arachne-digest Thursday, January 16 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2024
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 11:20:21 -0500 From: "david gunnells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons Hello Bastiaan, Here are the statistics for the violent crime rate in the U.S.: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm Remember, there are both high and low violent crime rates in the U.S., it just depends on which geographical locations you choose to focus on. ;) Here are the statistics for "Deaths by Firearms, 1979-2000", in the U.S.: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0764212.html A more telling statistical chart is the "Deaths and Death Rates from Accidents, by Type: 1980-1998", again, in the U.S.: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005124.html Are these "LIES"? ;) Regarding the prisons, I agree that they are sorely overcrowded (although some lobbies would have those numbers increase), but note that over fifty (50) percent of those incarcerated (in Federal prisons at least) are there for drug offenses...and that is an entirely separate discussion. :) A quick synopsis of prison population: "The United States has the highest prison population rate in the world, some 700 per 100,000 of the national population, followed by Russia (665), the Cayman Islands (600), Belarus (555), the US Virgin Islands (550), Kazakhstan (520), Turkmenistan (490), the Bahamas (480), Belize (460), and Bermuda (445). "However, almost two thirds of countries (63%) have rates of 150 per 100,000 or below. (The United Kingdom�s rate of 125 per 100,000 of the national population places it at about the mid-point in the World List. Among European Union countries its rate is the second highest, after Portugal�s 130.)" Source: Walmsley, Roy, "World Prison Population List (Third Edition)" (London, England, UK: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2002), p. 1, from the web at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/r166.pdf last accessed Oct. 12, 2002. cheers, david Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: >Two LIES... there is NO low violent crime rate in the US. >The best filled prisons on this planet can be found in the US and the >casualty rate due to fire arms is very high. >CU, Bastiaan ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:49:08 +0000 (UTC) From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, david gunnells wrote: > Hello Bastiaan, > > Here are the statistics for the violent crime rate in > the U.S.: > > http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm > > Remember, there are both high and low violent crime > rates in the U.S., it just depends on which geographical > locations you choose to focus on. ;) The statistics at the above URL could be easily misinterpreted because many homicides are not crimes. A killing of a human committed in self defense or by accident is a homicide, but under those circumstances the homicides are not crimes. Whether such homicides would be ruled accidents or self-defense cannot be determined until after all the hearings and trials are all said and done. The homicide statistic is entered *before* the case is adjudicated. After the case is adjudicated, the statistics are not modified accordingly to reflect only those homicides which are crimes. <snip> Sam Heywood - -- Message sent by Unix Pine, Version 4.33 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:58:08 -0800 (PST) From: John Vertegaal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Quicker loading pages Ron Clarke wrote: > A thought ! Would you like me to see if I can get your "large" > graphic down to the size you want to display it at ? > Just give me the URL and I will have a go. :) Hi Ron, I just reloaded my altered homepage and new.htm onto my server. New.htm is basically a copy of Steve's suggestion. And the homepage has new jpegs (minus the miscodings). The bottom two tumbnails are now somewhat larger than before, but their img src is a lot smaller. My gripe is with the middle picture. I've tried many different ways, but the reductions and final display have all been rather poor. I think the original may be lacking enough contrast. The url is http://www.coolbikesubuild.com Thanks for your offer, John V ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:15:23 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Communism and monastic communities On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 18:45:16 -0400, L.D. Best wrote: > Really quick non-quoted reply on monastic v. communist societies > 1. A communist society is not headed up by a single individual, elected > or not, who has the power of "life or death" -- membership or dismissal > or condemnation to an eternity of suffering -- over others within the > society. The Abbot does not have the power to condemn anyone to hell. And he can be removed for various reasons. True, he does have the power to discipline and to remove. But wouldn't some sort of judicial function be a part of all societies? > 2. A communist society does not live upon donations from outsiders. Some monastic communities are self supporting. > 3. A communist society does not recognize the overall power of a > single remote individual [God's Representative on Earth] to approve its > existance, and to have final say on its "rules." There are Benedictine communities not subject to the Bishop of Rome. Yes, it's possible. There are many Anglican communities, at least three Lutheran communities, and others. But perhaps I should just say that some monastic communities have "communistic tendancies" and let it go at that! Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:11 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Funny characters included in mail message On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:51:47 -0500 (EST), Thomas Mueller wrote: > to Sam Ewalt: I noticed one line with weird characters in one of your messages > in this thread and am curious how those weird characters got there. Here is > the excerpt, quoted without adding any line-prefix character: > America needs to grow up, learn more about the world and get > smarter about how to handle the responsibilities that our global > strength imposes on us. > ���-�a > (end of quote, end of message) I don't know how they got there or what they mean. It happens on occasion when I am composing mail replies with the Arachne editor. Maybe one of the gurus know where they come from. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:07:35 -0500 From: "david gunnells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons Hello Sam, They can be misinterpreted until you do more research. ;) Here is a snippet on the methodology for the homicide statistics: "Homicide as defined here includes murder and nonnegligent manslaughter which is the willful killing of one human being by another. Excluded are deaths caused by negligence, suicide, or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder. The classification of this offense is based solely on police investigation, as opposed to the determination of a court, medical examiner, coroner, jury, or other judicial body." (see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/addinfo.htm for a plethora of information regarding additional information regarding the data) For the percentage of homicides that are cleared, see: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/cleared.htm cheers, david Samuel W. Heywood wrote: >>http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm > >The statistics at the above URL could be easily misinterpreted >because many homicides are not crimes. > >A killing of a human committed in self defense or by accident is a >homicide, but under those circumstances the homicides are not crimes. > >Whether such homicides would be ruled accidents or self-defense >cannot be determined until after all the hearings and trials are all >said and done. The homicide statistic is entered *before* the case >is adjudicated. After the case is adjudicated, the statistics are not >modified accordingly to reflect only those homicides which are crimes. > >Sam Heywood ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:06:21 -0500 From: Roger Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons London, January 14, 2003. A police officer was stabbed to death during a raid in connection with the ricin poison investigation. Scotland Yard Chief Inspector, Throckmorton P. Gildersleeve, stated that this conclusively proves knives are dangerous weapons and kill. Commencing January 1, 2004, possession of knives of any kind will be banned from all of England. Anyone who can prove that possession of a knife is a necessity will have to obtain an annual permit from the Queen. When asked what happened to the wielder of the knife, Gildersleeve stated that he was set free as it was the knife that killed, not the wielder. The knife has been taken into custody. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:15:04 -0800 (PST) From: John Vertegaal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Quicker loading pages Hi again Ron, I hope I'm letting you know in time, that it's no longer necessary to try to find the best manual size reduction method. I just tried out EasyThumb. Unfortunately it requires Windoze, but its results are great. It's freeware from Fooke's Software in Switserland. Thanks again for everyone's help. John V ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:06:35 +1300 From: "skywalker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Fw: arachne list cancelled Got a response from Michael, unfortunately not a very encouraging one, this problem has being going on for months, how hard is he trying and if he does not have the time or expertise to fix it then the list should be cancelled, that would fix it. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Polak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "skywalker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 12:43 AM Subject: Re: arachne list cancelled > skywalker wrote: > > > Fix the unsub function of your Majordomo installation. > > if it was that easy, I would have already done it... > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:21:25 -0400 From: "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: The facts don't lie? Define "fact" [was Re: OT: weapons Killing in self-defense is rare in this country, and I doubt the statistics are available which would separate the instances of LEO vs. civilian. As a percentage of total homicides, I doubt it would be statistically significant. As to killing "by accident," and having it classified *initially* as homicide and then "down graded" as you imply could be the case, I doubt that is a statistically significant amount either. Rather, the inverse is true: Deaths by "accident" are normally reported as accidents, and then -- after a great deal of investigation and court cases -- changed to criminal offenses; that number is likely statistically more significant. HOWEVER, what is *most* significant is the fact that you cannot rely to any degree of certainty on statistics maintained at either the national or the state level when it comes to crimes, crimes of violence, accidental deaths, or even suicides. Even ten years ago the majority of this stuff simply was not considered important enough to waste limited manhours and limited resources to keep accurate track of; the statistics maintained at the local level were generally those which constituted a "hair up his a**e" for whomever was in power at the time. Even with today's much less expensive