*quietly snags the M100SIG archive from archive.org*
On 5/26/20, m100-requ...@lists.bitchin100.com <m100-requ...@lists.bitchin100.com> wrote: > Send M100 mailing list submissions to > m100@lists.bitchin100.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.bitchin100.com/listinfo.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > m100-requ...@lists.bitchin100.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > m100-ow...@lists.bitchin100.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of M100 digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Undocumented hardware (John R. Hogerhuis) > 2. Re: Undocumented hardware (John R. Hogerhuis) > 3. Re: Undocumented hardware (Philip Avery) > 4. Re: Undocumented hardware (John R. Hogerhuis) > 5. Othello for model 100 (Alain Dextraze) > 6. Re: Othello for model 100 (John R. Hogerhuis) > 7. Re: Othello for model 100 (Mike Stein) > 8. Re: Undocumented hardware (B 9) > 9. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 10. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 11. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Dison) > 12. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 13. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 14. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 15. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 16. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Dison) > 17. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 18. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Wilson) > 19. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Dison) > 20. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 21. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Dison) > 22. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 23. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 24. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Wilson) > 25. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 26. Re: Undocumented hardware (Mike Stein) > 27. Re: Undocumented hardware (Mike Stein) > 28. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Dison) > 29. Re: Undocumented hardware (Tom Wilson) > 30. Re: Undocumented hardware (Stephen Adolph) > 31. Re: Undocumented hardware (Mike Stein) > 32. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 33. Re: "No-VAN" obligation (Brian K. White) > 34. Re: Undocumented hardware (Mike Stein) > 35. Re: "No-VAN" obligation (Stephen Adolph) > 36. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 37. Re: "No-VAN" obligation (Brian K. White) > 38. Re: Undocumented hardware (Mike Stein) > 39. Re: Undocumented hardware (Brian K. White) > 40. Reuse of laddie (John R. Hogerhuis) > 41. Re: Reuse of laddie (Tom Dison) > 42. The Dead Hand (John R. Hogerhuis) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 15:32:28 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <cacutkuj_n8oovfdkzvwg6cpzkphay-qtcoc0chwgvapl1bs...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 1:05 AM B 9 <hacke...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> >>> To: m...@bitchin100.com >>> >>> Yes the Model T screen driver is slow. It's possible we could speed it >>> up >>> a little because there is some hardware scrolling capability built into >>> the >>> video chip drivers that the ROM does not make use of. >>> >>> But that would >>> a) Require creating code in option rom or in RAM to do all character >>> generation >>> >> >> Are you sure that's required? The demos I found don't seem to be doing >> that. >> >> > > It's complicated. There's a lot of ROM code you can leverage for sure. > > >> b) It's not clear how much the speed-up would be. >>> >> >> One demo, by Philip Avery, claims over 10x speed acceleration using >> hardware scrolling. According to Hidden Powers of the Model 100 >> <https://archive.org/details/HiddenPowersOfTheTrs80Model100/page/n183/mode/1up/>, >> the screen can only show 90 characters per second with a maximum download >> speed to RAM of 240 cps. My own tests with scrolling speed in TELCOM is >> that I can get about 1KB in 6 seconds (170 cps) if the screen has to >> scroll >> during download, but I save about a second per kilobyte (200 cps) if I >> disable screen scrolling but still send characters to the screen. Of >> course, this is with software flow control, so that may be an additional >> bottleneck. >> >> It's strange and fascinating that the Model T had hardware scrolling >> acceleration it never used. Do you have a link for more information about >> it? I tried googling and all I came up with was: >> >> >> http://www.club100.org/memfiles/index.php?action=view&filename=LCDTST.DO&directory=Steve%20Adolph >> and >> >> http://www.club100.org/memfiles/index.php?&direction=1&order=nom&directory=Philip%20Avery/Hardware%20Scroll >> >> > http://bitchin100.com/wiki/index.php?title=Model_100_LCD_Programming > https://bitchin100.com/files/hardware/HD44102.PDF > https://bitchin100.com/files/hardware/lcd.pdf > > > >> Neither one worked on my Model 200, but I don't know if it's a lack of >> hardware support or if it's just writing to the wrong addresses. The >> Philip >> Avery documentation mentions "Kenneth Pettit", but googling for him and >> "hardware scroll" turns up nothing. >> >> > Ken Pettit is the author of VirtualT which has a full implementation of the > display chip. You can look at that source code if you're interested. > > My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial > implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related to the > unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... > > >> (By the way, the Bitchin100 site could use a friendly "how to transfer >> binary files over a serial port using only builtin software" right on the >> front page. Fortunately, after some more googling, I found a Github >> repository that made it easy: https://github.com/bkw777/dlplus). >> >> > > I used to maintain and enhance DLPlus. But now I focus on LaddieAlpha which > runs on Windows, Linux and OSX. It is linked from the front page of > bitchin100. Some people have an objection to the Mono or .NET runtime. But > I like C# and not having to hand-roll all my own data structures. > > You can read my research into Model 100 flow control (that went into HTERM) >>> in the wiki article >>> http://bitchin100.com/wiki/index.php?title=Model_100_Serial_Interface >>> >> >> Wow! After reading through that, I'm impressed you figured it all out. >> Thank you for documenting it so well. >> (Again, I'm struck by how weird it is that these computers had hardware >> capabilities that were never used, not even documented!) >> >> > You're welcome. As to hardware capabilities Bill G didn't spend development > effort on... always trade-offs. Get to market sooner or implement one more > feature... > > >> >> >>> Does HTERM have a terminfo file listing the escape sequences it can do? >>>> Not that it needs one if it has full ANSI compatibility, of course. >>>> >>> I can't put my hands on the T102 version but I've attached the one I >>> have >>> for T200. >>> >> >> I'm not sure if it's because I had the mailing list in "digest" mode, but >> I didn't receive the attachment. Could you please send again or post it >> somewhere? >> >> >>> The mapping for the extended characters is in the code and on the wiki. >>> >> Thanks, the wiki didn't seem to have all the characters, so I went >> straight to the source which also seemed more accurate. >> >> > It's just slightly different choices. HTERM limits to 16-bit unicode > characters. The wiki page has some better mappings for characters if you're > willing to go for 32-bit unicode. > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200525/29a07097/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 15:34:57 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <cacutkugywfqxcu1_2mvfb6m5tssk2-cr7k__hkkecucohxu...