Doug Pensinger wrote:
For the information of those who haven't been on the list for very
long, or who might not understand even though they have, the reason I
do not respond to JDG is that he and I have had several less than
civilized encounters and I decided after the last one (over a year
ag
- Original Message -
From: "Sonja van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 4:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
> > For the information of those wh
On 14 Nov 2003, at 4:20 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore
their
posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
religious people expect that they should take regular insults with good
grace, while less insulting thing
Dan Minette wrote:
>
> I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore their
> posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
> religious people expect that they should take regular insults with good
> grace, while less insulting things written by JDG are
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
> I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
> are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may
be out of it now, I'm not sure. Anyway, in case you forgot, I'm not
religious.
--
Erik
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
> > are
>
> Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may be
> out of it now, I'm not sure. A
On 14 Nov 2003 at 14:19, Julia Thompson wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> > > I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list
> > > who are
> >
> > Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfile
--- Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hm. Wondering now:
>
> how many religious people on list
I prefer "spiritual," but I suppose you could place me
in this category. ;)
> how many very non-religious people on list
> how many people have killfiles
None currently (I presume this
From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Explanation
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:19:58 -0600 (CST)
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at
On 14 Nov 2003, at 9:22 pm, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 14 Nov 2003 at 14:19, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list
who are
Perhaps you forgot th
On 14 Nov 2003, at 8:19 pm, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
are
Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, although I may
On 14 Nov 2003 at 23:40, William T Goodall wrote:
>
> On 14 Nov 2003, at 9:22 pm, Andrew Crystall wrote:
>
> > On 14 Nov 2003 at 14:19, Julia Thompson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
> >>>
>
From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
> >
> > > I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
> > > are
> >
> > Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me fo
Andrew Crystall wrote:
>
> Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
> regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
>
> I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are
> scientoligists and made them offensive to me off the list.
>
So you are als
William T Goodall wrote:
>
> I'm mildly non-religious
>
No, you are fanatically anti-religious :-P
Alberto Monteiro
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
In a message dated 11/14/2003 4:47:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> well, I *do*
> toss out the baseball/football posts frequently :\
No no say it isn't so. I have been engaged in these mostly for your entertainment
___
http://w
At 02:19 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Erik Reuter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 10:20:14AM -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who
> > are
>
> Perhaps you forgot that JDG killfiled me for a while, al
At 05:31 PM 11/14/03 +, William T Goodall wrote:
On 14 Nov 2003, at 4:20 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore their
posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
religious people expect that they should take regula
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >[I wrote:]
> > well, I *do*
> > toss out the baseball/football posts frequently
> :\
> No no say it isn't so. I have been engaged in these
> mostly for your entertainment
All right, OK, very well then! --
Play ball!
Debbi
who never managed - no, *never* - to s
Dan Minette wrote:
I've noticed a rather interesting asymmetry. People on the list who are
religious are expected to regularly read posts that proclaim them evil,
mentally defective, etc. and let the insults just slide off their backs.
Who expects that? Is that in the etiquette guidelines: relig
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Sonja van Baardwijk&qu
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael Harney wrote:
>
> From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Julia
> >
> > doesn't use killfiles, certainly not on mailing lists
>
> I would definately not killfile anyone on a list that I was moderating,
> that much is certain, but if someone is going far e
At 09:33 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael Harney wrote:
>
> From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Julia
> >
> > doesn't use killfiles, certainly not on mailing lists
>
> I would definately not killfile anyone on a list that I was moderating,
> that
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> Have I ever begun a post "Look, punk..."?
No, and you've never done the (highly irritating, IMO) thing of saying
"Bzzt, thank you for playing" or something similar, either.
Julia
___
http://www.m
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> At 09:33 PM 11/14/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
>
>
> >On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Michael Harney wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > > Julia
> > > >
> > > > doesn't use killfiles, certainly not on mailing list
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > I've noticed a rather i
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Andrew Crystall wrote:
> >
> > Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
> > regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
> >
> > I have a few on the culture list, because the individuals are
> > scientoligis
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > I've noticed a rather i
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Doug Pensinger&qu
From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Explanation
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:20:14 -0600
- Original Message -
From: "Sonja van Ba
Dan Minette wrote:
No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil?
