arachne-digest Sunday, January 19 2003 Volume 01 : Number 2027
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:09:07 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Iraq vs. N Korea On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:54:16 +0100 (CET), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) wrote: > Hi Samuel! > 17 Jan 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Cultureal differences] > Some minor points ... > I did not mean to include the charta word by word. > It would be enough to include the most vital things. > Like that _every_ human being has indeniable rights. The US Declaration of Independence says something very similar . . . "That all men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." > (guaranteed minimal income) > The minimal income is so minimal that it is just enough to survive. > IMO american social/health system is total crap. Bush fixed that problem yesterday. He made a speech which pleases nearly everybody except the unscrupulous trial lawyers which force doctors and hospitals to pay for outrageous premiums for their malpractice insurance to protect themselves from the rash of frivolous lawsuits. Bush in his speech called for legislation to correct this problem. Among other measures he proposes, he is seeking a reasonable max on the awards that can be given for medical malpractice suits. > But again this is MO, and I don't care, because I'm not affected ... this is > america's problem > (eductation) > There is no "don't agree". > There are facts. If somebody teaches something wrong, you can intervene. > For me this is the best system available. > And it saves the children from misguided parents. > In America it is possible that children grow up with the thought that > black/white/purple whatever people are inferior. > In Europe the child would at least hear something different in school. The best solution for many parents is to take their children out of public schools. If the parents tell the teachers they are teaching things wrong the teachers won't change their ways, no matter how good a job the parents do at proving that the teachers are wrong. > Everything has pros and cons. > SH> The US Constitution provides for the people to own weapons to provide > SH> for their security. There is nothing in the UN human rights > SH> declaration recognizing the right of the people to own weapons. > Naturally not - THANX GOD !!!!!! > For me this is no basic human right. (and for most of the world) > Naturally if a nation is still wants such achaic things they can additionally > include it. > SH> The UN feels that they should be instructed and indoctrinated in some > SH> ideas and laws and customs and religions that their parents want to > SH> protect them from. > First ... religion is not part of education. > Everybody is entitled to additionally and freely take religious education. > And yes. > The UN and me think that there is basic knowledge that every human being should > know. > This is not indoctrination. > Indoctrination is what is done on CNN and Fox-news. > When I first saw that I thought it was a joke. > BIG american falgs blowing in the wind, taking away 25% of the screen. > For example a german family left germany, because the children were taught > that there is evolution, and that the world was not created in 6 (7) days. This is the reason why many parents take their children out of public schools in the US. I don't think that is a good reason because I believe that evolution occurs and I don't believe the world was created in 6 days. In the US parents have the right to take their children out of public schools, even if they don't have a good reason in my opinion for doing so. Some parents do have some good reasons in my opinion for taking their children out of public schools. > For me the education is a safeguard that young people get to know a diversity > of oppinions. This should be one of the main purposes of education in the US. In most of the private schools in the US the schools seek to protect the children from learning of any opinions and points of view that the teaching staff thinks are wrong. > SH> When the last original native speaker dies, his language dies with him > SH> because there is nobody left who can teach it, thanks to mandatory > SH> public education. > NO !!! > Exactly the opposit is true. > There are many courses for the people where they can learn their native tongue. > There are classes with 2 teachers, one speaking the native tongue, and who > supports the pupils. In a recent TV news program there was a story about a chieftain of an Indian tribe in Alaska who is 87 years old. She is the only member of the tribe who remains who can still speak the native language. She speaks English also, and she speaks it well. In an interview she said that when she was a little girl most members of the tribe could still speak the native language. She has attracted the attention of some professional linguists who recognize that only she can pass on this knowledge of the tribe's native tongue. She is cooperating very closely with them. She says that the professional linguists are much better learners than even her own tribespeople who have expressed an interest in learning their native language from her. This is surprising to her. The linguists say that there is very much about the language that they can never learn because there is so much to learn from her and she cannot devote every hour of all of her remaining years to imparting her knowledge to the linguists. She has other very important things to do, such as officiating in tribal ceremonies and in re-teaching her people to recite the ancient religious prayers and chants that many had so long since forgotten. She travels a lot because the families of her people are very scattered. This chieftain remains as the only authority on a language that used to be spoken not very long ago by a tribe of many thousands. There can never be anyone who will ever become a greater authority on the subject than she herself. > SH> The UN aspires for unlimited World Government and very limited world > SH> languages and cultures and religions. > What is the UN. > It is an organization formed by the world governments. > So, no you couldn't be more wrong. > Because the world's governments can never form a world government. True, but the world's governments ATTEMPT to form a world government. Also they ATTEMPTED to establish a world language which they called Esperanto. What a failure that concept was! The only other history I am aware of in which people tried to do that is the story about the Tower of Babel. I am sure that most everyone on this list knows that story and they know what a miserable failure the project was. History repeated itself in the story about how the UN tried to establish Esperanto. > SH> True freedom and responsible democracy arises from respect for human > SH> life and from appreciation for human diversity and individuality. > I 100% agree. > And exactly this is the basic notion of the human rights. The basic notion is just great. The problem is that not all nations agree on what we should recognize as human rights. