Tony Peden writes:
Curt, David: I humbly request that such patches not be accepted in
the future.
I've been away for the weekend, so I don't actually know what
happened, except that some music played on a certain date. I had not
been aware of the Easter egg.
I really think that grabbing
On Sun, 19 May 2002 22:27:35 -0700,
C. Hotchkiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alex Perry wrote:
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette
rule, that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith
respect of others.
I
OK, ha, ha, funny, funny. Joke's over.
Curt, David: I humbly request that such patches not be accepted in the
future.
I really think that grabbing files off the network without explicit
permission from the user is a bad idea, even when it's all in good fun.
FlightGear is not, by nature, a
Tony comments:
OK, ha, ha, funny, funny. Joke's over.
For you maybe ... 8-)
I really think that grabbing files off the network without explicit
permission from the user is a bad idea, even when it's all in good fun.
1. Putting the magic download into the base package CVS would have
Tony Peden wrote:
OK, ha, ha, funny, funny. Joke's over.
Curt, David: I humbly request that such patches not be accepted in the
future.
I really think that grabbing files off the network without explicit
permission from the user is a bad idea, even when it's all in good fun.
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith respect of
others.
I disagree. Almost _every_ new Microsoft-based program checks its home
website, sometimes for logging and sometimes anonymous as in this case.
It is
Martin Henne wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
OK, ha, ha, funny, funny. Joke's over.
Curt, David: I humbly request that such patches not be accepted in the
future.
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith
On Sun, 2002-05-19 at 17:39, Alex Perry wrote:
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith respect of
others.
I disagree. Almost _every_ new Microsoft-based program checks its home
website, sometimes for
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith respect of
others.
I disagree. Almost _every_ new Microsoft-based program checks its home
website, sometimes for logging and sometimes anonymous as in this
On Sun, May 19, 2002 at 07:05:37PM -0700, Alex Perry wrote:
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith respect of
others.
I disagree. Almost _every_ new Microsoft-based program checks its home
Well I knew it was there and forgot about it. I always run from a text window
so a quick CTRL+C closed the player and saved my bandwidth. Seems to me that
Curt meant it as a joke, no harm intended, albeit a little less gratifying for
modem users. It's only for one day. So my suggestion is
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:38:40AM -, Jim Wilson wrote:
Well I knew it was there and forgot about it. I always run from a text window
so a quick CTRL+C closed the player and saved my bandwidth. Seems to me that
Curt meant it as a joke, no harm intended, albeit a little less gratifying
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tony Peden) [2002.05.19 15:36]:
OK, ha, ha, funny, funny. Joke's over.
Man, I've been trying to figure out what the heck you guys are talking
about. Anybody else that doesn't have mpg123 installed? :-)
Anyway, it's not even funny. I thought it was going to be a Stars
Alex Perry wrote:
I definitely agree. It's a violation of almost every netiquette rule,
that is concerned to virus-like behaviour or bandwith respect of
others.
I disagree. Almost _every_ new Microsoft-based program checks its home
website, sometimes for logging and sometimes
14 matches
Mail list logo
