and comments received
both publicly and privately to date, and looking forward to a next round -
whenever, whatever :-)
[1] http://loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html
[2] http://owf-ged-poll.limequery.com/index.php
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Anjana G Bhattacharjee
a.g.bhattachar...@gmail.com
to perform the process.
-1 to the proposed womAn mailing list.
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Anjana G Bhattacharjee
a.g.bhattachar...@gmail.com wrote:
as ever, my focus here is on process
to a possibly different
number in, say, 7 days time?
Best, A
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Jean T. Anderson j...@bristowhill.comwrote:
Anjana G Bhattacharjee wrote:
snip/
Have just come across a curious parallel to this, perhaps, in the arena of
Golf tournament sponsorship - IBM sponsored
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Kathey Marsden kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net
wrote:
It is actually my hope that a separate list will not be necessary as I tend
to like a more integrated approach.(I did not much care, for example,
explaining to my middle school son why a free technology
Just a note to mark 7 days since the date of this proposal - thank you for
all responses so far - still listening ;-) best, A
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Anjana G Bhattacharjee
a.g.bhattachar...@gmail.com wrote:
20100722 / APORIA WORK / XIIX
PROPOSAL SUMMARY
Previously at Apache, we
Golfing rules anticipate visual impairments to varying degrees, and in cases
where required, a coach or guide can be incorporated into play [1]
Best, A
[1] http://www.blindgolf.co.uk/howdone.php
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
On Thu, Jul
Henri Yandell wrote:
Will you be running for the board next year?
Personally would prefer establishing a first international Royal Charter for
FLOSS before retiring to any board
This is da vinci level genius. I love it :)
Thanks - though may take the Dan Browns a little longer to figue
, Anjana G Bhattacharjee wrote:
Hi Ross,
Thanks for replying to the women@ list and cc-ing to others as
appropriate
The matter at hand is of course one of decision-making process, albeit
with
regards to women@ on this occasion, and it is the process that concerns
me,
given that it may
Hi,
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
It was noise because on a busy morning I was too distracted to read
Bertrand's original post carefully and, thus, missed your point, which was
responding directly to what he wrote. I hate it when that happens :-) but
no harm done.
Thanks for kind reply, but my
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
A little history is probably relevant here. Woman@ was set up on Aug 7
2005, during that time it has had very little activity with the most recent
email being Sept 14th 2007.
The fact is that people are not looking for a list called
Hi Jean,
Certainly doesn't sound like noise to me - but maybe we should continue this
conversation on the women@ list ?
Best, A
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Jean T. Anderson j...@bristowhill.comwrote:
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Thanks -- that's a terrific suggestion to auto-respond that
-1 (unbinding)
because this vote, and the dot it slip, reminds me of a problem of
relevance when dotting the i's and crossing the t's when framing any vote,
so to speak
in this case, would suggest that there may be a significant difference
between the options of:
(a) closing women@ and
(b)
12 matches
Mail list logo
