Linux-Advocacy Digest #176, Volume #35 Tue, 12 Jun 01 22:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: ZDnet: David Coursey Attacks that Horrible Operating System: Windows ("Paolo
Ciambotti")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? (Rotten168)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Michael Vester)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Maynard Handley)
Re: Getting used to Linux ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Maynard Handley)
Re: Mail Order Brides? Check this place out! (flatfish+++)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ZDnet: David Coursey Attacks that Horrible Operating System: Windows
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:03:28 -0700
In article <9g5u6i$r9o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bobby D. Bryant"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attention all Linux advocates: If you haven't used Windows for a while,
> strand yourself somewhere where there is only a Windows machine for a
> couple of days. It will refresh your perspective on things, for sure.
I spent all day today trying to uninstall MSFT Project. On the first pass
with the uninstaller it told me that the installation was damaged and to
re-run setup from the original location. So I did, and it told me again
the installation was damaged and I should re-run setup from the CD. So I
tried to re-install directly from the CD, but it tells me the installation
is damaged and I should re-run setup from the original location.
MSFT Project still seems to work perfectly; I just can't uninstall it or
re-install it.
Tomorrow I'll probably have to spend all day alternating between REGEDIT
and Norton WinDoctor before I can get it banished from my system. What a
magnificent piece of shit is this thing called Windows.
------------------------------
From: Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 01:02:00 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <3b261436$0$94305$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > >"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Jon Johansan wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > "Dennis G. Allard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> > news:<84aU6.9834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> > > > > I'm talking about what they [the NYSE] 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.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If they were running anything Microsoft, they would have crashes so
> much
> > >> > > more often it would make this little down time look like a holiday!
> > >> >
> > >> > 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.
> > >>
> > >> That all depends on what you mean by "archaic". Do you mean the old
> > >> hardware boxes or the o/s? From my viewpoint I consider Win2k a kludge
> > >> compared to unix. Some consider unix to be very old and win2k as a
> > >> modern o/s... I kept checking into many reviews from different sources
> > >> on Win2k and find it is more of a kludge... can't call that modern.
> > >> At least Unix is structured and has some good reasons for its design.
> > >
> > >Please refrain from speaking out of your ass.
> > >
> > >Every Unix system I've used so far (which is Solaris, AIX, IRIX,
> > >Linux, and BSD) (yes, I know Linux isn't Unix, but you get my drift)
> > >every single one of them seems to be teetering on the edge of failure.
> > >I've had to reinstall this Solaris box on my desk 3 times now because
> > >the fscking pkgadd and patchadd BS fails constantly while installing
> > >patches. If you call that "structured" and a "good design" then you're
> > >smoking crack.
> >
> > Aw, you're getting all irritable these days....
>
> Yes, I've had too much contact with Solaris and Linux lately.
> I stopped to think about all the hours of my life wasted doing
> simple tasks that take mere minutes on Windows (like installing
> Oracle, or installing patches) and I became pissed. Perhaps
> I should sue Sun for wasting precious hours of my life. It's
> the American way.
You know, honestly Chad, I've installed MySQL, PHP, StarOffice with
little/no problem. And I'm no Linux advocate, but installation of the
apps hasn't been too much of a problem, for me.
Installation of the OS... now that's a different story.
> > Our work linux servers just keep going, going going going.
>
> Going and going and doing nothing?
>
> I have a Linux box underneath my desk which I haven't used
> in several weeks since it's using during our testing phases
> and we're in a development cycle.
>
> I check it the other day and X had crashed. I left it sitting
> at a login screen and it just spontaneously crashed for no
> reason. I guess there's a time limit in X after which, if it
> hasn't crashed already, it just crashes.
Again, not something that's happened to me. X has crashed for me,
usually it crashes when you try to do too many things (which is
relative, I know) and the only answer other than waiting for 30 minutes
or so for X to get it's act together, is to ctl-alt-bkspc it and kill
it. Or course it sucks if you had something imporant running.
I learned to download big apps in a VT because of X's instability.
> I also noticed on the other box I have by my desk, if you
> attempt to mount a CDROM when there is none in the drive
> (I got the two boxes mixed up on my KVM switch) the whole
> machine goes batty. The console froze while it attempted
> the IO operation. I had to switch to another virtual terminal
> to get a console back and that one console still hasn't returned
> yet. I get IO error messages on all the other consoles.
