On Jan 6, 2005, at 9:34 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
What is your favorite e-mail program? What's the best thing about it?
What's the worst thing about it? What OSs does it work under? Is it
more
mouse-dependent or can it be mostly or fully driven from the keyboard?
How much would it cost for me t
On 7 Jan 2005, at 6:49 am, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Jan 6, 2005, at 9:34 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
What is your favorite e-mail program? What's the best thing about it?
What's the worst thing about it? What OSs does it work under? Is it
more
mouse-dependent or can it be mostly or fully driven
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:34:05PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
> What is your favorite e-mail program?
The Mutt E-Mail Client
http://www.mutt.org/
> What's the best thing about it?
"All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less."
> What's the worst thing about it?
"All mail clients suck.
I have used Netscape, Microsoft Outlook, and Outlook Express. I think
I briefly tried Eudora. I liked Netscape the best and Outlook was
fine for work but I didn't like for home. I have used Outlook Express
for home for years but am increasingly dissatisfied, I like to save
emails. I am now tryin
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 03:47:14 -0600, Gary Denton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have used Netscape, Microsoft Outlook, and Outlook Express. I think
> I briefly tried Eudora. I liked Netscape the best and Outlook was
> fine for work but I didn't like for home. I have used Outlook Express
> for home
Warren Ockrassa wrote:
Netscape Communicator has a very nice thread manager for
discussion groups (!) and integrates more or less
seamlessly with Navigator. (Freeware.)
That's close to the one I'd recommend, Mozilla Thunderbird. It's
free, and has a Bayesian spam filter. It also works like the old
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:12:58AM -0500, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:34:05PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
> > What is your favorite e-mail program?
>
> The Mutt E-Mail Client
> http://www.mutt.org/
By the way, if you want to see how mutt's nifty threading feature looks
on Bri
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:12:58AM -0500, Erik Reuter wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> Is there any way to change the look of Mutt?
Of course, didn't you to the link I gave? Mutt is fully customizable, as
I said.
> Your screenshot looks like it was designed for an Atari 2600 at worst
> or a 286 at best. Ugly as si
On Jan 8, 2005, at 9:10 AM, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:12:58AM -0500, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 10:34:05PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
What is your favorite e-mail program?
The Mutt E-Mail Client
http://www.mutt.org/
By the way, if you want to see how mutt's nif
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Gary Denton wrote:
> I have used Netscape, Microsoft Outlook, and Outlook Express. I think
> I briefly tried Eudora. I liked Netscape the best and Outlook was
> fine for work but I didn't like for home. I have used Outlook Express
> for home for years but am increasingly d
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> > Is th
- Original Message -
From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> Methinks Robert was expecting something other than a text-only
console
> window
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:48:19AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> Certainly, but you know how it is.lots of programs use the
> term "fully customizable" when they actually aren't. It never hurts to
If you really did go to the mutt webpage link I provided, you would
have been able to rea
On Jan 8, 2005, at 11:34 AM, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:48:19AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Certainly, but you know how it is.lots of programs use the
term "fully customizable" when they actually aren't. It never hurts to
If you really did go to the mutt webpage link I
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:48:19AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
>
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:41:17AM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> The mutt site is really more a vast collection of links, and I'm more
> likely to align with Robert here -- if you're recommending the product
> ostensibly you know something about it, and it might be much more
> sensible to ask a
On Jan 8, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:41:17AM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
The mutt site is really more a vast collection of links, and I'm more
likely to align with Robert here -- if you're recommending the product
ostensibly you know something about it, and i
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:40:55AM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> Perhaps there's another way to convince him. What's the system load
> mutt imposes? My Mail.app is currently using 42 MB actual, 130 MB
> virtual memory, which is a hell of a lot for email.
Below is the output of top while mutt is
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:04:48PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> So you felt that resorting to rudeness was the most proper response?
