Linux-Advocacy Digest #61, Volume #35 Fri, 8 Jun 01 17:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why should an OS cost money? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why should an OS cost money? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why should an OS cost money? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (flatfish+++)
Re: Here's a switch for a change (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Laura M. Hagan")
Re: Here's a switch for a change ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Laura M. Hagan")
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (.)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (Ray Fischer)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (sunbird)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (Chris Belway)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:42:21 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 07 Jun 2001
>"Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:rHQT6.62133$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:v%vT6.6328$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>[snip]
>> > This I find quite surprising. As I understand it *only* Microsoft's
>> > Java compiler and VM can use WFC, because only they support
>> > MS's "delegates" feature, upon which WFC depends rather
>> > heavily.
>>
>> That is only because Symantec's Java machine (which Netscape licenses) for
>> some strange reason does *not* support the WFC delegates feature (even
>> though Symantec could have done so, as they are one of WFC's creators).
>
>This seems rather weird to me. If Symatec thought
>highly enough of delegates to build WFC on them,
>why not support them in their own JVM?
>
>Perhaps MS insisted.
That does seem likely, given the circumstances. Supporting WFC for Java
and Netscape would threaten the application barrier used to maintain the
OS monopoly.
[...]
>> I'm not saying that it would have been prohibitively difficult; I'm simply
>> saying it wouldn't have made smart business sense. Also, there was
>already
>> a hue and cry (largely from IBM) about Microsoft's development tools being
>> Windows-only (at the time this was going on, Windows 95 was in
>development,
>> and if you were talking about 32-bit Windows, you were referring to NT).
>
>That seems a rather strange thing for IBM to cry about. Why
>should anyone expect Microsoft to product development
>tools for other platforms?
To make money? If they're supposed to be so good at making tools, why
would they want to avoid turning a profit wherever they can?
[...]
>> Microsoft was also sensible enough to realize that some developers didn't
>> want any part of Microsoft development tools for reasons having nothing to
>> do with their quality (or perceived lack of it). Microsoft concentrated
>> mostly on the higher-order languages (C++, Cobol. Fortran, etc.).
>
>I am having difficulty thinking of a development tools
>vendor that does not do that. Though most don't promote
>BASIC. :D
IOW, whether you, Dan, or Christopher, is more full of shit is kind of
an academic question? :-D
>> It took
>> Windows 95 for Microsoft to release Visual Basic upon an unsuspecting
>> planet.
>
>I'm sure there were 16-bit versions of VB. Didn't
>they predate 1995?
Visual Basic? Hell no. Word had a macro language called WordBasic, but
even that wasn't any 'version of VB'.
>I was under the impression that OCX controls
>were an effort to 'clean up' VBX controls and make
>them language-neutral and 32-bit compatible.
Well, if so, it failed pretty badly. OCX controls don't seem much
better than VBX controls. The whole thing was probably just more churn
to keep anyone from being able to compete on Windows. :-D
>[snip]
>> > Yes, but MS can handle the development tool end of it
>> > *themselves*. They cannot handle more than a small fraction
>> > of the applications.
>>
>> True, they *could* handle it all themselves. They now have development
>> tools *across* the spectrum of tool users (newbies to enterprise). But
>why
>> *do* it alone if you don't have to?
>
>Mostly to keep all the goodies on your own platform,
>I should think.
That makes no sense. It is only a successful gambit if you have "your
own platform". IOW, if you are monopolizing. MS owns their code, not
"the platform".
>Obviously, MS didn't think that important enough
>to keep MFC and WFC to themselves.
No, they thought it would maintain their illegal monopoly; the only
reason they need to do anything. All the other motivations you guys
give them are senseless flights of fancy. Why attribute to malice
(competitive aggression) what can be adequately explained by stupidity
(ignorance of the law)?
>But farming things out to others has its drawbacks,
>for a platform vendor.
Calling MS a platform vendor is like calling Firestone a car dealer.
>[snip]
>> > > Even the Justice Department knows it.
>> >
>> > I wonder. The whole "application
>> > barrier to entry" argument suggests that
>> > they don't know it; they seem to think that
>> > running Windows apps in a compatibility
>> > box would somehow make an OS
>> > competitive.
>> Merely looking at OS/2 should disabuse Justice of that notion.
>
>I'd have thought so.
A clear indication of the typical value of your opinion on matters of OS
competition, I'm afraid. Certain proof that you don't get it to begin
with.
--
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
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:42:25 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 7 Jun 2001 23:02:03
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:36:03 GMT, Christopher L. Estep
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Star Office? (Max, it's available for Windows (and it's still free), but
>> >can't compare feature-wise to Office 97, let alone either 2000 *or* the
>> >just-released XP.)
>>
>> Name a feature that it lacks compared to Office 97.
