Linux-Advocacy Digest #785, Volume #34 Sat, 26 May 01 04:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: ease and convenience (Terry Porter)
Re: The nature of competition (Terry Porter)
Re: Aaron paints himself into a corner. Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian
turdboy's crack pipe ("jet")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Which three Linux distros would you install ? Why? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Jet proves once again that she still loathes men. ("jet")
Re: Jet proves once again that she still loathes men. ("jet")
Re: Aaron paints himself into a corner. Re: aaron kulkis steals his ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: A new concept for our friends in misc.fitness.weights: SexualMarketValue
(SMV) ("Public " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 26 May 2001 07:35:52 GMT
On Sat, 26 May 2001 05:56:46 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thought I'd try a new newsreader tonight. Would this be easier on
> Windows or Linux?
>
> (Debian) Linux:
> 1) launch a shell
> 2) apt-get install knode
> 3) knode&
>
> Windows:
> 1) fire up a web browser
> 2) navigate to the newsreader company's website
<snip 3-13 valid Windos neccessities>
>
> I could have gone a lot further overboard with this and maybe thrown
> in a reboot; this comparison isn't an exaggeration. Commercial
> software will always be a hassle because its purpose is not to serve
> your needs, but those of some business.
>
Well said mmnnoo, Linux is just too easy to use.
This is one of the reasons I use it, and not the complete opposite
as the current crop of Wintrolls, would have readers believe.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 26 May 2001 07:42:50 GMT
On Fri, 25 May 2001 14:05:20 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry does. He keeps talking about 1995 like it was yesterday.
It's 1997 I refer to, Wintroll.
And gee, it *does* seem like yesterday to me :)
On the other hand, you have conviently forgotten that I get to fix Win98
problems *everyday* these days, as my wife has a Win98 pc.
Just yesterday, she had to power down twice because a friend sent her approx
7megs of email with MPEG attachments, and her machine slowed to a crawl.
Thank you 'Outhouse Distress' ;-)
I fixed it by d\l her mail to my pc, which naturally couldnt have cared
less about 7 megs of attachments because I run Linux.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Aaron paints himself into a corner. Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother
ian turdboy's crack pipe
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:46:51 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jet wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > enialle wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 25 May 2001 15:39:16 -0700, "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >He loves to rag on me for being "old". So, I ask him what he will
do
> > when
> > > > >his mail order bride turns 40. He never replies, he's painted
himself
> > into a
> > > > >corner.
> > > >
> > > > exactly. that means he must think brenduh is a loser what with
> > > > children and over 40.
> > >
> > > Not a loser...just not qualified for a man of my age and wealth.
> >
> > LOL! Give me a second, I have to wipe off my computer screen.
> >
> > So, what you gonna do when your GCW turns 40?
>
> 40-year old women are QUITE acceptable if you are celebrating your
> 20th anniverssary together.
What about her saaaaaaaggggy tits? They don't sag any less because you are
married and have kids. LOL.
>
> Hope that helps, losette.
Took you long enough to come up with your lame answer.
J
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:15 GMT
Said Rick in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 25 May 2001 22:26:41 -0400;
>Daniel Johnson wrote:
[...]
>> Yes; it was just a file manager, just like
>> the Mac's Finder.
>
>"Just a file manager?" Sure.
Calling the Finder "just a file manager" does certainly make your point
against Daniel, Rick. No, Daniel, the Finder was not "just" a file
manager. Besides being "just" a special new thing never available
before, which I'll dub a *program manager*, in retrospect (though the
Finder was truly more of a file manager than what we think of today as a
program manager, which is more similar now to the CDE desktop than
anything else), the Finder relied heavily on the Macintosh toolbox.
Declaring all desktops equally limited is not very supportive of your
case, Daniel.
The Finder was not just a 'file manager' for MacOS. It was a paradigm,
which Bill Gates immediately and noticeably tried to copy.
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:16 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:08:06
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >> 'All' companies want me to buy their products. Any attempt to forestall
>> >> competition or engross the market is illegal monopolization. The only
>> >> available "tying me to them in some way" is providing competitive
>> >> merits, or a lower price, in order to entice me to so tie myself to
>> >> their brand in order to enjoy the benefits of their product.
>> >
>> >You said it.
>>
>> Obviously. What's your point? Eager to misinterpret it, but unable to
>> figure out how? You may have skipped over the fact that MS has not
>> offered lower prices, or other competitive merits, but only the
>> aforementioned illegal monopolization.
>
>If your intention is to twist everything to your favourite little dogma,
>then you appear to be succeeding again.
And, again, I'll calmly point out that I have no dogma, but only
reasoned opinions. The fact that you can't refute them at all does not
make them "dogma", it makes them 'correct'.