You think stating a fact ("please pay attention if you want me to reply
to your questions") is rude. You are entitled to your opinion, even if
it is silly. But d
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:04:48PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> Well it would seem, based on the nature of your comments here, that
> you are on the wrong list.
Perhaps, since you and Gary started posting. But that is easily solved
with a kill file if it gets to be a problem.
--
Erik Reuter
Erik said:
> You think stating a fact ("please pay attention if you want me to
> reply to your questions") is rude.
I think the quoted text is not, strictly speaking, a fact.
> I think not paying attention but still expecting people to provide
> helpful responses is not particularly astute. Espe
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 08:26:47PM +, Richard Baker wrote:
> Erik said:
>
> > You think stating a fact ("please pay attention if you want me to
> > reply to your questions") is rude.
>
> I think the quoted text is not, strictly speaking, a fact.
You are, of course, correct. The phrasing was,
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:04:48PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
>
>
> >
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 02:44:06PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "Erik Reuter"
>
> > On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:04:48PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Did you get beaten up a lot in school or something?
> >
> > Did you have trouble with girls in s
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 02:44:06PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> > --
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:04:50PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 2:55 PM
> Subject: Re: E-mail program quest
- Original Message -
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion"
Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: E-mail program questions
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:04:50PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> &
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:17:29PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "Erik Reuter"
>
> > On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:04:50PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> > > From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 02:44:06PM -0600, Rob
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 04:25:29PM -0500, Erik Reuter wrote:
> And to get back on subject, your email reply had serious problems. It
> really mangled the quote lines. It took me longer to fix that then to
> type the reply.
http://erikreuter.net/erik/misc/mutt2.html
By the way, here is a screensh
Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:17:29PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
>> - Original Message - From: "Erik Reuter"
>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:04:50PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>>>
From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 0
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:52:54PM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> Mutt looks good and I would try it if I could find a Win port of it,
> but I didn't see anything to that regard on the page you linked to.
http://cygwin.com/
I haven't tried it, but you should be able to run mutt under Cygwin. (
Erik Reuter wrote:
http://erikreuter.net/erik/misc/mutt2.html
By the way, here is a screenshot showing another trick the mutt can do.
Colorizing each level of quotes in a message. Of course it only works if
other emailers don't mangle the quotes...
No doubt it will make Rob's eyes hurt, but it help
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 06:45:44PM -0500, maru wrote:
> But more importantly, were you running mutt as root, you naughty
> person?
No, that is a bug in PuTTy.
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/br
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, maru wrote:
> ~Maru
> Unsolicited security advice is the best kind!
Depends on the form it takes. :) Hacking into someone's system without
permission and then pointing out the problem to them isn't terribly good.
Noting a possible problem without hacking and pointing it
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 06:45:44PM -0500, maru wrote:
> But more importantly, were you running mutt as root, you naughty
> person?
To elaborate, PuTTy changes the window title to root whenever it detects
an "su", but it does not change the window title back when the su is
exited. Not a big deal s
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> Thunderbird does a similar act with threading and it seems to work
> pretty good. Is there any way to change the look of Mutt?
I was curious how threading compared on mutt, Thunderbird, and mail.app.
A google turned up this post:
Now that's interesting: I use 'sudo' meself. A curious bug in puTTY.
Another thing: wouldn't your prompt change automatically,
from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But I take it from your last section that
you are actually getting all your email from /var/mail/, right, since if
you were u
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:23:32PM -0500, maru wrote:
> Now that's interesting: I use 'sudo' meself. A curious bug in
> puTTY. Another thing: wouldn't your prompt change automatically, from
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On my system, the prompt is set automatically whenever a person
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:41:17AM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
>
> > The mutt site is really more a vast collection of links, and I'm more
> > likely to align with Robert here -- if you're recommending the product
> > ostensibly you know something abou
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> > Is there any way to change the look of Mutt?
>
> Of course, didn't you to the link I gave? Mutt is fully customizable, as
> I said.
