew. Kulkis suggested
Rob> a vote and said "Let's see how much Sliverdick likes democracy now."
>>
Rob> I think you're off-base on this.
>>
>> Perhaps in this case. Do you want me to dig up some of his
>> many calls for killing on the basis of political views?
>>
>> How about his version of debtor prisons?
Aaron> If you owe a lot of people money, and are unwilling to make good on your
Aaron> debt, then what's wrong with society putting you to work in an environment
Aaron> where you can (a) work, and (b) be shielded from wasteful purchasing
Aaron> decisions (like drugs and alcohol).
It can easily turn into a life sentence of slavery for
fucking up financially. Criminal charges should be brought
for fraud, hidden assets should be seized to pay the debt,
beyond that, bankruptcy and the associated poor credit should
be the max penalty.
It is a freedom thing, lying cowardly, forging, totalitarian
types like you would not understand.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
