Linux-Advocacy Digest #141, Volume #35 Mon, 11 Jun 01 20:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: The Microsoft PATH. (webgiant)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Ray Fischer)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Ray Fischer)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Maynard Handley)
Re: XP finally reveals it true colors!!! ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: IBM Goes Gay ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Interconnect")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Mats Olsson)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:08:22 +1200
> You might want to consider that the NASDAQ runs MS for 90% of their
> operation and has had 0. That's zero MS related downtime since their
> adopting NT. They continue to convert their backend operations to W2K but
> are not completed. This is not an operation you take lightly or race ahead
> quickly but they are doing it. Converting from archiac Unix mainframes to
> W2K servers.
Jon, what is so "archiac" about Unix mainframes? apart from years and years
without a problem, and mission critical operations like air control, still
in the hands of these "archiac Unix mainframes". Wellington airport computer
based around a 20 year old mainframe running a set of COBOL applications,
and never once within its 20 year history, has there been any problems.
Also, these "archiac Unix mainframes" are running the back end of the Work
and Income New Zealand, computing 800,000 public records. If you are going
to say, "they chose it because of application [name of application]", it is
incorrect, as they current software package is a totally new, custom written
set of application's to address the issues regarding the amalgation of the
two departments, Income Support and Job Search, that occured 3 years ago.
With in the three years, there has only been one hickup. Maybe Jon, you
should realise how idiotic the notion "archiac Unix mainframes" sounds.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (webgiant )
Subject: Re: The Microsoft PATH.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:12:22 GMT
On Tue, 08 May 2001 23:50:25 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>A great deal of you don't remember this as you weren't
>alive during the 80's, at least not consious, and you never
>knew a life without Windows.
I still have old DOS floppies lying around someplace. Heck, I still
create MSDOS6.22 boot disks for older DOS games.
Frankly, I wish the Linux community had also had a period without a
GUI. There'd be more console-only software and games for starters,
and lets face it, you may be able to run Linux on a 386, but you
probably don't want to run a GUI on it.
>Windows got it start into business by attacking small business.
>
>Linux is going the same thing.
>
>From my consensus in my own town, 50% of the small business's,
>that being a business with under 100 employee's are using Linux
>now.
>
>Surprisingly, most of these business's have established REDHAT
>Linux ONLY policies and don't have Novel, other UNIX, or even
>Windows in their offices anymore.
>
>They are LINUX ONLY shops.
The big difference between the Microsoft-only and the Linux-only shops
is that the Linux-only shops are there by CHOICE.
You might remember, since you claim to have been alive during the 80s
and 90s, that Microsoft was essentially the only game in town when it
came to operating systems on the PC, and this was because IBM was the
biggest PC manufacturer and MSDOS was its chosen OS.
Microsoft since then has held onto Microsoft-only shops not because
the managers specifically wanted Microsoft, but because Microsoft
threatened to leave them without support during the interim period
between OSes if they switched.
So no, Linux is NOTHING like the Microsoft of the 80s and early 90s.
Or to be quite accurate, nothing like the Microsoft.
>There other business's in this catagory just replaced their
>back office servers with REDHAT servers and left the desktops
>as Windows for the most part.
Which seems to indicate that they are not "Microsoft-only". The
important thing to remember about such shops is that the Linux server
was SNUCK IN, since if you actually tell Microsoft you're switching,
you're in for a mess o' trouble.
If you went to whomever helped you get Linux in the back office and
said, "hey, we're going to keep running Windows in the front office,"
you won't get a threatening letter, you'd get at most a "sure, okay,"
if the techie felt like giving more than a shrug and an grunt.
Many CEOs who have been praising their "NT Servers" and telling other
CEOs whose systems crash regularly that they must be doing something
wrong, are often the unknowing recipients of Linux servers with Samba
and other things which make the server look like an NT server without
the problems of an NT server.
>Linux is taking the exact same path that Microsoft did to achieve
>power. They conquer the small businesses first then work on
>the larger ones.