and much faster computerized databases at the local level, there is no nationwide system or rules or "codes" for classifying crime. If there is one thing that is less reliable than Medicare statistics, it is "crime statistics." To attempt to compare this year's statistics on crime with those of ten years ago is like comparing kiwi with nectarines ... when half the people have never tasted kiwi and nearly that many don't know the difference between a nectarine and a peach. l.d. P.S. I ran into this problem with nationwide & statewide statistics when I attempted to compare the number of deaths resulting from "all aspects" of smoking to those deaths attributable to alcohol; I couldn't do it, because right now the 'bad guy' is tobacco and no one is keeping tracable figures on alcohol related deaths -- not even those on the highway! ==== On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:49:08 +0000 (UTC), Samuel W. Heywood wrote: >> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm > The statistics at the above URL could be easily misinterpreted > because many homicides are not crimes. > A killing of a human committed in self defense or by accident is a > homicide, but under those circumstances the homicides are not crimes. - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:52:44 +0000 From: "Ron Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons Hi David, On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:28:56 -0500, david gunnells wrote: > Hello Ron, > Maybe you'd be interested in these: > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~confiles/ > specifically, this page: > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~confiles/confiles.html Thanks for that David. :) I finally got it all - I had to "leech" the site with WGET, then re-write the background colours in order to see any of it, but I now have it all. As I suspected before, it is a collection of bits and pieces put together by our own version of the gun lobby - the Sporting Shooters Assoc. Some of it is actually well researched and documented, and much of what is said I can only agree with, although not actually pertinent to the issue of gun ownership and public safety. But some of it is also deliberately misleading, e.g. by stating what is true (but unreleted) and then saying "therefore ..... ", or by other manipulative tricks used by all flavours of propagandists. For instance, any treatment of facts and figures from before the gun control laws were even proposed have no relevence to the efficacy or otherwise of gun control, and gun "registration" was never an issue in our present gun control measures, and has no bearing on the present situation. Sadly, it is the sort of woolly and extravagant collection of claims, mostly unsupported by facts, decorated with largely irrelevant numbers and selective quotes that I would expect from the knock-on-your-door God-botherers. I am sure that even legitimate gun supporters would wince at some of this stuff. On the other hand, there is absolutely NO, repeat NO, support for Charlton Heston's claim that violent crime rates exploded immediately after the current laws were introduced. It seems that was too much even for our gun enthusiasts to claim. BTW: I have never owned a firearm, although I have owned air-guns (pistols and rifles) and may do so again. I have friends who are gun owners, and have been duck-, pig-, and deer-shooters. I don't have a problem with that. While I was growing up in East Africa, my father had a large collection of guns (mostly rifles), some of which I have used. A proportion of our diet including warthog and hippo, gazelle and guinea fowl, was hunted with those guns. Dad got his leopard in our chicken run with a 12-bore shotgun. Our family was also very grateful for that. But I also know people who own guns, who have given no obvious reason for police to refuse a licence - but who make me very, very nervous. I am glad that at least one automatic shotgun I am aware of has been removed from Australian society. Regards, Ron Ron Clarke http://homepages.valylink.net.au/~ausreg/index.html http://tadpole.aus.as - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:42:17 -0400 From: "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Graphics manipulation [was Re: Quicker loading pages John, First thing I noticed about your large image of the middle picture is that it is relatively low quality, very grainy. Did you use a digital camera to take it, or did you scan a photograph? I'm asking because it makes a difference in what the "first step" is -- which I've been struggling with for some time, myself -- to making a decent graphic for a website, or for a printout. If you used a digital camera, then you got stuck with JPG to begin with ... and if you didn't have the camera set for the finest quality, you've lost definition and workability to begin with. Photos of the vacation are fine in "regular quality," but something for specific illustration really needs to be the highest quality you can get to begin with. The same applies to scanning photos -- go for the highest quality you can obtain. Even if all you can get for the original graphic is JPG, the next step is to consider converting to a bitmap [BMP]. When I am working with images and want to maintain the best possible control, I always have my "master" in BMP form. Yes, I *know* they are huge, but that format is the only one where you don't lose a whole bunch when you covert it. And once you've gotten what you want, you can then change the target to JPG or GIF as the end step, depending upon which format gives you the level of quality you want for the size you want of the final file. If you don't have a whole bunch of drive space available, there is always the very workable, non-loss, ZBM approach; zipping up a BMP file can reduce