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Is the hardware scroll being used in REX CP/M? > > Sounds like that was the plan at some point. > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200525/a2c59d83/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:39:48 +1200 > From: Philip Avery <pav...@xtra.co.nz> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <e8264d39-9b9e-a3ed-da20-a703cc1cd...@xtra.co.nz> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" > > No, though I was reminded of that by the recent Hardware Scroll post. > Decided to leverage ROM code, so eventually M100 CP/M gets down to "rst 4". > > Philip > > On 26/05/2020 10:34 am, John R. Hogerhuis wrote: >> Is the hardware scroll being used in REX CP/M? >> >> Sounds like that was the plan at some point. >> >> -- John. > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/e8c8232c/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 15:47:09 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CACutKUh-U4ipNrEHj9wscHrGcwK1wM5jcKuc07DtGL=bfbx...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 3:40 PM Philip Avery <pav...@xtra.co.nz> wrote: > >> No, though I was reminded of that by the recent Hardware Scroll post. >> Decided to leverage ROM code, so eventually M100 CP/M gets down to "rst >> 4". >> >> Philip >> > > OK. Yeah you have to draw the line somewhere on all these features if you > ever want to be done. > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200525/2e5482af/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 00:58:13 +0000 > From: Alain Dextraze <a.dextraze1...@hotmail.ca> > To: "m...@bitchin100.com" <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: [M100] Othello for model 100 > Message-ID: > > <qb1pr01mb3284c1b5159f48cf67b1115bea...@qb1pr01mb3284.canprd01.prod.outlook.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello ! > I do not often write to the group, but I have a problem. I can not open 2 > files for the model 100: othelo.v3 and othelo.jdt. I get the message that I > can not reach the listing. These files come from SIG. Somebody can help? > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/59b3f5f6/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 21:59:53 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Othello for model 100 > Message-ID: > <cacutkujv815p-0pw_aa2wpufrjshbj-prjjasnjjxqssvpz...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I don't have a copy of the M100SIG handy and those extensions don't ring a > bell. > > Can you open them with a text editor like Notepad? > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200525/dc6e372e/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 01:55:13 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Othello for model 100 > Message-ID: <0F32B465651B42BAAC52EA0EB83C50FC@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > They're three different text mode BASIC programs; just change the extension > to .DO > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Alain Dextraze > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Sent: Monday, May 25, 2020 8:58 PM > Subject: [M100] Othello for model 100 > > > Hello ! > I do not often write to the group, but I have a problem. I can not open 2 > files for the model 100: othelo.v3 and othelo.jdt. I get the message that I > can not reach the listing. These files come from SIG. Somebody can help? > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/71e66256/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 01:23:34 -0700 > From: B 9 <hacke...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <cag1tpesatyqrpz0emq4v_syhjcpusozju7zjkhc8vvazil+...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >> >> My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >> implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related to >> the >> unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... >> > > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. > > >> (By the way, the Bitchin100 site could use a friendly "how to transfer >>> binary files over a serial port using only builtin software" right on >>> the >>> front page. Fortunately, after some more googling, I found a Github >>> repository that made it easy: https://github.com/bkw777/dlplus). >>> >>> >> >> I used to maintain and enhance DLPlus. But now I focus on LaddieAlpha >> which runs on Windows, Linux and OSX. It is linked from the front page of >> bitchin100. Some people have an objection to the Mono or .NET runtime. >> But >> I like C# and not having to hand-roll all my own data structures. >> > > I saw LaddieCon on the front page, but I skipped it because it said it was > for Microsoft Windows. If it is OS agnostic, maybe change the description > to: "LaddieCon: Use this to transfer files with any modern computer". I've > no objection to Mono as long as it doesn't get in my way. I like the DLPlus > repository because using it is as simple as 'git clone' and 'make install'. > > ?b9 > >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/3c711089/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:23:58 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <89eefe23-4624-93ab-6bfa-f861d3265...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >> My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >> implementation of the display chip?+ some bugs specifically related >> to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... >> >> >> I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. > > web8201.net has a copy, also just stuck a copy up in archive.org > https://archive.org/details/M100SIG > > I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. > I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from > web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, > like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my > google drive, my laptop... > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:31:29 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV4cotx7_4WnnjOas1LzP=3th0er-m7ruapt+iedp1j...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Brian, > just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive? > If so, did you ensure that you posted the "No VAN" version, which has > deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's code? > I believe this was Van's wishes. > ..Steve > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:24 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >> > My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >> > implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related >> > to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... >> > >> > >> > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >> >> web8201.net has a copy, also just stuck a copy up in archive.org >> https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >> >> I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. >> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, >> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >> google drive, my laptop... >> >> -- >> bkw >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/af948105/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 07:33:51 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CA+L8ohmnJno2BYcvfc+HP9GcEbzQq_rJeoOEC=z+xfgRYq=w...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I have to say I really like LaddieAlpha, I have it running on a Raspberry > Pi - very ready to install and, and now I have plenty of storage for my > Model 200. I did a git clone of it and hterm, and plan to play with the > source is both. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 07:24 Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >> > My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >> > implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related >> > to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... >> > >> > >> > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >> >> web8201.net has a copy, also just stuck a copy up in archive.org >> https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >> >> I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. >> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, >> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >> google drive, my laptop... >> >> -- >> bkw >> > -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/976af072/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:41:20 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV5B=fjvsao9cqy-j+mo2hykbfkftu4fk0m8hbry2ya...