With the big, big difference being that if you go to Linux and say,
"I'm dropping you for Microsoft," the most you might get is a LAUGH
out of whomever you are talking to. You certainly won't be told that
your support for any applications you have will simply dry up.
There are fundamental differences between Linux and Microsoft, the
most important difference--which renders your entire complaint
moot--being that Linux has no real interest in making a profit and
thus has no incentive to be mean and nasty about keeping customers.
>In the larger shops, I don't know of any companies as of now
>which don't have at least one LINUX server of some kind.
Because they WORK! Because Linux uptimes are measured in YEARS while
Microsoft uptimes are measured in DAYS, months if you are lucky!
Linux servers only have to be brought down for changes in hardware
within the server box, and if you buy the right stuff first, you won't
have to do that for years. NT servers get to reboot for practically
every single change made to the system--software, configuration,
and/or hardware--and if you are lucky they'll even come back up after
the reboot.
>The Military is starting to buy REDHAT equipped PC's in serious
>quantities now.
Because a system which DOESN'T CRASH is a valuable thing for people
who develop weapons systems.
>The Governments are dabbling in Linux still here. There about
>like the large shops.
>
>Linux is very clearly feeding on replacing Microsoft equipped
>machines. That seems to be what's it doing 80% of the time
>right now.
Largely because Microsoft still has 90% of the market. New PCs don't
count for as much of the market as they used to, and so when someone
wants to use a working OS like Linux, chances are they're currently
running one that doesn't work, like Microsoft.
> There's no NOVEL or other UNIX left hardly anywhere.
Linux, being technically UNIX, can't technically replace UNIX. As for
Novell, IMHO, it is dying a not too undeserved death.
>In the last year of deploymnet, I have heard of NO LINUX retractions
>in business. Once Linux get's started in a business it seems to stay
>and even grow.
With the main difference between Microsoft and Linux still being that
the Linux shops are there by CHOICE and the Microsoft shops are there
by INTIMIDATION or IGNORANCE OF ALTERNATIVES.
>I expect the next 2 years to provide Microsoft with SERIOUS financial
>damage from loss of market share.
>
>In the same respect, I expect REDHAT stock to start to climb starting
>now for the next 2 years at least.
Another point which needs to be made is that if someone copies a
Microsoft CD and sends it to a friend, skipping the illegal nature of
the act for a moment we can see that Microsoft has just lost a $199
sale and tons of potential revenue from customer support.
If someone copies a RedHat CD set and gives it to a friend, RedHat
didn't lose a single sale and in fact GAINED A CUSTOMER in the form of
someone who might call in for customer support, and they will not deny
the owner of the *copy* customer support.
So what happens is that RedHat is growing precisely because it is not
acting like Microsoft, and this has been true of Linux in general.
>Microsoft is getting their first taste of an ass whoopin right now!
For the simple reason that the OS is no longer as much of a priority
as it used to be in the 80s and 90s. If the user interface looks nice
to the user and is not difficult to use, what is running underneath
DOESN'T MATTER.
Thanks to the malleability of the Linux desktop, you can essentially
switch a computer from Microsoft to Linux overnight and leave common
office workers still able to use the system. They might need a little
training to use the StarOffice or Applixware office suite, and they
will get less of a break every morning waiting for the system to boot,
and they won't be able to sit around doing nothing a few hours a day
because the server has crashed, but otherwise the work will be the
same.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:10:26 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> For 10 minutes could you stop being retarded, and explain in RATIONAL
>> TERMS wht is wrong with homosexuality?
>
>What part of AIDS, Hepatitis, Tuberculosis, and Kaposi's Sarcoma do you not
>understand?
And Kulkis is _really_ concerned about getting these when he has sex
with other guys.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:13:53 +1200
> > SO, Chad, honey, what you are saying is that these events were so low
key,
> > the only coverage that could be given is on their OWN website. Most
> > companies I know don't jump onto www.microsoft.com and read the success
> > stories. They goto EDS or IBM and get them to design and implement a
> > solution.
>
> The press is to busy fashionably bashing MS to cover any of their
> achievements.
