On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 09:20, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 23:14, Jason Dixon wrote:
>
> > Better does not always equate to "good". Everything's relative.
>
> Hence, Microsoft.
I know this is OT, but a colleague just sent it to me and I couldn't
resist...
http://www.cs.usm.maine.
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 23:14, Jason Dixon wrote:
> Better does not always equate to "good". Everything's relative.
Hence, Microsoft.
--
Tue Aug 26 23:20:00 EST 2003
23:20:00 up 1 day, 13:06, 1 user, load average: 1.04, 0.99, 0.92
--
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 08:29, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:19, T. Ribbrock wrote:
>
> > Wrong question. The correct question is: Why on earth does he have a
> > 13+ line long signature, ignoring Netiquette?
> >
> > SCNR,
> >
> > Thomas
>
> Dunno. But it's better than the attach
El Mar 26 Ago 2003 09:57, T. Ribbrock escribió:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:29:43PM +1000, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:19, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> > > Wrong question. The correct question is: Why on earth does he have a
> > > 13+ line long signature, ignoring Netiquette?
>
> [...
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 10:29:43PM +1000, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:19, T. Ribbrock wrote:
>
> > Wrong question. The correct question is: Why on earth does he have a
> > 13+ line long signature, ignoring Netiquette?
[...]
> Dunno. But it's better than the attached legalese spo
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:19, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> Wrong question. The correct question is: Why on earth does he have a
> 13+ line long signature, ignoring Netiquette?
>
> SCNR,
>
> Thomas
Dunno. But it's better than the attached legalese spouting forth from
some that live behind a corporation..
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 09:02:11PM -1000, Marc Adler wrote:
[...]
> How the hell do you make your sig file change every time it gets
> attached to a message?
Wrong question. The correct question is: Why on earth does he have a
13+ line long signature, ignoring Netiquette?
SCNR,
Thomas
--
==> RH
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 17:02, Marc Adler wrote:
>
> How the hell do you make your sig file change every time it gets
> attached to a message?
OT and kept from the list -> the desire to be flamed isn't with me this
week...
--
Tue Aug 26 21:10:01 EST 2003
21:10:01 up 1 day, 10:56, 1 user, load
Fuck. Fuckfuckfuckfuck.
That wasn't supposed to happen.
<*hides head in shame*>
* Marc Adler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-08-25 21:02]:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> I didn't post this to the redhat list because it's totally off-topic,
> but it's a question that has been burning holes in my head for a while.
Hi Stephen,
I didn't post this to the redhat list because it's totally off-topic,
but it's a question that has been burning holes in my head for a while.
* Stephen Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-08-22 07:21]:
> On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 10:40, Michael Mansour wrote:
[snip]
How the hell do you make
On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 00:16, Eric Wood wrote:
> Sent my complaint in. Wonder if SCO is archiving all messages with certain
> keywords.like "sco". I hope they are!
>
> -Eric Wood
I got the Mandrake list going on this too...a number of 'em are either
calling the FTC or filling in the online c
Sent my complaint in. Wonder if SCO is archiving all messages with certain
keywords.like "sco". I hope they are!
-Eric Wood
Jason Dixon wrote:
> Someone informed me that you can submit your complaint online:
> http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/consumer.htm
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe m
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 23:16, Martin Marques wrote:
> I can't remmeber where I read it (maybe /.), but I remember reading that local
> Autrialian LUG asked for investigations on SCO on tax payments (don't know
> which is the deparment that does that in Autrailia).
Australian Tax Office - otherwis
TC as described below and submit a
> >
> > complaint against SCO.
> >
> > > If they get enough, they're likely to open an
> >
> > investigation against
> >
> > > them. It took me all of 3 minutes to complete the
> >
> > call. Let
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 10:40, Michael Mansour wrote:
> So could someone from Australia do this?
>
> SCO have an office here but am not sure if the FTC
> would care about internationals would they?
>
> Michael.
I did it this morning via the URL that was supplied. Made me feel rather
good, too. Esp
On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 20:40, Michael Mansour wrote:
So could someone from Australia do this?
SCO have an office here but am not sure if the FTC
would care about internationals would they?
Michael.
Michael, while the FTC is concerned with US citizens, I think if you take the approach that a
, they're likely to open an
> investigation against
> > them. It took me all of 3 minutes to complete the
> call. Let's show SCO
> > that their behavior is unacceptable!
> >
> > -J.
> >
> > -Forwarded Message-
> > Subject: [staph] SCO and
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 00:29, Jason Dixon wrote:
> Someone informed me that you can submit your complaint online:
> http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/consumer.htm
With my schedule being otherwise filled and flat out, I had to spend
some time this morning filling in the online complaint. I just had to.
I'm per
gainst SCO.
> If they get enough, they're likely to open an investigation against
> them. It took me all of 3 minutes to complete the call. Let's show SCO
> that their behavior is unacceptable!
>
> -J.
>
> -Forwarded Message-----
> Subject: [staph] SCO and th
that their behavior is unacceptable!
-J.
-Forwarded Message-
Subject: [staph] SCO and the FTC
Date: 21 Aug 2003 09:44:59 -0400
[From a Slashdot posting]
I just got off the phone with the FTC. If everyone calls and complains
then the chances they will investigate SCO goes up. The
20 matches
Mail list logo