>
>Can you embed a spreadsheet application within a word processing document
>all within a slide show presentation? Clicking on any section allows full
>power editing of that item within the native app.
When it doesn't crash the system, that is. You gotta be *real* careful,
don't do anything too big, and NEVER double-embed, as you suggested, or
you're fucked. Just goes to show you what happens when you start making
stuff up about 'within the native app', as if it were any different than
a poorly implemented launch mechanism.
Microsoft's engineering just *sucks* so much, it is unbelievable. So
much so that it isn't even any *more* unbelievable that sock puppets try
to pretend it "just works".
--
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: Why should an OS cost money?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:42:29 GMT
Said Stuart Fox in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 1 Jun 2001 07:51:33
>"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Donn Miller wrote:
>>
>> >mlw wrote:
>> >>
>> >> If one thinks about the history of man, and the nature of invention,
>> >> one must ask themselves why an OS costs any money.
>> >
>> >Tech support and media costs.
>>
>> Tech support does and should cost money, so does media. However, the
>> question is why should an *OS* cost money? You can get an OS without
>> incurring media or tech support costs. They are three seperate things.
>
>Why should a corporation give away the time they've spent developing their
>OS for free?
So that people will pay them money and they can make a profit.
>Developing an OS takes time, lots of of it, and that time
>needs to be paid for.
Selling support contracts, CDs, even just books, is more than sufficient
to make developing an OS cost-effective. Developing an OS only takes
time the first time, and, no, it doesn't really take that much. Linux
advocates did it as a hobby, for example.
>Whether you've got sponsors paying for it (ala
>Redhat, VA et al), or you just your free time, or you work for an employer.
Regardless, making money developing an OS as a programmer is not the
same situation as making money developing an OS as a software vendor.
Sure, it is possible for a single programmer to act as a vendor, or for
a vendor to rely on a single programmer. But in the real world, that
isn't the issue, and so your constant flipping back and forth from the
situation for one and the situation for the other without any honesty or
integrity is really making you look dumb.
>When you have sponsors willing to pay for it and make a loss, and people
>willing to work on their own time, then you can give your OS away.
Or, if you've already made the money back developing it (which was years
ago for all MS products) you can sell it more cheaply in order to remain
competitive. Unlike monopolizing, this is a legal method of making
money.
>If you
>are expecting to make a return on your development effort, then you need to
>recover your costs (and hopefully for your sharedholders turn a profit).
If you cannot make that return selling at market rates and competing
fairly, then believe it or not it is illegal. Business models which
rely on first clearing out the competition before you can make a profit
are clearly in violation of federal law. Again, this is a "believe it
or not" situation. You have to be able to recover your costs *without*
monopolizing, merely competing equally on the merits with all other
alternatives, most of which will be selected by most consumers. This is
why, for instance, as little market share as 40% is legal proof of
monopolization, unless some competitive justification for the business
strategy can be demonstrated in court.
--
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: Why should an OS cost money?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:42:32 GMT
Said Joe Ogiba in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 03 Jun 2001 01:04:46
>"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> > "Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Stuart Fox wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > >> If one thinks about the history of man, and the nature of
>invention,
>> > > >> one
>> > > >must
>> > > >> ask themselves why an OS costs any money.
>> > > >>
>> > > >Wrong question, the real question is why shouldn't an OS cost money?
>> > > >
>> > > >An OS should cost money, because it is derived from effort, which
>most
>> > > >humans expect to be paid for. Total up the amount of time that Linux
>> > > >has taken to develop, and then try and recover that cost. Linux of
>> > > >course is a special example, as it is allegedly developed by people
>on
>> > > >their "free" time. Of course, this doesn't include people who are
>paid
>> > > >to develop it (Linus by Transmeta, Alan Cox by Redhat). I don't see
>too
>> Hmm... isn't Linus paid by Transmeta for doing something totally
>> different?
>> > > >many Linux companies actually making money - because they can't
>recover
>> > > >the costs of their effort.
>> OK, I will pay a rational price for software, a price that this software
>> is worth.
>> Paying $250 for a CD and a booklet (Win9x) or $700 for an office-suite
>> is not
>> priceworthy, if you ask me. I really don't want to take my month of work
>> and buy
>> software with it, when I can have all that and even more for about 10%.
>>
>> [Snipped]
>Who the hell pays $250 for Win 9x and $700 for MS Office ?
Whoever buys them retail. There *must* be people who do, or else why
would MS sell them, and why would the retail price be listed to begin
with?
>I paid $125 for
>Windows 2000 Server
You got ripped off.
>and $99 for Office 2000 Premium w/ Frontpage 2000 and
>PhotoDraw 2000 a year and a half ago.
Not a bad bundle. Too bad it is all monopoly crapware; shoddy goods are
shoddy goods, even at an attractive price.
--
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: Why should an OS cost money?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:42:34 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 3 Jun 2001 04:12:25
>"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> OK, I will pay a rational price for software, a price that this software
>> is worth.