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > follow up; > looks like this is not the "no Van" version of the M100SIG; suggest we pull > this one down and replace it with the one that has all of Wilson's code > scrubbed. > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:31 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Brian, >> just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive? >> If so, did you ensure that you posted the "No VAN" version, which has >> deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's code? >> I believe this was Van's wishes. >> ..Steve >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:24 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >>> > My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >>> > implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically >>> > related >>> > to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round >>> > tuits... >>> > >>> > >>> > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >>> >>> web8201.net has a copy, also just stuck a copy up in archive.org >>> https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >>> >>> I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. >>> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >>> web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, >>> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >>> google drive, my laptop... >>> >>> -- >>> bkw >>> >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/ee479e92/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 09:41:40 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <5565a7ac-d4b1-e47b-8b58-9b3cf3457...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 8:31 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> Brian, >> just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive? >> If so, did you ensure that you posted the? "No VAN" version, which has >> deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's?code? >> I believe this was Van's wishes. >> ..Steve > > What in the world did you think this was all about? > > "I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. > I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from > web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, > like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my > google drive, my laptop..." > > So, whichever version this is, it's the version that's generally > available anywhere else. > > Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever has > any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever public, > then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. > > -- > bke > >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:24 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com >> <mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >> >? ? ?My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a >> partial >> >? ? ?implementation of the display chip?+ some bugs specifically >> related >> >? ? ?to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round >> tuits... >> > >> > >> > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >> >> web8201.net <http://web8201.net> has a copy, also just stuck a copy >> up in archive.org <http://archive.org> >> https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >> >> I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff >> removed. >> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> web8201.net <http://web8201.net>, and the same as every other copy I >> had sprinkled around, >> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >> google drive, my laptop... >> >> -- >> bkw >> > > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:00:18 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV6v3k_Jf5hyv+yN==eo7q9vhmuwsh_zjmzng1toyco...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > If there were versions floating around that were not marked "no VAN" then > that was unfortunate. > It does not change the fact that Van's software was published without his > permission. > > What this is all about, is the fact that his software was published > without his permission. > > And so, > > An M100SIG marked "NoVan" is what is posted at > https://bitchin100.com/files/m10x/M100SIGNOVAN.zip > > and IIRC that was the one that was meant to be available publicly. > > Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being shared > publicly we should take steps to remove it. > > thanks > Steve > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 9:41 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 5/26/20 8:31 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> > Brian, >> > just curious, did you post the M100SIG to the internet archive? >> > If so, did you ensure that you posted the "No VAN" version, which has >> > deleted all of Wilson Van Alst's code? >> > I believe this was Van's wishes. >> > ..Steve >> >> What in the world did you think this was all about? >> >> "I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. >> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, >> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >> google drive, my laptop..." >> >> So, whichever version this is, it's the version that's generally >> available anywhere else. >> >> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever has >> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever public, >> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >> >> -- >> bke >> >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 8:24 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com >> > <mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >> > > My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a >> partial >> > > implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically >> > related >> > > to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round >> > tuits... >> > > >> > > >> > > I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >> > >> > web8201.net <http://web8201.net> has a copy, also just stuck a copy >> > up in archive.org <http://archive.org> >> > https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >> > >> > I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff >> > removed. >> > I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> > web8201.net <http://web8201.net>, and the same as every other copy >> > I >> > had sprinkled around, >> > like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, >> > my >> > google drive, my laptop... >> > >> > -- >> > bkw >> > >> >> >> -- >> bkw >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/96565c71/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:02:00 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV5a0w_a-TBQqkQGGbpaHg4PKVxMki0Rdm7=_bfss7t...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I find your statement ridiculous Brian. > I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. > > >> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever has >> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever public, >> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >> >> -- >> bke >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/68c92d31/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 09:05:41 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CA+L8oh=-aua7tc3g_kjopcthzy2yh47xfwwrxrkgym4d678...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Should I not be looking at the source? I was going to add some additional > features. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:02 Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I find your statement ridiculous Brian. >> I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. >> >> >>> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever has >>> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever public, >>> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >>> >>> -- >>> bke >>> >>> -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/9bb614c1/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:31:23 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <e8579722-edb3-35c5-ed48-6a7600b7c...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 10:00 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> If there were versions floating around that were not marked "no VAN" >> then that was unfortunate. >> It does not change the fact that Van's software was published >> without?his permission. >> >> What?this is all about, is the fact that his software was published >> without?his permission. > > He didn't voluntarily post it to a public forum? Someone stole it from > his hard drive? > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 07:31:29 -0700 > From: Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <calt8mqqygqsprd4sk7mcsfwsf8kue0i-4ofohhcvvb6_pze...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> >> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being shared >> publicly we should take steps to remove it. >> >> thanks >> Steve >> > > Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s > posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to > request the files be taken down. > > If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his > intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of us > have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs > decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. > > You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no > obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as > Van?s agent. > > > -- > Tom Wilson > wilso...@gmail.com > (619)940-6311 > K6ABZ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/b03778a3/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 19 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 09:38:04 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <ca+l8ohmjnw-4ahqop+xr4pk0vcxjbdynu03doaohkb4j6g2...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Ok, I?ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31 Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being >>> shared >>> publicly we should take steps to remove it. >>> >>> thanks >>> Steve >>> >> >> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s >> posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to >> request the files be taken down. >> >> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of us >> have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs >> decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. >> >> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as >> Van?s agent. >> >> >> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> > -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/49649f90/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 20 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:39:36 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <e4b9f87f-0d26-7620-56a3-c01d28044...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > I just asked what I thought was a riduculous question, but you're saying > that's exactly what did happen? > > That does make this at least an interesting question. > -- > bkw > > > On 5/26/20 10:02 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> I find your statement ridiculous Brian. >> I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. >> >> >> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever >> has >> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever >> public, >> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >> >> -- >> bkw >> > > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 21 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 09:40:22 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CA+L8oh=BMd5axD73RHN1Y=V4K9VnG3-=tqjmwf8xwcclw0p...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Who manages that Bitchin100 that has the git repository I cloned? > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:38 Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ok, I?ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that. >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31 Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being >>>> shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >>>> >>>> thanks >>>> Steve >>>> >>> >>> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s >>> posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to >>> request the files be taken down. >>> >>> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >>> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of >>> us >>> have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs >>> decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. >>> >>> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >>> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as >>> Van?s agent. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Tom Wilson >>> wilso...@gmail.com >>> (619)940-6311 >>> K6ABZ >>> >> -- >> Faith without Works is Dead... >> > -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/d111a9c3/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 22 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:42:15 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <fcd35a5c-aa08-51e6-3c46-018217e03...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > This isn't about LaddieAlpha but about some things that are included in > M100SIG.zip, which is an archive of an old CompuServe forum that has > been around for some time. > > -- > bkw > > On 5/26/20 10:38 AM, Tom Dison wrote: >> Ok, I?ll delete LaddieAlpha. Sorry about that. >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:31 Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com >> <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com >> <mailto:twospru...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> Is there a way to comply?? I think once we know about a file >> being shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >> >> thanks >> Steve >> >> >> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If >> it?s posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he >> would have to request the files be taken down. >> >> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest >> of us have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if >> Van?s heirs decide they want his work made public, we?d have to >> respect that, too. >> >> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting >> as Van?s agent. >> >> >> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com> >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> >> -- >> Faith without Works is Dead... > > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 23 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:42:14 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV5ONqpQ=+dg3tatutudpngjhuqoccztze7+pg6rkps...