its size by around 50% give or take a few percents. It is often possible to then store the "too big" BMP on a floppy as a ZBM. Of course if you have a CD burner that is even a better place to put your 'master' BMP files. l.d. P.S. I just realized what I was writing about, and I find it flabbergasting that this level of technology is now available to anyone who can afford a bundled computer system! Ms Josephine Blow now has better graphics & storage technology available, on that cheapo system she bought, than "Lights & Magic" had for the first version of E.T. !!! Technology is running so fast ... I hope we can find valid and valuable uses for it once in awhile. ==== On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 09:58:08 -0800 (PST), John Vertegaal wrote: > Ron Clarke wrote: >> A thought ! Would you like me to see if I can get your "large" >> graphic down to the size you want to display it at ? >> Just give me the URL and I will have a go. :) > Hi Ron, > I just reloaded my altered homepage and new.htm onto my server. New.htm > is basically a copy of Steve's suggestion. And the homepage has new > jpegs (minus the miscodings). The bottom two tumbnails are now somewhat > larger than before, but their img src is a lot smaller. My gripe is with > the middle picture. I've tried many different ways, but the reductions > and final display have all been rather poor. I think the original may > be lacking enough contrast. The url is http://www.coolbikesubuild.com > Thanks for your offer, > John V - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:51:53 +00 From: "Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons Hi Samuel and David, the interpration of the figures is rather difficult. I did download the pages mentioned. first thing I was interested in was: death by firearms = 30,708 (1998) but since it is not possible to know from the statistics how many casualties are by suicide by a firearm... how much casualties are by shootings? Accidents by firearms just 726... far less than I expected. However the total count for 'death by firearms' is quite high compared to the motor vehicle accidents = 43,510 or drugs/medicines = 9,838. Nearly 6 times more inmates per 100,000 population in the US than in EU. In Holland abt 70% of the inmates is there for drug related crime... and if we would build more prison capacity that rate would come to 95% I suppose. **** Very off topic ***** To paraphrase L.D. this is a lot of money for a crime with relative less casualties. Not spoken of the immense $$$ for the costs of investingation and prosecution. And the bad thing of all is that detention does not help a f**k to solve this problem. **** I do not want to start a discussion on this... we would become very off topic. To Europeans the US is a very violent society. But maybe Hollywood is to blame for this... our view is formed by at least 50% of all pictures in cinema or TV originated from the US. Regards, Bastiaan On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:49:08 +0000 (UTC), Samuel W. Heywood wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, david gunnells wrote: >> Hello Bastiaan, >> Here are the statistics for the violent crime rate in >> the U.S.: >> http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm >> Remember, there are both high and low violent crime >> rates in the U.S., it just depends on which geographical >> locations you choose to focus on. ;) > The statistics at the above URL could be easily misinterpreted > because many homicides are not crimes. > A killing of a human committed in self defense or by accident is a > homicide, but under those circumstances the homicides are not crimes. > Whether such homicides would be ruled accidents or self-defense > cannot be determined until after all the hearings and trials are all > said and done. The homicide statistic is entered *before* the case > is adjudicated. After the case is adjudicated, the statistics are not > modified accordingly to reflect only those homicides which are crimes. > <snip> > Sam Heywood > -- Message sent by Unix Pine, Version 4.33 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:50:26 -0400 From: "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: ephiphany! I just realized the most basic, underlying, and generally overlooked truth about statistics: Statistics are only as valid as the reason they are being generated, processed, and kept. Sounds simple doesn't it? But think about it for a few seconds. - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 18:22:31 -0500 (EST) From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Samuel W. Heywood wrote: > The statistics at the above URL could be easily misinterpreted > because many homicides are not crimes. Police shooting criminals are also "homicides." - -- Steve Ackman http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?) http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 19:40:46 -0500 From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Funny characters included in mail message On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 14:36:11 -0500, Sam Ewalt wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 02:51:47 -0500 (EST), Thomas Mueller wrote: >> to Sam Ewalt: I noticed one line with weird characters in one of your > messages >> in this thread and am curious how those weird characters got there. Here is >> the excerpt, quoted without adding any line-prefix character: >> America needs to grow up, learn more about the world and get >> smarter about how to handle the responsibilities that our global >> strength imposes on us. >> ���-�a >> (end of quote, end of message) > I don't know how they got there or what they mean. It happens on > occasion when I am composing mail replies with the Arachne editor. > Maybe one of the gurus know where they come