Dan M.
No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil.
How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling
religion evil?
Now I'm not excusing his excesses at all, but you
Julia asked:
> Hm. Wondering now:
>
> how many religious people on list
> how many very non-religious people on list
> how many people have killfiles
> if killfiles by religious people have primarily non-religious people
> if killfiles by non-religious people have primarily religious people
I
Andrew Crystall wrote:
>
>> So you are also fanatically anti-religious, for some specific
>> religions.
>>
>> I am surrounded by fanatics!!!
>
> Anti-religion? No.
> Anti-scientolgist? YES.
>
> Scientology is a *dangerous* UFO Cult
>
Dangerous? In which way?
Alberto Monteiro - who would like to ha
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Andrew Crystall wrote:
> >
> > Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
> > regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
> >
> > I have a few on the culture
On 15 Nov 2003, at 1:26 pm, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Andrew Crystall wrote:
> >
> > Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
> > regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quo
On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 07:26:21AM -0600, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> I didn't realize UFOs were involved. But, then, I've not made a
> detailed study of it.
No one has. THAT's why their unidentified!
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikreuter.net/
___
ht
On 15 Nov 2003, at 4:10 am, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 15 Nov 2003 at 1:22, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Andrew Crystall wrote:
Not you. I don't think either of the people I killfiled are that
regular posters anymore. (no-one else is quoting them anyway)
I have a few on the culture list, because the in
In a message dated 11/14/2003 9:54:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> All right, OK, very well then! -- face" with glasses and sits with chin on fist>
> Play ball!
Ata girl
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
At 02:19 PM 11/14/2003 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote:
>how many religious people on list
Very free from my estimation.
>how many very non-religious people on list
Certainly more than the former.
>how many people have killfiles
Well, I would be interested in the results of Jon's proposed poll.
>i
At 11:25 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
>> No, as I've never stated you were evil. Did JDG ever call you evil?
>>
>> Dan M.
>>
>> No, but JDG does not post 20 times a day that you are evil.
>>
>
>How many times has he called you, personally, evil, as opposed to calling
>religion evil?
At 07:23 PM 11/14/2003 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
>> I have no trouble with anyone deciding to killfile someone, ignore their
>> posts, etc. That's perfectly reasonable. But, its funny that even the
>> religious people expect that they should take regular insults with good
>> grace, while less i
O.k., I suppose that I have a moral obligation to step in to this
discussion, particularly following Dan's observation.
As perhaps the author of the most famous killfile in list history (in re: a
former listmember) I certainly am not going to bash anyone for setting up a
killfile. I think there
- Original Message -
From: "Ronn!Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> At 04:10 AM 11/15/03 +, Andrew Crystall wrote:
> >On 15
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'.
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
> in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
> when their predictions didn't come true >:-)
But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the
defense
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote:
> Then again, maybe none of us are perfect.
Maybe?
I believe that nobody on this list is perfect.
I believe that a lot of people on this list are trying, anyway. And some
are trying in the other sense of the word. :) And maybe some people are
t
Dan Minette wrote:
> I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
> lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
> know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another
SF writer about it. He bet that he could create a
On 15 Nov 2003, at 5:02 pm, Steve Sloan II wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
> I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
> lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
> know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with anothe
On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
I presume you mean by '
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> On 15 Nov 2003, at 3:24 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
>
>
Steve Sloan II wrote:
>
> > I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
> > lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
> > know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
>
> I remember reading somewhere that Hubbard made a bet with another
> SF writer about it. He bet that h
Julia Thompson wrote:
>
>> Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
>> in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
>> when their predictions didn't come true >:-)
>
> But the ones I see are vague enough that there's be plenty of room for the
> defense to be reasonably
On 15 Nov 2003, at 9:34 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
On 15 Nov 200
John D. Giorgis wrote:
Secondly, I have begun a post once "Look, punk" IIRC, I meant that
phrase to be a bit more humorous, in an albeit dark way, than it ended
up sounding
I'm not going to tell you what you were thinking when you posted, but as I
recall you later described the depth of
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
> Julia Thompson wrote:
> >
> >> Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
> >> in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
> >> when their predictions didn't come true >:-)
> >
> > But the ones I see are vague enough tha
At 09:18 AM 11/15/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 15 Nov 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote:
> Then again, maybe none of us are perfect.