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > It was commercial software, Brian. Why the impedance here? > The dispute was/is between Rick Hanson, who has departed, and Wilson Van > Alst, who's status is unknown. > > Wilson alleged that Rick made Wilson's commercial software available to all > via the M100SIG. It is a long ago dispute. That's about all I know. > Wilson requested that his programs be deleted from the M100SIG, which seems > like a reasonable request. > > That is why the currently available M100SIGNOVAN.ZIP is what is posted at > Bitchin100. > > Your sarcasm is very frustrating here, Brian. No one has to reach into > someone's harddrive to violate someones rights to their own work. > Distribution and use of someone's commercial products without permission to > do so is illegal. > > > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On 5/26/20 10:00 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> > If there were versions floating around that were not marked "no VAN" >> > then that was unfortunate. >> > It does not change the fact that Van's software was published >> > without his permission. >> > >> > What this is all about, is the fact that his software was published >> > without his permission. >> >> He didn't voluntarily post it to a public forum? Someone stole it from >> his hard drive? >> >> -- >> bkw >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/6b948257/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 24 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 07:43:08 -0700 > From: Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <calt8mqtm61auypqpysxsjfx04vm-cx+okyzf721pvqzk4wp...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I asked about LaddieAlpha, too. We can use it and even modify it, but we > can?t redistribute our changes to other people. > > I?ll dig out the email chain when I get a chance. Short version, it?s > publicly available, so of course you can download and use it. You just > cannot give it to someone else without a license - which you and I do not > have. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:05 AM Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Should I not be looking at the source? I was going to add some additional >> features. >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:02 Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I find your statement ridiculous Brian. >>> I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. >>> >>> >>>> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever >>>> has >>>> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever >>>> public, >>>> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> bke >>>> >>>> -- >> Faith without Works is Dead... >> > -- > Tom Wilson > wilso...@gmail.com > (619)940-6311 > K6ABZ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/abe974aa/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 25 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:44:53 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV49w_F5JNZFanoJOBhbRkFOWoCNcHy9qt=utxpxxyi...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Great, very interesting. > Unfortunate that this has happened. > Morally, I think it is the respectable thing to honor Wilson's wishes here > to the best ability we have. > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 AM Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being >>> shared >>> publicly we should take steps to remove it. >>> >>> thanks >>> Steve >>> >> >> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s >> posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to >> request the files be taken down. >> >> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of us >> have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs >> decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. >> >> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as >> Van?s agent. >> >> >> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/ec186b69/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 26 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:45:25 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <8493287EEB9A4C5897A3CFC6D8D99B3F@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Aside from the ethical issue of promulgating intellectual property against > the explicit wishes of the author, what does this have to do with > undocumented hardware? > > The question related to the SIG files was about some odd extensions on an > Othello game. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:23 AM > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > > >> On 5/26/20 4:23 AM, B 9 wrote: >>> My web based emulator https://bitchin100.com/CloudT has a partial >>> implementation of the display chip + some bugs specifically related >>> to the unused hardware scroll. Once I find my box of round tuits... >>> >>> >>> I think it may be lost in the same place mine went to. >> >> web8201.net has a copy, also just stuck a copy up in archive.org >> https://archive.org/details/M100SIG >> >> I think there was a full and a redacted version with some stuff removed. >> I don't know which one this is, but it's the same as the one from >> web8201.net, and the same as every other copy I had sprinkled around, >> like in the files section of the Facebook Model T Computers group, my >> google drive, my laptop... >> >> -- >> bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 27 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:50:46 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <7372E339625F45B7ACF47E73A2765D74@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Unless I'm missing something this M100SIG dicussion has nothing to do with > hardware scrolling or Laddie at all and Brian has mixed up two unrelated > threads. > > If you're talking about LaddieAlpha then John H is the man to talk to, but > I'm sure he won't mind. > > m > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Dison > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:05 AM > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > > > Should I not be looking at the source? I was going to add some additional > features. > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:02 Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I find your statement ridiculous Brian. > I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. > > > > Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever > has > any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever > public, > then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. > > -- > bke > > > -- > > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/5c2ced49/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 28 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 09:48:54 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <ca+l8ohkuwbz+ndflb_6mqt0mqqbvnqsthfnxvzshvbo8ooz...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Thanks, I?ll keep the changes to myself. I want to add an interface for > simplicity, maybe even a ?disk-drive? look to it. I have it on a RPI in a > case with a screen top. I think a full-screen Drive Image with blinking > activity light would be cool. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:43 Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I asked about LaddieAlpha, too. We can use it and even modify it, but we >> can?t redistribute our changes to other people. >> >> I?ll dig out the email chain when I get a chance. Short version, it?s >> publicly available, so of course you can download and use it. You just >> cannot give it to someone else without a license - which you and I do not >> have. >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:05 AM Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Should I not be looking at the source? I was going to add some >>> additional >>> features. >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 09:02 Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I find your statement ridiculous Brian. >>>> I hope this is simply because you were not aware of the theft. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Secondly, whichever version this is, I do not agree that anyone ever >>>>> has >>>>> any right to un-publish something after the fact. If it was ever >>>>> public, >>>>> then it's public. Don't like it? Too bad. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> bke >>>>> >>>>> -- >>> Faith without Works is Dead... >>> >> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> > -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/8d07f7aa/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 29 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 07:49:51 -0700 > From: Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CALt8mqS8DwJfa_o=AvOJMPf=7hjw4knzyxhewtrwomb70zb...