>
> How many Novell achievements have you heard of lately? They have
> quite a few case studies up there. People are using Win2K successfully
> (and Novell, I presume). It's just not big news.
>
> Do you trust the major media and slashdot for all your information?
>
> Your head is in the sand farther than I originally thought!
I haven't heard (in regards to Novell) many lately, as I don't normally
subsribe to the daily rags like news.com and slashdot.org. I do occasionally
read "Info Tech Weekly", in the Dominion on Mondays, which, for the most
part, tells news, what ever it is. Microsoft releases a new wizz bang OS,
they will tell you that Microsoft has released a new OS. Most of the
infotech weekly actually focuses on local success stories, whats happening
in the world, and where the major players and heading. So you conclusion
that I subscribe to the trash aimed for the lowest common denominator is
incorrect.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:14:59 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE FUCK SEXUALITY HAS TO DO WITH T.B.?
>
>Regardless of whether it's explained or not, gays have an astronomical rate
>of TB infection compared to the the heterosexual population.
>
>In fact, it's usually one of the first SYMPTOMS of AIDS.
Kulkis, you've been told this before, but...
You're full of shit. TRY to make allowances.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:19:12 +1200
> > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just isn't
> > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
>
> True - linux wasn't capable either which is why the NASDAQ continues what
> they started in July 2000 - converting to W2K on the web, the floor and
the
> back room. Unisys is supplying the W2K boxes running Datacenter.
>
I just had to jump in then, the new UNISYS datacentres have 32 CPU's, which
Linux doesn't support # of CPU's >8. Hence, the only three left is, Solaris,
which is a dog of an OS when not running on Ultra Sparc, thus leaves,
UnixWare and Windows. Even though UnixWare is more than capable to handling
32 processors, I guess UnixWare was not considered due to its uncertain
future in the hands of Caldera, hence, Windows 2000 Datacentre was the last
one standing. If someone offered at least a decent alternative, they would
have considered it.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Maynard Handley)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:24:22 -0700
In article <9fodg2$aeh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bill Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I've been reading the followup to my message in bizarre amazement.
Did no-one actually understand my point?
The issue is NOT "how do I back up the system and then restore it to the
same or an equivalent system"?
The issue is, imagine I have a system that I've used for 4 years. It has
on it maybe two hundred app, perhaps twenty of them commercial, the rest
free/shareware. The apps have installed shared libs in various places,
prefs in various places, help files and dictionaries and file translator
plugins in various places. In addition various pieces of hardware (NTSC
capture card eg) have installed their crud in various places.
I want to take this whole mess and have my new, four years later computer
with substantially different internals (no serial, ADB, SCSI, but new USB
and 1394) just work the same way.
NOTHING you people are arguing about has any relevance to solving this
problem. Giving me a fscking break---you think XCOPY from a win95 machine
onto a new machine that comes with Win ME is going to have any useful or
pleasant effect?
Neither is Partition Magic in any way relevant to the problem. Neither is
this boneheaded article that recommends separating your data onto a
separate drive. Well duh---now how exactly does that help with my two
hundred apps, installed drivers and DLLs etc?
And the Linux crowd don't seem to have anything useful to ad either beyond
"Windows sux". I've not read anything that indicates the problem is better
on Linux. I could believe that some parts of the problems are
easier---presumably PER USER prefs files are limited in how far they can
go. But a linux box used as a personal box---what about all the apps? What
about drivers installed after the OS? What about OS-wide prefs that you
set?
Maynard
> "Paul Repacholi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Dean Kent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > WARNING - shameless plugs follow!!!
> >
> > > Bill Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:9fh843$7qm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > "cjt & trefoil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > > Have you ever actually tried to do that? It's not as easy as
> > > > > you seem to think.
> >
> > > > I've used both XCOPY and Partition Magic to replicate a (bootable)
> > > > partition onto a new disk on the *same* machine: it's easy with
> > > > the former, and completely painless with the latter.
> >
> > The fact that you need to turn to 3rd party tools proves that windows
> > is at best incomplete, or totally broken. Even with them, the Registry
> > will get you in many cases.