from. C0hq! These 'funny characters' are being cause by a memory leak while using the internal editor. So-far... I have had no luck in my attempts to track down where in the code it is happening. - -- Glenn http://arachne.cz/ http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:48:16 -0500 From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: weapons On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:51:53 +00, Bastiaan Edelman, PA3FFZ wrote: <snip> > To Europeans the US is a very violent society. But maybe Hollywood is to > blame for this... our view is formed by at least 50% of all pictures in > cinema or TV originated from the US. <snip> FWIW, In the entire 250 year history of this town.... 1 murder. A 17 year old boy killed his own sister. The weapon he used to kill her.... a hammer. - -- Glenn http://arachne.cz/ http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:50:42 -0500 From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Fw: arachne list cancelled On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:06:35 +1300, "skywalker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Got a response from Michael, unfortunately not a very encouraging one, this > problem has being going on for months, how hard is he trying and if he does > not have the time or expertise to fix it then the list should be cancelled, > that would fix it. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Polak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "skywalker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 12:43 AM > Subject: Re: arachne list cancelled >> skywalker wrote: >> > Fix the unsub function of your Majordomo installation. >> if it was that easy, I would have already done it... Cancel the list... you say ???? If all current members of this list choose to do the following.... This list will effectively be cancelled. Anyone who might be interested may now STOP sending messages to this list. And begin sending them here instead. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks should go to Ray Andrews for making this suggestion. - --- Forward message begin --- On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:25:42 -0500, Glenn McCorkle wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:46:11 -0800, Ray Andrews wrote: >> Glenn, >> This refusal of Michael to fix the unsubscribe to the Arachne list is, >> IMHO, becoming more than an embarasment, its outrageous and irresponsible. >> Just a suggestion: why don't we start up a yahoo group for Arachne and tell >> Michael to shut majordomo down completely, since he seems unwilling or >> unable to manage it responsibly? > Do you perhaps mean something like this ??? ;-) > arachne_ue > General discussion of Arachne and related subjects. > (Arachne is a Dos based graphical Web browser) > Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > List owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ____ > I'll wait a couple more days for Michael to fix the unsub function. > If he still has not done it by let's say Wed. evening.... > I will then 'invite' all current members of the list to stop > sending messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and to start sending > them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead. - ---- Forward message end --- I am sorry Michael.... IMO, You may now 'uninstall' Majordomo from your server. Because for many of us, our patience has reached its end. :((( - -- Glenn http://arachne.cz/ http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 23:48:17 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Fw: arachne list cancelled On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 20:50:42 -0500, Glenn McCorkle wrote: <snip> > If all current members of this list choose to do the following.... > This list will effectively be cancelled. > Anyone who might be interested may now STOP sending messages to this list. > And begin sending them here instead. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Thanks should go to Ray Andrews for making this suggestion. Yahoo groups sux. I have in the past had some very bad experiences with the yahoos. In order to send or read posts in the yahoo groups they say you have to sign up for a yahoo user ID. It appears that this is just a ruse. I suspect the yahoos just want to harvest your email address and sign you up for the opt-in lists of all the spammers they support. I suspect them of supporting spammers because their main web page has links to lots of porn sites. Almost all porn sites are promoted primarily by spammers. The yahoos won't even send you a valid yahoo user ID. If you complain to them about how your yahoo user ID doesn't work they will just send you a canned response referring you to their useless help pages. I am all in favor of dumping Majordomo, but please don't select yahoo groups as an alternative. BTW, several people on this list have reported the same problems as I have about how yahoo groups sux. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Jan 03 22:09:50 -0800 From: "Dan Pruitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: ephiphany! Just like ENRON bookkeeping<vbg> At 5:50PM 1/15/03, "L.D. Best" wrote: >I just realized the most basic, underlying, and generally overlooked >truth about statistics: > > Statistics are only as valid as the reason they are being generated, > processed, and kept. > >Sounds simple doesn't it? But think about it for a few seconds. > >-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ > > Have a Goody! Dan http://members.neandertech.com/~Basik_Korner - ---This was written by a user of Arachne, GEOS, and DOS on the WWW! http://arachne.cz http://www.breadbox.com http://www.drdos.org http://www.nettamer.net ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #2024 ******************************