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Absolutely. We certainly should not be passing around stuff that is being > actively withheld. > > I?m not against distributing orphaned works, but if someone has made a > point of saying ?that?s mine, you should not be copying it,? then we need > to respect that. > > But also, let?s not get hung up in the weeds and totally distracted from > the question that started all this... I don?t even remember what it was > now, or how that took a left turn into the SIG files. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:45 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Great, very interesting. >> Unfortunate that this has happened. >> Morally, I think it is the respectable thing to honor Wilson's wishes >> here >> to the best ability we have. >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 AM Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being >>>> shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >>>> >>>> thanks >>>> Steve >>>> >>> >>> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s >>> posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to >>> request the files be taken down. >>> >>> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >>> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of >>> us >>> have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs >>> decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. >>> >>> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >>> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as >>> Van?s agent. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Tom Wilson >>> wilso...@gmail.com >>> (619)940-6311 >>> K6ABZ >>> >> -- > Tom Wilson > wilso...@gmail.com > (619)940-6311 > K6ABZ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/9200c3f3/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 30 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 10:54:15 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: > <CAMCMnV5tPmDe2w9XJ3r2cDk7=2aeix2mdn_rukx12eui9jj...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > my bad, I should have started a separate thread on "what do do about > M100SIG posted at Internet Archive". > I'm done anyways. > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:50 AM Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Absolutely. We certainly should not be passing around stuff that is being >> actively withheld. >> >> I?m not against distributing orphaned works, but if someone has made a >> point of saying ?that?s mine, you should not be copying it,? then we need >> to respect that. >> >> But also, let?s not get hung up in the weeds and totally distracted from >> the question that started all this... I don?t even remember what it was >> now, or how that took a left turn into the SIG files. >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:45 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Great, very interesting. >>> Unfortunate that this has happened. >>> Morally, I think it is the respectable thing to honor Wilson's wishes >>> here to the best ability we have. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 AM Tom Wilson <wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being >>>>> shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>> >>>> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s >>>> posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have >>>> to >>>> request the files be taken down. >>>> >>>> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >>>> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of >>>> us >>>> have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs >>>> decide they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. >>>> >>>> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >>>> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as >>>> Van?s agent. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tom Wilson >>>> wilso...@gmail.com >>>> (619)940-6311 >>>> K6ABZ >>>> >>> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/f0ed296d/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 31 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:02:18 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <F0FAFF4EF0664095BC53CA2B347A30B4@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I don't think this is about legal issues but about the ethics of posting a > file to a public place like the Internet Archive when it contains commercial > software, even if it already exists elsewhere, and especially when the > author has explicitly requested that it not be posted publicly. > > m > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Wilson > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:31 AM > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > > > > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file being > shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. > > > thanks > Steve > > > Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If it?s > posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he would have to > request the files be taken down. > > > If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his > intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest of us > have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if Van?s heirs decide > they want his work made public, we?d have to respect that, too. > > > You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no > obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting as Van?s > agent. > > > > > -- > > Tom Wilson > wilso...@gmail.com > (619)940-6311 > K6ABZ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/dc35b95b/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 32 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:34:41 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <85295082-7d2c-61f8-6bdf-aa6c67394...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 10:42 AM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> It was commercial software, Brian.? Why the impedance here > If you don't like impedance then I suggest the way to avoid it is to > stop expecting something you have no right to. > > If you don't want something of yours published, you can opt not to > publish it, and if I broke into your house and stole your hard drive, > you have every right to make demands of me about that. > > Anything else, *of course* you have to convince me why I should agree > with whatever it is you wish I would do or not-do. > > If a wrong has been done to some 3rd party and you just care about that > for whatever reason, be it principle or personal,and you'd like to see > it undone or it's damage limited, and you want something out of me in > the pursuit of that, so far all of that is entirely reasonable. But *of > course* you have to convince me, and can only ever ask me, not actually > demand or expect compliance. > > You might have a valid point and it might indeed be the right thing to > do, and I might even agree with you, but until you say more than "do > this", I'm simply un-moved that's all. > > -- > bkw > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 33 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:41:47 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] "No-VAN" obligation > Message-ID: <fbd621c1-f2fd-0a4a-898d-28c38ac44...