> X about shits when I start it up, I get all sorts of pop-up messages
> telling me the same thing as the terminal did about the CDROM.
> I can't open the Gnome file explorer thingee now because it keeps
> complaining about the CDROM. It's been about 2 weeks now since
> this happened and it still hasn't figured out there's no CDROM
> in the drive. It's a RH 7.0 install.
>
> Again, I had to think to myself, "Who writes this crap, and do
> they ever even attempt to run it themselves?". I guess not.
>
> And they expect people to run production servers on these things?
> ROFL... what a piece of shit.
>
> Meanwhile, our Win2K box which is our directory server, Exchange
> messaging server, and file server hums along. Not a single hiccup
> since it was "born" 6 months ago.
>
> -c
--
- Brent
"General Veer, prepare your underpants for ground assault."
- Darth Vader
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 01:04:30 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, pip
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 12 Jun 2001 13:15:48 +0100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>mlw wrote:
>> It is the same argument, with one difference. C is more like a portable
>> assembler.
>
>Really ? Well then show me a large C program that does something useful
>that is potable.
Um....did you *really* want to drink that? :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random typo here
EAC code #191 43d:09h:10m actually running Linux.
Be paranoid. Everyone else is.
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:19:48 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Dave Martel"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2001 11:48:13 -0500, "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Yes, I know the study was partially sponsored by MS (someone has to pay
>>for these things) so please don't fire off stupid replies implying that
>>MS purposely contaminated it's own results by 'buying the study' -
>>that's just preposterous.
>
> Not at all preposterous, given their past history of sponsoring "flawed"
> studies.
"Hello, Gartner? Yeah, Miller from Microsoft again. Look, we'd like you
to do another independent study for us. You know, call up a bunch of
system administrators and ask them if they've bought any Linux servers in
the last year. Oh, no, not at all, we'll be more than happy to provide
you with a cold-call list. Just don't tell anybody we culled it from our
MSVP and MCSE mailings. Good enough. Pleasure talking to you again."
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 12:04:40 -0700
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Rex Ballard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > Actually,
> > >
> > > The ILoveYou Virus caused over $2.8 Billion in damages to nearly 50
> > > million
> > > users (roughly $500/user on average). The total average damages
> > > resulting
> > > from Microsoft sponsored security holes now exceeds $2000/user/year
> > > (so much
> > > for TCO).
> >
> > Interestingly enough, a recent Macintosh virus has come out that does the
> > equivelant of the ILoveYou virus, using Applescript instead. It does use
> > Outlook Express, but it also works with non-MS email clients as well.
>
> I just wish whoever writes these damn viruses would just quit or get a
> life.
> Its screwing up computing.
>
> --
> V
I second the motion. There is enough problems without the deliberate
mayhem. Prison and a publically accessable list of convicted offenders.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Maynard Handley)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:32:10 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Well, it does :-) and in this particular respect, a great deal
> more than other alternatives.
>
> Per user pref files tend to be unlimited. I can't think of a
> single application that I use that is constrained by system-wide
> preferences. My per-user preferences define my environment.
> How else could a multi-user system operate?
>
> What about the apps? For the most part they're available in
> source, and can be compiled or installed from scratch with
> essentially no effort or cost. For the ones that aren't
> available that way, the old versions will still work unless I've
> changed to a machine with a different processor architecture.
> In that case I have to get a replacement or I'm short of luck.
> How else could the applications behave? Even Windows is
> famously backwards-compatible for applications.
>
> Drivers and system-wide configuration are an issue of bringing
> the new machine up in the first place, and are essentially
> orthogonal to the issue of moving your user environment around
> with you.
>
> So what _was_ the question?
Oh give me a fucking break. This is why adults consider the Linux crowd to
be a bunch of amateurs.
The point I raised was that it is time-consuming to move from one box to a
new one.
Your answer is "well the apps are available as source".
So FUCKING WHAT??? How does that reduce the time involved?
The problem is NOT the availability of the apps or data or whatever else.
The problem is that I can't hit a single button, come back in an hour, and
have the new machine just ready to work the same way my old machine did.