>
> Unlike, e.g., Linux, where *all* tools are third-party...
>
> Of course, XCOPY ships with Windows (it's a DOS utility), but I wouldn't
> expect you to know that.
>
> >
> > > I think you might want to reconsider the XCOPY method - see here for
> > > a starter, and follow the links for more details:
> > > http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT121498000000
> >
> > A good article, but I thought it totaly missed the sad detail that
> > none of it should be needed. The fact that you felt you needed to
> > write it, and rescue the luser shows how short of the mark windows
> > is.
> >
> > I can restore a standalone machine in one operation, reliably and
> > painlessly. This has been the case for decades, and there is now
> > now excuse for any system to be that way.
>
> And indeed it's true for Windows as well: image-copy the boot partition to
> a CD-R, then image-copy it back if you ever need it. The discussion above
> had nothing to do with restoring an existing configuration to the same
> machine, but with migrating all user context (including installed
> applications) to a different machine.
>
> I'll admit that some systems do a much better job of segregating such
> information from the machine-specific aspects of an installation, but by
> definition whenever applications tie into those machine-specific aspects -
> or the new system is not 100% upward-compatible in handling, rather than
> assuming installation-time upgrading of, obsolete system-controlled areas,
> such as email - things can't be completely transparent, and damn few systems
> include transparent run-time support for *all* arbitrarily-old (and
> long-since-replaced) formats/features.
>
> - bill
>
> >
> > --
> > Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
> > +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
> > West Australia 6076
> > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
> > Spam-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XP finally reveals it true colors!!!
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:25:04 +1200
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9g2ifk$q7q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9g2ac7$ul0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > In New Zealand, you would be lucky to get a personal computer for under
> > $2000 +GST. Mind you, most people I have met would rather save up, and
> > purchase a good quality setup that will last them years, even newbies,
vs.
> > getting an "el cheapo" brand computer with multiple problems.
Considering
> > that there are easy finance plans that can spread $25 payments over 3
> years,
> > owning a good quality computer is not a hard task.
>
> Here you can also get a pretty good price reduction for trade in, as well.
> And a good computer, btw, is likely to last for a *long* time.
> I'd the same computer for over 3 years, I could keep on using it if I
> weren't eager to get the latest & best.
I've got a PIII 550 w/384MB of ram. I'm just going to wait until the end of
next year, or the middle of the year after and decide whether I need
upgrade, which I most likely don't. Since I don't use the latest wizz bang
"features", "games" and "performance" is not an issue for me I won't need to
upgrade, also, by that time I would have this computer for 4 years.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:28:02 +1200
> > Why not talk about this? We've already established that Windows is
> > superior to Linux in every regard, right?
>
> LOL!
>
> And whilst we're off topic, why not dip in to some
> racism/nationalism/patriotism debates?
>
> -Ed
I'd also like to go into a debate on whether colourful computers run faster
than beige ones. That should get the Mac crowd going.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <mark###@logichip.com.au>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 09:15:02 +1000
Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
> > unfortunately, runs
> > > > > > > on Windows.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does
the
> > > > > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture
just isn't
> > > > > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced
they were
> > > > > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it,
or if
> > > > > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard
about it
> > > > > if it went south.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Only the front end is running WinDog, the back end is not according
to a
> > > > Information Week article.
> > >
> > > It is Unisys
> > > http://www.nasdaq.com/reference/sn_indices_temp_disrupt_000218.stm
> > > With 300,000 terminals involved in trading, how could it be losedos?
> > > NASDAQ requires much more than what a toy operating system like
losedos
> > > can provide.
> >
> > Well, I don't know about your "losedos", but Unisys seems to be
> > convinced that Win2K Datacenter is where their company needs to be.
>
> I don't get this 'losedos' thing? It's obviously a play on MS-DOS...
> what does it mean.
Possibly along the lines if two teams play a game one team Wins one team
Loses. Hence lose dos as in you lose?
> > Won't be long before NASDAQ is running an ES-7000 or a few.