>> Paying $250 for a CD and a booklet (Win9x) or $700 for an office-suite
>> is not
>> priceworthy, if you ask me. I really don't want to take my month of work
>> and buy
>> software with it, when I can have all that and even more for about 10%.
>
>I can get Win2K for $129
Where and how?
>I'm quite certain that I can get a decent price cut on Office as well.
Are you allowed to resell them? Hell, are you actually getting a
license as with the full price?
>I agree with you on the high prices, though.
The difference between shoddy goods and high prices is really kind of
relative. That's why all of it's just "monopoly crapware", and that is
all that need be said, as far as I am concerned.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:49:19 GMT
In article <3b212110$0$94312$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers says...
>
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED] dripot> wrote in message
>news:CP8U6.1221$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What's the skinny ?
>
>What software are they running for what?
>
Haven't heard about the fiasco today ?
I'm talking about what they use for managing trades.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 14:51:05 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3%9U6.1335$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <3b212110$0$94312$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers
says...
> >
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] dripot> wrote in message
> >news:CP8U6.1221$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> What's the skinny ?
> >
> >What software are they running for what?
> >
>
> Haven't heard about the fiasco today ?
>
> I'm talking about what they use for managing trades.
Well, their web site runs under AIX, so one would assume that they're
probably a big IBM shop, and are probably running trades under AIX and/or
OS/390.
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 19:57:50 GMT
On 8 Jun 2001 18:54:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 8 Jun 2001 16:21:34 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>
>>>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>I think it's more to do with the quality of lager in pubs around here - I
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lager? I thought you were talking about BEER, not that watery piss!
>>>>>
>>>>>What do you prefer?
>>>
>>>> BITTER.
>>>
>>>What *kind* of bitter, you simpleton.
>
>> Any.
>
>heineken?
Too sweet and gives a nasty headache if I drink too much, especially
if it's a hot summer day.
Becks is ok.
I like Samuel Adams, or Michelob Lite.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 21:24:18 -0400
> He's demanding to talk to the store manager because Windows wiped out
> all of his data which contained some kind of a web based research
> project (best I could gather in between screams).
>
I'd like to have been there and heard the manager try to explain that not
only was his data permanently gone with no chance of compensation but he
couldn't have a refund on the software because he agreed to the no-refunds
clause in the EULA when he installed the product. - but he could have
another copy of the same product in exchange.
This is one of the things I really hate about software - if you buy a TV,
Video, Toaster or any other item and it turns out to be crap you are
entitled to a full refund yet if you buy software and it's crap you are
only entitled to exchange it for another copy which is rather pointless
(unless you like the product but the media is faulty). This applies to
Videos and Music as well.
Another thing I hate with some products is forced registration before
installing ( or just having to enter serial numbers) - wouldn't you hate it
if every time you bought a CD or DVD you had to enter a number the first
time it's played and then it won't play in a different machine - imagine
going back to your record shop and complaining that your walkman won't play
your latest music CD and being told it's because you tried it in the home
system first and it's now only registered to play on this system and if you
succeed in playing it on the walkman we'll sue you for piracy ( for walkman
read laptop and for home system read home desktop pc and you will see the
stupidity of software activation).
------------------------------
From: "Laura M. Hagan" <doesn'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 11:49:26 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Laura M. Hagan" wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > There are three types of homosexuals:
> > >
> > > a) those who have AIDS
> > > b) those who will get AIDS
> > > c) those who will get die before they get a chance to get AIDS.
> >
> > d) Lesbians, who have a lower chance of getting AIDS than
> > do either male or female heterosexuals.
> > Idiot.
>
> What's your pre-occupation with lesbos?
Why do you want to pretend they don't exist?
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 15:12:04 -0500
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9frbdu$5ku4u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > He's demanding to talk to the store manager because Windows wiped out
> > all of his data which contained some kind of a web based research
> > project (best I could gather in between screams).
> >
>
> I'd like to have been there and heard the manager try to explain that not
> only was his data permanently gone with no chance of compensation but he
> couldn't have a refund on the software because he agreed to the no-refunds
> clause in the EULA when he installed the product. - but he could have
> another copy of the same product in exchange.
There is no such clause in the EULA, in fact MS offers a 30 day money back
guarantee on retail software.
Further, his data isn't gone. Just the OS is corrupted.
> Another thing I hate with some products is forced registration before
> installing ( or just having to enter serial numbers) - wouldn't you hate
it
> if every time you bought a CD or DVD you had to enter a number the first
> time it's played and then it won't play in a different machine - imagine
> going back to your record shop and complaining that your walkman won't
play
> your latest music CD and being told it's because you tried it in the home
> system first and it's now only registered to play on this system and if
you
> succeed in playing it on the walkman we'll sue you for piracy ( for
walkman
> read laptop and for home system read home desktop pc and you will see the
> stupidity of software activation).