In my world, the world of consumer computer users, people who have lives
outside computing, we expect things to work that way, with single button
installers. The idea of spending twelve hours surfing the net downloading
packages and building them does not thrill us to our cloacas.
if you look at my original post, my point was my claim that this lack of a
single-button way to move an old machine to a new machine has a
demonstrable economic effect, that there is a substantial base of
consumers out there who are wealthy enough to buy a new system, and
willing to buy a new system, but could not be bothered to do so because
the cost (in TIME) of moving everything from one machine to the next is
too high; and that by fixing this MS (with money from Intel in necessary,
since Intel wins as much as MS) could do as much as anything else to
improved their revenue stream.
Since then I have not read a single post since then that makes me change
my mind. I have, however, once again had a chance to view just how
fundamentally out of touch with reality your average Linux zealot is.
Maynard
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:47:22 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Charlie Ebert"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I let Windows totally the year after you.
>
> It's tuff to raise a family and continue to pay Bill Gates $$$ for
> licenses, software, new computers. He'll I was spending over $6,000 a
> year on the crap. My wife wished it would get addicted to crack cocaine
> as it would be cheaper for the family as I'd die quicker.
>
> It was at that time I decided to flush windows down the toilet.
>
> In time, I've rid myself of every box of Windows software I've ever had
> and I don't regret leaving the garbage one bit.
>
> Then there was the work situation with NT servers. NT servers are
> worthless peices of shit. Our servers would always go down at 3:00 AM.
> Then I'd have to go in and spend 8 hours rebuilding the servers. I got
> so angry about it I used to threaten people not to touch the server or
> I'd tear their heads off and shove them up their asses. But this idea
> was to no avail as the server would just explode anytime after 34 hours
> of uptime anyway.
>
> I realized there had to be a better way for business to work than to
> continue to use this diahrea-ware.
>
> And so I've been using Linux at home since 97 solely. Debian has
> everything I need and it's never failed me, not once. I have never lost
> data while using Linux. It has never happened.
>
> My uptime is limited only to the stupidity of the local power company.
>
> After 4 years of using Linux for a family server and a desktop, I can
> say that Linux is ready to serve anybody.
>
> And when you consider the cost of Windows, the buggyness of Windows, the
> security threat of Windows, and the fact that Microsoft is a money hungy
> monopoly which is hell bent on entrapment of all the computer users of
> the ENTIRE WORLD, you realise people who run windows are simply put,
> brainless dumbshits....
>
> I mean their totally clueless.
>
> Thanks
>
>
Gee, Charlie. Don't hold back, tell us what you _really_ think <grin>.
I've never owned my own PC until a few years ago; I've always had one
provided by my employer at no cost. Until my current job, where I'm not
actually required to have one, but it would be nice to be able to work at
home every now and then.
So I had a friend who owns a local PC shop build me a budget workstation,
and I trotted down to the local big-box office supply retailer to grab all
the software I'd need. I threw in a boxed copy of Win95 in the basket,
and then a copy of Office, then somebody's antivirus, then somebody else's
graphics software, and so on and so forth until my wife pointed out that
we now had more money in the shopping cart than the PC had cost. We
weren't upgrading from a previous version of any Microsft product, and the
difference between first-purchase and upgrade pricing is staggering.
So anyway, I happened to see a copy of Caldera Linux sitting on the rack
for the whopping grand total of $29.95 and I read the back cover of the
box to see what all was included and thought what the hell, it's only
thirty bucks and if it totally sucks I can go back and piss away three
grand for the real stuff and take it off my taxes.
Never went back.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Maynard Handley)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:39:24 -0700
In article <9g42ap$luq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pop) wrote:
Goddammit guys, why is this so hard to understand?
I am not complaining about the inability to get data from machien A to
machine B. Whatever problems may exist in that area, they are the least of
my worries.
The point is not that "all you have to do is copy the material in this
tree from here to there; then copy the scripts that you modified in this
folder; then copy whatever X placed in that folder".
The point is that I have to do anything at all.
On a mac---I couldn't speak about other loser systems---I upgrade the OS
on my machine by installing a new CD, hitting the "go" button, and coming
back twenty minutes later. All done and it just works.