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > So, the issue is that the stuff in question was commercial software? > > IE, it was neither publicly posted by the author, nor stolen from his > hard drive, but was commercial software that was re-distributed illegally? > > That is the detail that was missing or unclear to me. > > -- > bkw > > On 5/26/20 11:02 AM, Mike Stein wrote: >> ? >> I don't think this is?about legal issues but about the ethics of posting >> a file to a public place like the Internet Archive when it contains >> commercial software, even if it already exists elsewhere, and especially >> when the author has explicitly requested that it not be posted publicly. >> m >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Tom Wilson <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com> >> *To:* m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:31 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com >> <mailto:twospru...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> Is there a way to comply?? I think once we know about a file >> being shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >> >> thanks >> Steve >> >> >> Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If >> it?s posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he >> would have to request the files be taken down. >> >> If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >> intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest >> of us have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if >> Van?s heirs decide they want his work made public, we?d have to >> respect that, too. >> >> You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >> obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting >> as Van?s agent. >> >> >> -- >> Tom Wilson >> wilso...@gmail.com <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com> >> (619)940-6311 >> K6ABZ >> > > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 34 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:59:36 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <8668E62B985947679418214CDF493D5D@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > > >> ... you have to convince me why I should agree >> with whatever it is you wish I would do or not-do. > --- > I don't think anyone has to convince you of anything. > > It's up to you whether to respect the wishes of the author of some > commercial software (who also made many other contributions to the Model T > knowledge base) that it not be spread around, and I think you've made your > ethical position quite clear. > > Again, for anyone still confused this has nothing to do with undocumented > hardware or Laddie etc. transfer programs. > > m > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/816f3858/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 35 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 12:10:11 -0400 > From: Stephen Adolph <twospru...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] "No-VAN" obligation > Message-ID: > <camcmnv5rjokycuzw-rjhccq+vpzohtxgnyx8rtvj1nq8_k5...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > That is what I said, yes. I simply and politely asked if you (supposing it > was you that posted it) could do something about it. > > So I will ask again, politely. > > Can and will anything be done about it? As I have said, I think, if > possible, that the M100SIG should be removed from the internet archive. > > > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 11:41 AM Brian K. White <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> So, the issue is that the stuff in question was commercial software? >> >> IE, it was neither publicly posted by the author, nor stolen from his >> hard drive, but was commercial software that was re-distributed >> illegally? >> >> That is the detail that was missing or unclear to me. >> >> -- >> bkw >> >> On 5/26/20 11:02 AM, Mike Stein wrote: >> > ? >> > I don't think this is about legal issues but about the ethics of >> > posting >> > a file to a public place like the Internet Archive when it contains >> > commercial software, even if it already exists elsewhere, and >> > especially >> > when the author has explicitly requested that it not be posted >> > publicly. >> > m >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > *From:* Tom Wilson <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com> >> > *To:* m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com> >> > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2020 10:31 AM >> > *Subject:* Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:00 AM Stephen Adolph >> > <twospru...@gmail.com >> > <mailto:twospru...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Is there a way to comply? I think once we know about a file >> > being shared publicly we should take steps to remove it. >> > >> > thanks >> > Steve >> > >> > >> > Legally speaking, only Van can make someone take down his work. If >> > it?s posted to Internet Archive without his permission, then he >> > would have to request the files be taken down. >> > >> > If he can?t (because he has passed away), then whoever inherits his >> > intellectual property would have to make that request. The the rest >> > of us have no legal authority to act on his behalf. In fact, if >> > Van?s heirs decide they want his work made public, we?d have to >> > respect that, too. >> > >> > You can ask so Archive.org nicely, I suppose, but they are under no >> > obligation to honor a request from a third party that is not acting >> > as Van?s agent. >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Tom Wilson >> > wilso...@gmail.com <mailto:wilso...@gmail.com> >> > (619)940-6311 >> > K6ABZ >> > >> >> >> -- >> bkw >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/baff720c/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 36 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 12:13:10 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <a72a2ab5-2105-72a9-7d4f-88993fc85...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote: >> ? >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com >> <mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> >> To: <m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM >> Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >> >> > ... you have to convince me why I should agree >> > with whatever it is you wish I would do or not-do. >> --- >> I don't think anyone /has to convince you/ of anything. >> It's up to you whether to respect the wishes of the author of some >> commercial software (who also made many other contributions to the Model >> T knowledge base) that it not be spread around, and I think you've made >> your ethical position quite clear. >> Again, for anyone still confused this has nothing to do with >> undocumented hardware or Laddie etc. transfer programs. >> m > > I don't understand how you can still fail to grasp the essentials of > something so simple, and clearly explained. > > Correct, no one has to convince me of anything. Unless they want > something out of me. > > I respect any wishes that in my opinion the wisher has some right to. > > I wish a lot of things that I am quite sure you do not respect. > > At the beginning of this thread, I had no information to suggest why I > should respect the expressed wish. Now, I have more information, or at > least hints to it. It's still not a closed question for me, but it's at > least now an interesting one that I haven't finished considering yet. > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 37 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 12:16:53 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] "No-VAN" obligation > Message-ID: <d08242a6-f983-d367-87b9-5af4ac19b...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 12:10 PM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> That is what I said, yes.? I simply and politely asked if you (supposing >> it was you that posted it) could do something about it. >> >> So I will ask again, politely. >> >> Can and will anything be done about it?? As I have said, I think, if >> possible, that the M100SIG should be removed from the internet archive. > > I posted it. > > It's the same as the copy Gary has been hosting on web8201 forever and > still today. > > I don't know if I can take it back down, but I assume I can, or that I > can at least ask. > > I am answering politely that I don't know yet whether I will try. > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 38 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:42 -0400 > From: "Mike Stein" <mhs.st...