If the software ran only from the CD, this wouldn't be a problem. Some
software uses disk protection, where the CD must be in the drive to use it.
This is equally inconvenient, so the cd-keys are a convenience to you, so
you don't have to locate the cd every time you use it.
If you prefer to have the CD in the drive, and you could get enough people
to agree with you, i'm sure most software companies would listen.
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:16:10 GMT
>>>>> flatfish+++ writes:
flatfish> On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 21:00:14 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Fear makes a person small.
flatfish> And poisoning a childs mind is sick....
Yes, lead poisoning is a bad thing.
However teaching kids about homosexuality is nothing
like that.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
From: "Laura M. Hagan" <doesn'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 11:53:52 -0700
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Laura M. Hagan" wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > The right to swing your arms ends where my nose begins.
> > >
> > > The right to collect and trade deadly, communicable diseases ends
> > > where MY health begins.
> >
> > So, as I said before, Kulkis, you're in favor of women all becoming
> > lesbians? Since heterosexual sex transmits disease, after all, and
> > lesbian sex has the lowest disease transmission rate. Doesn't that
> > make sense?
>
> Monogomous heterosexuals have no such problems.
Since when did your argument rest on "monogamy," fool?
Are you now directing your attacks at non-monogamous
heterosexuals, as well as homosexual men? Let's hear it. Let's
hear you blame the spread of disease on heterosexuals, then.
> Hope that helps, lesbo.
What difference would it make if I were?
And no, it doesn't help, it only digs you in deeper. You're
going to get shit up your nose soon if you don't stop breathing.
Y'know, Kulkis, you're the first self-identified male I've seen
on Usenet who's as dumb as Parg. Congratulations!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: 8 Jun 2001 20:21:17 GMT
flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8 Jun 2001 18:54:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On 8 Jun 2001 16:21:34 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>>
>>>>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>I think it's more to do with the quality of lager in pubs around here - I
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lager? I thought you were talking about BEER, not that watery piss!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you prefer?
>>>>
>>>>> BITTER.
>>>>
>>>>What *kind* of bitter, you simpleton.
>>
>>> Any.
>>
>>heineken?
> Too sweet and gives a nasty headache if I drink too much, especially
> if it's a hot summer day.
> Becks is ok.
> I like Samuel Adams, or Michelob Lite.
Ah, the absolute worst of the absolute worst. I'm not surprised.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 20:20:22 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There are three types of homosexuals:
>
>a) those who have AIDS
>b) those who will get AIDS
>c) those who will get die before they get a chance to get AIDS.
d) those who are like Kulkis and are afraid of getting AIDS.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 20:23:33 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"." wrote:
>> > We have a special word for people who don't recognize danger............
>>
>> Recruits?
>
>Absolutely not.
>
>Basic training is all about recognizing, alleviateing, and combating
>dangers of all sorts.
Rule #1: Don't volunteer to go where people will be trying to kill you.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 21:44:45 -0400
> I can't stand all that spirit shite. If you took out all the ethanol,
> it would just taste like stagnant water. I prefer drinks like beer
> which have their own flavour.
>
Then again it's hard to know what pubs are doing to the beer between the
barrel and the glass - at least you can be sure what you are getting when
you buy it in cans. I don't go out drinking that often anymore anyway due
to getting a mortgage - I do buy the occasional sixpack or bottle of spirit
though ( the average bottle of spirit lasts me around 6 months - I probably
waste around 1/3 of the bottle through evaporation).
>>Life gets too boring if you drink the same thing all the time - same with
>>computers, why stick with one system - as well as windows & linux I also
>>use emulators for MacOS, Sinclair spectrum, BBC Micro, Amiga, N64, Sega
>>Megadrive / Genesis and several other computers, consoles & arcade
>>machines.
>
> The most I've ever emulated is the gameboy and the master system. I
> had great fun playing all those cheap and nasty games!
>
Games were often better in those days - they had to have better gameplay to
get people to keep using them as the graphics were often crap, unlike many
modern games which are all multimedia and graphics with zero thought put
into the things which make you want to keep playing them years later.
------------------------------
From: sunbird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:30:30 -0500
"." wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We have a special word for people who don't recognize danger............
> Recruits?
body bag filler
sunbird
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Belway)
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.men,alt.fan.oj-simpson
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: 8 Jun 2001 20:42:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Belway)
sunbird ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> "." wrote:
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > We have a special word for people who don't recognize danger............
>
>> Recruits?
>
> body bag filler
No.
Ron Goldman.
HTH
========================================================================
Steatopygias's 'R' Us. doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. tbtw#6. s.s.m#8. There ain't no more
If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is,
"God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell
him is, "Probably because of something you did." - Jack Handey
========================================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