>
> > Your screenshot looks like it was designed
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:16:41PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
> If everyone really meant "fully customizable" when they said it, it
> wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, over 50% of the people using
> it don't *really* mean it, and it may be over 90%. It's become a
> buzzword (buzzphrase?) th
On Jan 8, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 12:04:48PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
So you felt that resorting to rudeness was the most proper response?
You think stating a fact ("please pay attention if you want me to reply
to your questions") is rude.
No; I think it's
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:33:14PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> No; I think it's rude to assume that the entire world will sit quietly
> at your lotus-flower feet and play rapt attention as dulcet strains
> of truth fall like gems from your ruby lips, carefully taking note of
> every jewel of a
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 06:45:44PM -0500, maru wrote:
But more importantly, were you running mutt as root, you naughty
person?
No, that is a bug in PuTTy.
And how come your cwd is etc?
Just curious, though I'm tempted to bombast about how nobody belongs in
etc unless they're c
Erik Reuter wrote:
Thunderbird manages to get threading mostly correct, but it
sometimes places replies in the wrong place in the tree. It looks
like the threading code is basing much of its decisions on the
Subject: header, when it really should be using References: and
In-Reply-To:. It
Julia Thompson wrote:
What is your favorite e-mail program? What's the best thing about it?
What's the worst thing about it? What OSs does it work under? Is it more
mouse-dependent or can it be mostly or fully driven from the keyboard?
How much would it cost for me to get a properly license
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 08:04:33AM -0800, Nick Arnett wrote:
> Erik Reuter wrote:
> >On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 06:45:44PM -0500, maru wrote:
> >
> >
> >>But more importantly, were you running mutt as root, you naughty
> >>person?
> >
> >
> >No, that is a bug in PuTTy.
>
> And how come your cwd is et
Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
>> Thunderbird does a similar act with threading and it seems to work
>> pretty good. Is there any way to change the look of Mutt?
>
> I was curious how threading compared on mutt, Thunderbird, and
> mail.app.
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:16:55 -0600, Robert Seeberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Erik Reuter wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
> >
> >> Thunderbird does a similar act with threading and it seems to work
> >> pretty good. Is there any way to change the look
Erik Reuter wrote:
You'll have to bombast someone else. Perhaps you could bombast the
author of PuTTy, if you're so keen to bombast someone.
Nah, I like PuTTy. Use it just about every day... I probably have at
least two sessions going all the time. What version are you using? I
haven't noticed
Robert Seeberger wrote:
So it was a bit of a mixed bag for Thunderbird. It replicated all my
settings accurately and seems to possess a superior functionality
overall (in comparison to OE at least).
The downside was that it didn't replicate my filters (which I find
problematic since the filtering s
Robert Seeberger wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 11:07:02AM -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Thunderbird does a similar act with threading and it seems to work
pretty good. Is there any way to change the look of Mutt?
I was curious how threading compared on mutt, Thun
* Nick Arnett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> What version are you using?
0.53b
> haven't noticed the stuff you're describing... but then again, I'm
> probably just not paying attention.
Probably not. I'm not sure why anyone would worry about the window
title bar, since the command prompt has the
On Jan 9, 2005, at 3:53 AM, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:33:14PM -0700, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
I also think it's rude to offer advice on a topic and, when asked
for further information, to behave as though you've been massively
inconvenienced, your attention diverted from other ma
* Warren Ockrassa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> wrong? Or is it just possible that the information we're giving you --
> that you're curt at best, rude at least, and arrogant at worst online
> -- might in fact be completely true?
Has it occurred to you that I don't care one whit about your opinion
On Jan 10, 2005, at 5:35 PM, Erik Reuter wrote:
* Warren Ockrassa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
wrong? Or is it just possible that the information we're giving you --
that you're curt at best, rude at least, and arrogant at worst online
-- might in fact be completely true?
Has it occurred to you that
On Jan 10, 2005, at 4:35 PM, Erik Reuter wrote:
* Warren Ockrassa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
wrong? Or is it just possible that the information we're giving you --
that you're curt at best, rude at least, and arrogant at worst online
-- might in fact be completely true?