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <D96B519C01D24ED182445DC128F7CE81@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: <m...@bitchin100.com> > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:13 PM > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > > >> On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote: >>> ? >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> >>> To: <m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM >>> Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >>> > >> I don't understand how you can still fail to grasp the essentials of >> something so simple, and clearly explained. >> >> Correct, no one has to convince me of anything. Unless they want >> something out of me. > ------------- > I respectfully suggest that you're not grasping the essentials. > > I don't personally want anything and I don't think Steve does either; we're > only passing on the wishes of the author of the software being discussed > (confusingly OT BTW, thanks to you) and suggesting that you might want to > respect those wishes, even if others have not done so. Trying to convince > you that something is just 'the right thing to do' is obviously futile. > > You've made it clear that only you will decide whether or not to honour > those wishes and that's fine; let the readers of this thread form their own > opinions. > > 'nuff said. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 39 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 14:04:36 -0400 > From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware > Message-ID: <2d30a94c-9c71-86a0-44d4-2c2e98259...@gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 5/26/20 1:46 PM, Mike Stein wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com> >> To: <m...@bitchin100.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 12:13 PM >> Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >> >> >>> On 5/26/20 11:59 AM, Mike Stein wrote: >>>> ? >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Brian K. White" <b.kenyo...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:b.kenyo...@gmail.com>> >>>> To: <m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 11:34 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [M100] Undocumented hardware >>>> >> >>> I don't understand how you can still fail to grasp the essentials of >>> something so simple, and clearly explained. >>> >>> Correct, no one has to convince me of anything. Unless they want >>> something out of me. >> ------------- >> I respectfully suggest that you're not grasping the essentials. >> >> I don't personally want anything and I don't think Steve does either; >> we're only passing on the wishes of the author of the software being >> discussed (confusingly OT BTW, thanks to you) > > Thanks to _who_? > > and suggesting that you might want to respect those wishes, even if > others have not done so. Trying to convince you that something is just > 'the right thing to do' is obviously futile. > > It's certainly futile to do more than make the suggestion and provide > the basis for it. > > And I have not said or done a thing to suggest that I have any problem > with that much. What problem do you have with that, that causes you to > be persuing this conversation in this manner? > > Either have a point, and be able to defend it, or expect me to keep > pointing out that you haven't supplied a basis for your various remarks > and challenges. > >> You've made it clear that only you will decide whether or not to honour >> those wishes and that's fine; > > I disbelieve that you think this is fine, but the words at least are > correct, this *is* fine. > > -- > bkw > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 40 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:05:35 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: [M100] Reuse of laddie > Message-ID: > <cacutkujkdlsa5jpe9uayd8nwwhcssrvy_0evizzwaxxwsku...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As to enhancements to Laddie I'd like to keep it a command line tool for my > part. > > Tom if you wanted to add a graphical shell that ran it as is we could work > out a (free of charge) license where you could redistribute the Exe with > your program. If that didn't work I could refactor it into a library for > reuse. > > My own intent is to add to laddie an interactive full screen TELCOM > interface that simulates the Model T's main menu. I have the menu working > where I can pick files. > > But instead of putting a GUI on the host machine it exposes that text UI > over the serial connection just like the TPDD protocol and automatically > switched between. > > Sort of like the CLI built into Nadsbox but a full screen interface. > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/061fd15c/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 41 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:13:44 -0500 > From: Tom Dison <fretina...@gmail.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: Re: [M100] Reuse of laddie > Message-ID: > <ca+l8ohnv_kz39r9bpz6or1b6ethyiekf2c-hq6omt+7qswx...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I like it! > > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 13:05 John R. Hogerhuis <jho...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> As to enhancements to Laddie I'd like to keep it a command line tool for >> my part. >> >> Tom if you wanted to add a graphical shell that ran it as is we could >> work >> out a (free of charge) license where you could redistribute the Exe with >> your program. If that didn't work I could refactor it into a library for >> reuse. >> >> My own intent is to add to laddie an interactive full screen TELCOM >> interface that simulates the Model T's main menu. I have the menu working >> where I can pick files. >> >> But instead of putting a GUI on the host machine it exposes that text UI >> over the serial connection just like the TPDD protocol and automatically >> switched between. >> >> Sort of like the CLI built into Nadsbox but a full screen interface. >> >> -- John. >> > -- > Faith without Works is Dead... > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/78e15416/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 42 > Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:26:15 -0700 > From: "John R. Hogerhuis" <jho...@pobox.com> > To: m...@bitchin100.com > Subject: [M100] The Dead Hand > Message-ID: > <cacutkuiv2hef-00tijvm2n9ydzqn622ajb5pqfd+cau6ddp...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > The M100SIG thing is a very old battle based on an older rivalry. > > Apparently there was rivalry between the Compuserve SIG and Club100. > > I guess after Compuserve's demise Rick H. made the SIG file archive > available. > > Wilson Van Alst who was a big contributor to the community demanded the > whole thing be removed because he had some copyrighted files that he had > uploaded only for the Compuserve SIG. > > I picked the middle ground and created the "NOVAN" archive that has just > his files removed to honor his wishes /copyright. > > Rick's gone now and Wilson GAFiated and may be gone too. > > Better that we not continue their old battle. Sounds like Brian uploaded > the archive but it was probably the NOVAN version because that's likely the > only one around. > > -= Model Ts Forever =- > > -- John. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.bitchin100.com/private.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com/attachments/20200526/7f8b8442/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > M100 mailing list > M100@lists.bitchin100.com > http://lists.bitchin100.com/listinfo.cgi/m100-bitchin100.com > > > ------------------------------ > > End of M100 Digest, Vol 113, Issue 20 > ************************************* >
