none

2005-09-13 Thread John Smith
Hi, how are you today? I'm just doing some fundraising for " Food For The Hungry " 24,000 people die daily from hunger related causes in third world countries, what do you think of that? Go to  -   www.fh.org  (ecfa member) www.ecfa.org   Thanks Travis... Tel - 0414940086

Re[9]: Eglish for you! Palikarov

2005-09-13 Thread Lemesh Maria
Доброе время суток! Вам предоставляется уникальная возможность научиться английскому языку! Мы поможем Вам в этом! Вы сможете значительно и в короткие сроки повысить свои навыки в разговорной речи, грамматике, произношении. Квалифицированные преподаватели учителя из USA помогут Вам преодолеть яз

Re: licence for wiki material (or lack thereof): a desperate plea

2005-09-13 Thread Jon Dowland
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:52:41PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 10:39:19 +0100 Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > I am happy to work on how to do this with moin moin but I need to > > know that others agree this is necessary. > > ...and I'd be happy to work with

Philip Hands's continued messenger-shoot, was: [OT] MJ Ray's continued burbling (was Re: Debian UK ....)

2005-09-13 Thread MJ Ray
Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why do you think that mail was a joke? [...] The poor attempt at telepathy, claiming someone said "BTW" and ":-)" then rounding off by confirming that a constitution is required if you ask for a bank account type that requires a constitution (and exclude o

[OT] MJ Ray's continued burbling (was Re: Debian UK ....)

2005-09-13 Thread Philip Hands
MJ Ray wrote: [...] > In many > circumstances, law says groups must apply for a decision, > but DUS won't and I'm not sure whether the call reported in > http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-uk/2005-August/010548.html > really happened or was a joke like much of the rest of that mail.

Re: Debian UK (was Re: What the DFSG really says about trademarks)

2005-09-13 Thread MJ Ray
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [DUS expenses] > Ok. I certainly wouldn't call "items for sale" a case of "spending on > itself", though; and at least in the US, I suspect these expenses might > be accounted for in a somewhat different fashion than the breakdown > given above. (But perh