>
> Nice. Intel sux0rz.
>
> > -c
>
>
>
> --
> - Brent
>
> "General Veer, prepare your underpants for ground assault."
> - Darth Vader
>
> http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mats Olsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: 11 Jun 2001 23:33:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Maynard Handley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And the Linux crowd don't seem to have anything useful to ad either beyond
>"Windows sux". I've not read anything that indicates the problem is better
>on Linux. I could believe that some parts of the problems are
>easier---presumably PER USER prefs files are limited in how far they can
>go. But a linux box used as a personal box---what about all the apps? What
>about drivers installed after the OS? What about OS-wide prefs that you
>set?
Well, personally I install the (Unix) OS on its own partition, then
all the software elsewhere. The OS is then independent of the software
installed and can be upgraded freely... well, mostly. After an OS
reinstall, the package manager looses its database and it thus
becomes more difficult to do updates etc for non-OS packages. Wish there
was a way to tell the package manager to rescan the directory structure
and add in any package info it finds there...
/Mats
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:32:20 +1200
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Hacker D." wrote:
> >
> > drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Sat, 09 Jun 2001 23:31:01 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > > >Have you been raped or something?
> > >
> > > No, his boyfriend's dumped him, that's all.
> >
> > Yeah, Bill Gates has very little time for personal relationships these
> > days... Maybe he'll pump his idol, Dubya, up the ass a couple of
> > times. I know one thing - W. Bush and Aaron both have approximately
> > the same mental capabilities (the IQ of a brick).
> >
> > So Aaron, how does Dubya's semen taste?
>
> You tell us.
Aaron to normal person translation:
You tell us ---> "Rather salty, anyone else tried?"
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 19:35:34 -0400
Jet wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > mlw wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Fischer
> > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote
> > > > > > on Wed, 16 May 2001 22:30:16 GMT
> > > > > > <9duuvt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > > > > >Robert W Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > >>And where is your evidence that people have no choice over their
>homosexual
> > > > > > >>behavior?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Yeah! You could choose to be interested in men so it's obvious that
> > > > > > >homosexuals could choose to be interested in women.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Right?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One could mimic such behavior to avoid detection; such has been done
> > > > > > in the past, as I understand it -- even to the point of a
> > > > > > loveless, or at least sexless, marriage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This no more makes the homosexual a het, anymore than a woolen overcoat
> > > > > > makes a wolf a sheep.
> > > > >
> > > > > What part of "IT's the BEHAVIOR(*)," do you not understand?????
> > > > >
> > > > > (*) not the desire
> > > >
> > > > Normally I would not even touch such a string of posts. What two adults do in
> > > > privacy is no ones business. Who gives a flying fl&^%k what two people do
> > > > together? Seriously what does it matter?
> > >
> > > When two adults spread communicable diseases like Hepatitis and Tuberculosis,
> > > it is a matter of PUBLIC HEALTH and is EVERYBODY's business.
> > >
> > EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE FUCK SEXUALITY HAS TO DO WITH T.B.?
> > AND I WANT TO SEE A CAUSAL CORRELATION HERE.
>
> Let me explain something to you. Aaron is what I call a bitter boy. I
> believe bitter boys are that way because they can't get laid. (Aaron
> had to buy a mail order bride.)
Really? Who did I pay?
Was it an auction, like in the old slave days?
Or was she stored in a warehouse?
What kind of package was she delivered in? Were there any lavatory facilities
inside the package, or are you alleging that the US Post Office made some woman
sit in her own waste for several weeks?
Be precise jet...because accuracy counts.
> It also seems they tend to hate people
> they view as getting sex when they are not, such as gay men and
> blacks.
I like SANE people. Most black people I know are sane (unlike you).
Gays are suicidal, which is not sane.
>
> Look how irrational he is! He wants to make what gays do everybody's
> business because of AIDS, but doesn't seem to care about diseases
> spread mainly by heterosexual contact.
which DEADLY, INCURABLE diseases are spread by heterosexual contact?
>
> J
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