>> But I didn't say that. The federal judge said that last part.
>
>What a federal judge is immaterial if the case falls apart in the end.
You are entirely mistaken. Precisely what he said becomes all the more
important if he is overturned on appeal, since we must consider where he
went astray.
>> >Entanglement implies I'm trapped. Yet I don't feel as such. I moved from
>> >one area into Windows, I can just as easily move out again.
>>
>> If I had meant "trapped", I'd have said 'trapped'. "Entanglement"
>> implies, I think, cluelessness more than anything else, considering the
>> context is 'being a sock puppet for a criminal monopoly'. Cluelessness
>> or dishonesty, rather.
>
>Twisting it all again doesn't make it any truer.
Denying it doesn't make it false, either.
>> >From "can" to "does not" to "won't". If that isn't a clear example of how
>> >you're twisting words, I don't know what else is.
>>
>> Then apparently you don't know what is. I was pointing out that you
>> used "can" dishonestly, or mistakenly. Your response seems a clear
>> indication of which it was, but I'll leave that for the reason of others
>> to judge.
>
>Oh, I do know what it is. I'm just amused by your twisty way of taking
>what I said and cleverly twisting it to say the exact opposite.
That's the third time you've said "twist", in the same post. What is it
you're trying to say, other than an admission you have run aground in
defending illegal and unethical behavior?
And why on earth does that seem abhorrent to you?
>> >Are you in politics?
>>
>> I am in your face.
>
>And doing a pretty piss poor job of it, I might say.
Oh, yea. ;-)
>> >Your deductions are ludicrous. Besides which there is enough evidence out
>> >there to indicate that the company I work for are very highly regarded.
>>
>> So's Microsoft, according to you. Guffaw.
>
>Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
<*Spank*>
>Wake me when you have something useful to contribute other than the
>rhetoric and hot air you've been blowing lately.
Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:17 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:13:47
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >I see a supercomputer, I call it as such. I see nothing wrong there.
>>
>> Oh, puh-leeze. Just how is it you've "seen" this metaphorical
>> "supercomputer" that is really just the SETI software doing loosely
>> coupled distributed processing on millions of *separate* computers? In
>> your minds eye, you insist it is a supercomputer, because only then can
>> your stupid and pathetic claim that Windows can compete with Linux make
>> any sense at all.
>
>Because it is a supercomputer.
Yea, right, sure....
>> You see the word "supercomputer", and you believe it as such. There is,
>> indeed, something wrong in being so gullible or mistaken. The term was
>> used metaphorically, and everyone knows it, but only you wouldn't be
>> able to admit it.
>
>Yawn, because it is one?
No, it is not "one". It is 'something like'.
>> You see what kind of knots you have to tie your reason into in order to
>> maintain a conversation once you start being dishonest?
>
>I'm not being dishonest, or mistaken or gullible
Yea, right. Guffaw.
A loosely-coupled system for computing massive problems using
distributed processing is *not*, by definition, a "supercomputer", Pete.
Deal with it.
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:18 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:08:56
>In article <9egrdu$lfa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> > Fine, quote one.
>>
>> I can't be bothered. I know you snipped my posts in your responses to
>> alter what I meant. I pointed it out at the time and gave showed where
>> you did it. I don't have time to repeat this process.
>
>In other words, they do not exist. I thought so, more of your lies.
IOW, you've not given reason enough to believe you're anything but a
child with a senseless point. Try to describe your position coherently,
Pete, and perhaps intelligent people will deign to address it.
If you just want to troll, you get ME.
NOW what are you going to do?
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:19 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:03:05
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >Got any examples of that?
>>
>> Oh, that's precious. LOL!
>
>The fact that none have been posted is what I find "precious". As for you
>post, about the level of noise I'd expect from you.
None what?
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:34 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:25:17
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >Device drivers on Linux are written in C?
>> >
>> >Device drivers on Windows are written in C++ and make use of COM. Which
>> >one is more technologically advanced?
>>
>> I think it's pretty clear how far you are willing to go to miss the
>> point. What gave you the impression that the language used, and
>> reliance on a proprietary single-source API, has anything to do with how
>> advanced the actual technology of an OS is?
>
>So you're saying that C is technologically more advanced than C++?
No, I'm saying (and it is quite clear to anyone besides yourself, I'd
venture) that the language used is not a cogent definition of
technological advancement. In fact, I would point out that it is quite
beside the point, for the meaning of 'technological advancement' which
rightfully belongs in the context I defined by my statements.
>Here you go again, twisting everything to fit your dogma - your favourite
>topic.
<*Yawn*>
>> >Yes, how about an example, instead of a statement?
>>
>> Linux is peer reviewed, and thus demonstrates the engineering
>> community's consensus for adequately and correctly incorporating the
>> most sound and advanced software technologies.