I can NOT get that same ease of use when I want to upgrade to a new
computer. In that case I have to spend large amounts of time moving
material from the old computer to the new---but being careful to extract
only some of the data from these folders into the folders on the new
machine. I contend that a consequence of this is that Apple loses some
non-trivial fraction of sales each year from people who just couldn't be
bothered to go through the pain of this transition. I likewise contend
that the same is true of Windows.
Finally I have seen little to lead me to believe that things would be any
better under Linux.
Maynard
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Maynard
Handley) writes:
>
> >In article <9fodg2$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?
>
> If nobody actually unserstood your point, in 99% of the cases it is
> because it was poorly phrased. You talked about restoring the "user
> environment" and this, in a Unix context, means the user's files and
> applications installed in his home directory tree.
>
> >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?
>
> Any well behaved "third party" application on a Unix system should be
> installed under /usr/local. Migrate this directory tree and you have
> them all on the new box.
>
> Less well behaved applications reside in their own directory tree,
> usually under /usr. For them, you have to migrate those trees, too.
>
> And the worst behaved applications drop their bits in /usr/bin, /usr/lib
> /usr/man etc. It's easier to reinstall them from scratch.
>
> >What about drivers installed after the OS?
>
> Drivers aren't usually compatible between major OS releases, regardless
> of the OS: Win95 drivers won't work on Win98 or W2k. So, if your old
> Linux box was 4 years old, chances are that you'll need new drivers,
> compatible with the current kernel. This is less of a problem than it
> seems, because Linux distributions usually come with all the supported
> drivers, compiled as loadable kernel modules. So, you only have to
> migrate the boot-time script that loads the drivers you need.
>
> >What about OS-wide prefs that you set?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by that. If it's kernel settings whose
> default values you change in a boot-time script, you simply have to
> migrate that script, too. This is quite an esotheric thing and few
> actual users play with the kernel settings.
>
> You also have to migrate a few other files from /etc: passwd, shadow
> (if used), group. Not really needed if you're the only user, because
> you can let the installation procedure create the entries for your
> userid.
>
> So, the user who could actually write those scripts in the first place
> would have little difficulties migrating them to the new system.
>
> I've done that many times and it was really easy. If you can have both
> systems simultaneously connected to a LAN, it's a piece of cake.
> Otherwise, you have to choose between using some backup media and
> physically swapping the disk containing the /usr/local partition.
>
> Dan
> --
> Dan Pop
> CERN, IT Division
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mail: CERN - IT, Bat. 31 1-014, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mail Order Brides? Check this place out!
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 01:47:28 GMT
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 23:28:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
>Giving up Windows Advocacy?
>
>Why not try Prostitution/White Slave Trades Advocay instead!
Nahh Charlie I'm not gonna let you off that easy :)
Actually the entire mail order bride concept seemed so strange to me.
I read some of the messages on that web site and can't believe there
are men that have to buy a wife.
Real weird stuff!
------------------------------
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: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 21:51:11 -0400
"Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" wrote:
>
> > >Are you trying to spurt the typical homophobic legacy, off spring, family
> > >name bull shit. How is your son being gay going to affect you? apart
> from
> > >getting told his new boyfriends name, what will change? he will have the
> > >same personality, the same characteristics, he will still look up to you
> as
> > >a father. Please, give me an insight into the mystical "father-son
> bond",
> > >because aparently, you have problems expressing yourself.
> > >Matthew Gardiner
> >
> > Actually he was quite clear. Your scenario of if I had a son
> > I wouldn't be the least bit dissapointed that he loved having guys
> > ramming there cocks up his ass like he was steve chaney and the family
> > line is dead, like steve chaney is mindless PC babble.
>
> Don't you think the comment regarding "family line" sound very primitive and
> primal?
Life is primal.
So, like, what's your point?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> --
> I am the blue screen of death
> nobody hears your scream's
--
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.
------------------------------
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: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 21:52:15 -0400
Ed Cogburn wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Well, this may come as a surprise to you, but the US Army tests EVERY
> > soldier for AIDS every 6-12 months.
>
> And this is supposed to mean what? The situation he's talking about has
> to do with how personal medical info being distributed to other
> entities. If the Army is handing over this test info to your future
> employer, then your response here would make sense.
He implied that I could very well have AIDS and not know it.
I said that, given the US Army's policy, that's damn well unlikely
>
> --
> It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong. -- Voltaire
--
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
******************************