Has it occurred to you that
Warren wrote:
It's your life, your time to waste, and your problem, of course.
But of course he doesn't consider it a problem and there's not much any of
us could do or say to change that. So perhaps the right way to deal with
those mannerisms that we are uncomfortable with but that we can't do
Erik Reuter rudely contributed:
> * Warren Ockrassa ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > wrong? Or is it just possible that the information we're
> giving you --
> > that you're curt at best, rude at least, and arrogant at
> worst online
> > -- might in fact be completely true?
>
> Has it occurr
On 11 Jan 2005, at 6:28 pm, God wrote:
Erik, if Warren has posted nothing you consider worthwile reading, why
do
you read his posts and reply to them?
I surmise he sometimes succumbs to a charitable impulse to help improve
his fellow man.
--
William T Goodall
Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web : http
Erik Reuter wrote:
Because when I su, it is frequently to configure something in /etc.
And here I thought when people su-ed, they went to /court, not to /etc...
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
At 03:52 PM Saturday 1/8/2005, Robert Seeberger wrote:
What little slack I've had this afternoon is being interrupted by a
pain-in-the-ass cat who likes to tear things up. In the middle of
posting this he tore into a roll of toilet paper, spreading it all
over the bathroom. We've tried keeping pape
>
>
>
>
>>>All of the rude, sarcastic and abrasive comments snipped for reasons of
sanity.
Julia, your such a troublemaker What the hell were you thinking when you
posted such an inflammatory and provocative question like "what email
program should I use?"
Although, I must admit that Rob'
Gary Nunn wrote:
>If you can't stand the heat, don't tickle the dragon
Oh, is *that* what the kids are calling it these days? :-)
Jim
No gag too base Maru
___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
_
I was waiting for someone to point out just who had stirred up the
hornet's nest. ;)
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Gary Nunn wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>All of the rude, sarcastic and abrasive comments snipped for reasons of
> sanity.
>
>
> Julia, your such a troublemaker What the hell were you
> I was waiting for someone to point out just who had stirred
> up the hornet's nest. ;)
I guess that we can add "Email Clients" to the "sensitive topics" list right
up there with abortion, gay marriage, politics, gun control and comparisons
of list members to Hitler.
> Circus Peanuts? I pr
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 09:56:29PM -0500, Gary Nunn wrote:
> > Or am I about to *really* start an argument with that statement? :)
>
> It's the same old argument: Great Taste or Less Filling?
Are you trying to start a real flamewar about candy?
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
_
Julia wrote...
> > > Or am I about to *really* start an argument with that
> statement? :)
I wrote
> > It's the same old argument: Great Taste or Less Filling?
Erik wrote
> Are you trying to start a real flamewar about candy?
Erik, sometimes you surprise me by allowing that well hid
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:08:38PM -0500, Gary Nunn wrote:
> Erik, sometimes you surprise me by allowing that well hidden sense of
> humor of yours to peek out :-)
Gary, now there is no need to be rude...
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
_
> > Erik, sometimes you surprise me by allowing that well
> hidden sense of
> > humor of yours to peek out :-)
>
> Gary, now there is no need to be rude...
[hanging my head] your right, forgive me...
It is the sugar high making me crazy tonight :-)
__
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Gary Nunn wrote:
> > Circus Peanuts? I prefer Peeps, myself.
> >
> > Or am I about to *really* start an argument with that statement? :)
>
> It's the same old argument: Great Taste or Less Filling?
>
> Actually, I have to agree with you on this, had I had access to peeps
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 09:56:29PM -0500, Gary Nunn wrote:
>
> > > Or am I about to *really* start an argument with that statement? :)
> >
> > It's the same old argument: Great Taste or Less Filling?