>
>"Peer reviewed"... 8)
>
>It only works if everything is carefully examined and the results
>reported. Just everyone taking a look see at the code is not enough.
What the hell are you talking about? Yes, everyone "taking a look see"
is "peer review", given the latitude in stupidity which your appearance
in the discussion requires.
>There are problems in Linux install for various distros. Yet if this
>"peer review" process you mention was working, these problems ought to
>disappear.
You confuse competitive development with peer review. Understandable,
under the circumstances, but still so stupid an error that it seems
likely you are being dishonest in committing it.
>Why is it that a Linux upgrade rarely works and is not recommended? How
>did that one escape the "peer review" process you are putting such stock
>in?
Please make you statement comprehensible, and I will be glad to discuss
it. The statement "a Linux upgrade rarely works and is not recommended"
makes no sense, as it is false.
>How is that Samba eventually locks everyone out and has to be restarted
>for it to work? Didn't the "peer review" process catch this one?
This is at least more comprehensible. You seem to be referring to a
specific bug in Samba. Any difficulties getting Samba to work well can
be traced to Microsoft, since it is their piece-of-shit badly-documented
protocol, and if they didn't use it anti-competitively, it wouldn't have
the kind of stupid-ass problems it does.
>> Windows is just monopoly crapware.
>
>That's just your dogma.
No, it is the reality of the marketplace, the "real world", and the
verdict of a federal prosecution. Get it?
>In your posts you quote the following:
>"*** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***"
>How is it that you are singularly unable (or unwilling?) to do the above?
Why is it that it is so difficult for others to recognize what criteria
is described?
>How is Windows monopoly crapware?
How is it not? It seems a reasonable and accurate claim, given that it
has 95%+ market share and is widely recognized as being almost
god-forsaken in how difficult it can be. Don't you think?
[...]
>I don't rate gcc are a leading edge development tool unless it has an IDE
>and the whole kit and kaboodle.
I don't care.
>As for advanced kernel design, I thought the idea of having to do a
>kernel rebuild was rather old fashioned now, yet it's still there in
>Linux.
Just goes to show how wrong you can be. A kernel rebuild is actually a
pretty trivial process, when you aren't dealing with proprietary
bullshit and monopoly crapware.
[..]
>> Try some that aren't just brand names, and I might be impressed. Yes,
>> much of what commercial hacks crank out is entirely silly; real
>> advancement comes from the academic and scientific worlds.
>
>And where did you think our company came from? Sensaura is part of
>Scipher. Scipher is also known as "CRL". Central Research Labs of EMI,
>before EMI decided it wanted to focus on music and not research.
Did I mention how brand names are kind of useless in the modern era of
PC software?
>We base our technology on science. Go take a look at the white papers on
>our web site and see the level of science there, before you open your
>mouth and stick your size twelves in it.
Don't blame me for the inability of the market to distinguish efficient
design from senseless marketing. That's the result of monopoly
crapware. You can't deal with it until you learn to recognize it.
--
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]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:37 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 06:26:37
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >> No; that is my conjecture. I have no dogma, Pete.
>> >
>> >Oh yes you do! You regularly inject "monopoly crapware" into your posts,
>> >frequently out of context to the topic.
>>
>> Are you at all familiar with the definition of the term 'dogma'.
>> Perhaps you should look it up in the dictionary. It doesn't mean
>> "repetition".
>
>I've already quoted a definition of dogma to you from a dictionary. I
>remember you had the definition wrong then.
I must have missed the post, as ludicrous as that sounds, because I
frankly don't know what you're talking about. Perhaps this was several
months ago, and you simply posted a definition which was soon shown to
be flawed. I don't generally remember flawed arguments which I've
already refuted; it is a character flaw.
You could refresh my memory, but it will probably just result in a
spanking. If you feel up to getting yet-another spanking, you might
want to repost it, though.
I really wish there were a "[...]" to end this post, but Pete has only
made one shallow, tepid statement. Given that, I'll end with some
rhetorical ridicule:
"No, Pete, 'dogma' doesn't mean 'repetition, like I said. It doesn't
mean 'vague references to repetition', either, but that's beside the
point."
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:38 GMT
Said Mark Fergerson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[...]
>> > What wavelength(s)? In what medium? If he thinks it was any part of
>> >the usual broadcast bands in air, I'll offer a categorical "bullshit"
>> >right now. Otherwise I want a citation to examine. Something at an
>> >official National Bureau of Standards website will do nicely.
>>
>> IIRC, they were radio frequency in a waveguide.
>
> There's the catch.
'Tis not a 'catch'.
>Waveguides are weird beasts; there's phase
>velocity (always faster than c in vacuum) and group velocity (always
>slower than c in vacuum). Combine them as in the Pythagorean theorem
>and they always add up to c.[...]