Maybe?
I believe that nobody on this list is perfect.
I believe that a lot of people on this list are trying, anyway. And some
are trying in the other sen
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I presume you mean by 'Cult' a 'false religion'. But isn't a false
religion a religion too? Or if not, how do you tell the false ones
from
the true ones? And how can more than one be true?
Why does it have to be a false religion. I've always thought
At 03:34 PM 11/15/03 -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> On 15 N
At 08:40 PM 11/15/03 +, Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
>
>> Alberto Monteiro - who would like to have all horoscopes
>> in the newspapers have their authors subject to being sued
>> when their predictions didn't come true >:-)
>
> But the ones I see are vague enough that there's
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> On 15 Nov 2003, at 9:34 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
>
>
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> Dan Minette wrote:
>
> >
> > No, as I've
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Sonja van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 4:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
Doug Pensinger wrote:
For the information
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 05:31 PM 11/14/03 +, William T Goodall wrote:
Perhaps it is the way he expresses himself rather than the actual
content?
Are you suggesting that the way John expresses himself to those with
whom he disagrees is more offensive to them than the stuff The Fool
posts
On 16 Nov 2003, at 6:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing physics
through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing physics through
a
physics lens?
It seems to be better actually :)
By definition, a particle is pointline. When it exhibits
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Sonja van Baardwijk wrote:
> I HAVE NO KILLFILE. The first one saying I have a killfile ... will ...
> be ... eh ... smothered in ...eh ... chocolate sause. ;o)
And this would be bad how? :)
Julia
funny, didn't have massive chocolate cravings while I was pregn
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> On 16 Nov 2003, at 6:21 am, Dan Minette wrote:
>
> > L
On 16 Nov 2003, at 11:36 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
Right, the problem is that particles and waves were both partial
understandings. What was needed was a model that included an
inherently
unobservable wave function, collapse of the wave function into an
eigenstate, etc. What was needed was a parad
> From: Alberto Monteiro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Steve Sloan II wrote:
> >
> > > I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make
> > > lots of money, and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone
> > > know how accurate/inaccurate this is?
> >
> > I remember reading somewhere that
Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
physics through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing
physics through a physics lens?
Somewhat off topic, but what do you think of
Structure and Interpretaion of Classical Mechanics
Gera
On 17 Nov 2003, at 4:12 pm, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
physics through a computer science lens is as valid as viewing
physics through a physics lens?
Somewhat off topic, but what do you think of
Struc
Julia Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Sonja van Baardwijk wrote:
I HAVE NO KILLFILE. The first one saying I have a killfile ... will ...
be ... eh ... smothered in ...eh ... chocolate sause. ;o)
And this would be bad how? :)
Eh Well it is awfully messy? Or something hm
- Original Message -
From: "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: Explanation
> Dan Minette wrote:
>
> Let me understand. You are seriously suggesting that viewing
&
On 18 Nov 2003, at 2:41 pm, Dan Minette wrote:
The reality of QM is that it is a systematic set of rules and equations
that provide a good fit to observation. Computational methods allow
us to
use things like perturbation theory to obtain predictions that would
have
been impossible to obtain 100
- Original Message -
From: "William T Goodall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 7:55 PM
Subject: Re: Explanation
>
> On 17 Nov 2003, at 4:12 pm, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
>
At 09:22 AM 11/15/2003 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
>I heard that Hubberd made up Scientology as a scam to make lots of money,
>and didn't really believe at all. Does anyone know how accurate/inaccurate
>this is?
He never said the above publicly, but years before founding Scientology he
made a commen
75 matches
Mail list logo