>
> Are you trying to start a real flamewar about can
Gary Nunn spoketh:
> I guess that we can add "Email Clients" to the "sensitive
> topics" list right up there with abortion, gay marriage,
> politics, gun control and comparisons of list members to Hitler.
You forgot to include "which OS is superior: Windows or MacOS or *nix?" :)
God wrote:
Gary Nunn spoketh:
I guess that we can add "Email Clients" to the "sensitive
topics" list right up there with abortion, gay marriage,
politics, gun control and comparisons of list members to Hitler.
You forgot to include "which OS is superior: Windows or MacOS or *nix?" :)
God wrote:
> Gary Nunn spoketh:
>
>> I guess that we can add "Email Clients" to the "sensitive
>> topics" list right up there with abortion, gay marriage,
>> politics, gun control and comparisons of list members to Hitler.
>
> You forgot to include "which OS is superior: Windows or MacOS or
> *nix?
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Jim Sharkey wrote:
>
> Gary Nunn wrote:
> >If you can't stand the heat, don't tickle the dragon
>
> Oh, is *that* what the kids are calling it these days? :-)
>
> Jim
> No gag too base Maru
Considering all the problems Tommy has been having with reflux, I consider
"gag"
Robert Seeberger spoketh:
> Question to religious listmembers:
>
> Are religious peoples required to killfile this particular "GOD"
> individual because of the first commandment?
For the Christians: Such act would violate My updated Sixth Commandment:
Thou shalt not kill(file).
For all others
God wrote:
> Robert Seeberger spoketh:
>
>> Question to religious listmembers:
>>
>> Are religious peoples required to killfile this particular "GOD"
>> individual because of the first commandment?
>
> For the Christians: Such act would violate My updated Sixth
> Commandment: Thou shalt not kill(fi
On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
If thou werest truely God, Thou wouldst be able to communicate in the
modern f*cking vernacular.
Actually, you'd think the deity would be able to produce a simplified,
unambiguous language that was easy to learn.
Hmm, perhaps "god" speaks Es
On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
If thou werest truely God, Thou wouldst be able to communicate in the
modern f*cking vernacular.
Actually, you'd think the deity would be able to produce a simplified,
unambiguous language th
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
>
> > If thou werest truely God, Thou wouldst be able to communicate in the
> > modern f*cking vernacular.
>
> Actually, you'd think the deity would be able to produce a simplified,
> unambig
On Jan 10, 2005, at 5:13 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
Hmm, perhaps "god" speaks Esperanto. ;)
How easy is Esperanto to learn by someone who's spoken nothing but
Japanese up to the point of trying to learn it?
Much easier than learning English.
And apparently Klingon is about as useful as Esperanto the
On Monday 2005-01-10 16:46, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
> > If thou werest truely God, Thou wouldst be able to communicate in the
> > modern f*cking vernacular.
>
> Actually, you'd think the deity would be able to produce a simplified,
> unambigu
Rob wrote...
> > Or do we wait for Nick to kick God off the list because he might be
> > Jeroen?
Our false god Apophis wannabe wrote...
> Thou dareth equate Me with a mere mortal thou calleth Jeroen?
> Thou wisheth to violate My First and My Sixth Commandment?
> Thou really wisheth for Me t
Warren Ockrassa asked:
> Isn't it Australia were "Jedi" is recognized as a legitimate religion
> by the government?
I dunno about that, but it was the UK where more than 50% of the
respondents claimed 'Jedi' as their religion during the last census.
Ritu
__
Ritu said:
> I dunno about that, but it was the UK where more than 50% of the
> respondents claimed 'Jedi' as their religion during the last census.
Not quite:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2757067.stm
Rich, who should've listed "Sith"
___
http://ww
Rich wrote:
> > I dunno about that, but it was the UK where more than 50% of the
> > respondents claimed 'Jedi' as their religion during the last census.
>
> Not quite:
>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2757067.stm
>
> Rich, who should've listed "Sith"
My figures were way off the mark...
Than
88 matches
Mail list logo