Indeed, it is quite possible to hypothesize what error might have
resulted in GreyCloud's statements. Yet failure to determine precisely
what error it might be is begging the question. Just because your math
adds up does not prove that the DOD experiments mentions are invalid.
Get it?
--
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: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Which three Linux distros would you install ? Why?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 07:50:39 GMT
Said mmnnoo in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 26 May 2001 03:34:45 GMT;
>[...]I wouldn't see any point in using different
>distributions concurrently; all offer the same software, so why not just
>pick the single one that has the best package management (or the one with
>the most pretty GUI configuration tools, or whatever is important to
>you?)[...]
This makes the point clear; why NOT use different distros, if they all
support the same software? What if there is no 'single one'? What if
you want a pretty GUI on one, and configuration tools on another, and
development tools on yet another?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Jet proves once again that she still loathes men.
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:50:20 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jet wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > jet wrote:
> > > >
> > > > He loves to rag on me for being "old". So, I ask him what he will do
> > when
> > > > his mail order bride turns 40. He never replies, he's painted
himself
> > into a
> > > > corner.
> > >
> > > Taking a forty year old woman to dinner to get to know her
is...pointless.
> > >
> >
> > I know those who would disagree with you...
> ^^^^^
>
> Desperate 45-year old hags like yourself.
LOL. First, I'm not 40. Second, now that I called you on the 40 year old
thing, you up the age to 45. Remember, your GCW will be 45 as well one
day...what do you plan to do then? Hope she dies because of her bum kidneys
before then? Would you get a refund?
J
------------------------------
From: "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Jet proves once again that she still loathes men.
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:57:08 -0700
As if your first reply wasn't dumb enough, you have to reply to this message
again!
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jet wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > jet wrote:
> > > >
> > > > He loves to rag on me for being "old". So, I ask him what he will do
> > when
> > > > his mail order bride turns 40. He never replies, he's painted
himself
> > into a
> > > > corner.
> > >
> > > Taking a forty year old woman to dinner to get to know her
is...pointless.
> > >
> >
> > I know those who would disagree with you...
> >
> > > Taking a forty year old woman to dinner for your 20th anniversary
> > > is a reward.
> >
> > Dang, took you long enough to come up with that lame reply.
> >
> > So, you admit being 40 is no big deal
>
> it is if you're STARTING a relationship....after the woman has
> given her best years to some other guy.
>
> ...but no big deal if she gave her best years to you.
IOW, you think your GCW will be not as good when she gets to 40. Are you
going to tell her this?
>
> Hope that helps, man-loathing beast.
What have I said that indicates I loath men? You, yeah.
J
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Aaron paints himself into a corner. Re: aaron kulkis steals his
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 03:59:25 -0400
jet wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > jet wrote:
> > >
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > enialle wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, 25 May 2001 15:39:16 -0700, "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >He loves to rag on me for being "old". So, I ask him what he will
> do
> > > when
> > > > > >his mail order bride turns 40. He never replies, he's painted
> himself
> > > into a
> > > > > >corner.
> > > > >
> > > > > exactly. that means he must think brenduh is a loser what with
> > > > > children and over 40.
> > > >
> > > > Not a loser...just not qualified for a man of my age and wealth.
> > >
> > > LOL! Give me a second, I have to wipe off my computer screen.
> > >
> > > So, what you gonna do when your GCW turns 40?
> >
> > 40-year old women are QUITE acceptable if you are celebrating your
> > 20th anniverssary together.
>
> What about her saaaaaaaggggy tits? They don't sag any less because you are
> married and have kids. LOL.
>
> >
> > Hope that helps, losette.
>
> Took you long enough to come up with your lame answer.
>
> J
IF you think I read your drivel every day...you're insane.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 02:11:41 -0500
From: "Public <Anonymous_Account>" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A new concept for our friends in misc.fitness.weights:
SexualMarketValue (SMV)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.jackie-tokeman,soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
lee harvey oddball wrote:
>> > When my girlfriend pointed out that I was about 5 pounds overweight,
>> > I took action immediately.... because I have confidence in my abilities.
>> > And I solved the problem in 8 weeks.
>> >
>> >
>> > I didn't wait until I was 130 pounds and 10 sized too large.
>> >
>> >
>> It took you 8 weeks to lose 5 lbs?
>
>I wasn't in a race.
not the human one, at least.
>Hope that helps.
brenda tells me she was swapping cuntspit with irina while you were trying
to lose all that flab.
irina was so glad to have your atm card when her batteries ran low.
of course brenda amidala sweetheart cares about you long time
she told irina to use a double headed dong instead of running you to the
poorhouse with her duracell habit.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