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:18:52 -0400 From: "L.D. Best" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: A question offered for your consideration .. MSN 8 is now offering new improved "best on the market" junk e-mail blocking. With M$'s background in mind, and considering how much spam-mail can truly cost the consumer because of increased ISP costs, Is it possible that Microsoft servers/server programs are made specifically to allow untraceable relaying and acceptance of any and all crap so that they can then provide more, and more expensive, "cures" for the problem?? Is such a question truly unreasonable?? - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:04:44 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: In Response to - (Re: Iraq vs. N Korea) On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:54:16 +0100 (CET) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) writes: > MY problem is if America wants to force american law to worldwide > affairs. THIS is not possible. I agree, Ricsi. One should not force their own ways upon others. It is equally true that Americans don't want others to force foreign ways upon America. And, if a foreign force were to come and attempt to make this happen, they would fail. This is because, as a last resort, the American people still possess their guns. (Gee, I'm starting to sound like Mr. Heston?) > (education) > There is no "don't agree". > There are facts. If somebody teaches something wrong, you can > intervene. For me this is the best system available. > And it saves the children from misguided parents. > In America it is possible that children grow up with the thought > that black/white/purple whatever people are inferior. > In Europe the child would at least hear something different in > school. I'm guessing your haven't interviewed too many Turkish kids in Germany, Kurdish kids in France, Kosovars in Serbia, Hungarians in Romania, Romanians in Hungary, Gypsy peoples anywhere in Europe, etc., etc. Or, dare I ask, what do you think the French and Dutch kids hear in their schools about the German people. Care to guess what the Serbian people say about Austrians? The Europe I know isn't quite so perfect. I haven't yet been to Portugal. Perhaps they have reached the position where all prejudices have been abolished. For the rest of the world, it's still THEM vs US (whoever them and us happens to be). It's actually the core concept in Cultural Anthropology. < snipped - Sam Heywood's comment about right to own guns > > For me this is no basic human right. (and for most of the world) > Naturally if a nation is still wants such archaic things they can > additionally do it. And they will probably remain so - a nation free to do what they want. > The UN and me think that there is basic knowledge that every human > being should know. This is not indoctrination. Critical question - am I free to disagree and decline the opportunity to receive this enlightenment? *Basic* implies a standard, the minimal requirement. If an individual or group decides to remain ignorant and, thus, receive no indoctrination from anyone, is it acceptable? Or, for the good of the world and the betterment of all people, must all receive the enlightenment? If I am free to choose, then the subject knowledge cannot be *basic*. So, am I mandated to receive this *non-indoctrination*, or is it REALLY not actually *basic*, but merely an opinion which you hold and desire that I embrace? > Indoctrination is what is done on CNN and Fox-news. > When I first saw that I thought it was a joke. > BIG american flags blowing in the wind, taking away 25% of the screen. I'm guessing that you haven't watched too many replays of the 1936 Olympics. > For me the education is a safeguard that young people get to know a > diversity of opinions. I'm also guessing that the school system did a poor job of teaching the American perspective. Or were you absent that day? > What is the UN. > It is an organization formed by the world governments. > So, no you couldn't be more wrong. > Because the world's governments can never form a world government. So, does that mean that it's OKAY for all of us to keep our separate ways? Or must everybody change so that all become alike, yet each keeps their individual name so that *diversity* remains? Because, what I'm hearing is that you don't like some of the American ways. And, my understanding is that you think America should change. What I have failed to grasp is any reasoning that would suggest why it is logical to argue that America should change to a European perspective, yet illogical to argue that it is Europe who, in fact, needs to change its perspective. Maybe that's because I've never been indoctrinated with that particular version of basic knowledge. Bob - - ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:39:31 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Legal Logic ??? Hi all, In the desire to legally protect intellectual property, here's a good idea gone bad ... The European Union has announced that it will file a case in the International Court on behalf of the people of Parma, Italy - the birthplace of Parmesan cheese. Parma cheese makers believe that imitation cheese producers are illegally profiting from what, they claim, is an exclusive trademark. Italian politicians are reportedly considering filing a similar case against the city of Parma, Ohio. They fear that imitation cheese makers might relocate to the Ohio city and attempt to reclaim the name as a 'legitimate product of Parma - Parmesan cheese'. Meanwhile, in York of the United Kingdom, some discussion has occurred relative to the misappropriation of their ancient name by the famous American city. Last, but not least, a Scandinavian man named Robert has filed for a 'divorce' from his son. The boy, he claims, was actually fathered by a neighbor named Steven. Robert requested that the judge rename the boy Stevenson. These problems don't exist in Africa. And some call THEM a backward people? What is *logical* seems to be, like beauty, only in the eyes of the beholder. I sure hope Greece doesn't try to take away the name Arachne. <><> Bob <><> - - ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:12:40 +0100 From: Bart Buitinga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Save Arachne Re: ill Legal Logic ??? One call to all arachnians: Obviously, the european conquerors have spread a perverted version of european civilisation worldwide. The spirit of colonialism has survived its origin, and now exists as imerialism in the hands of the heaviest armed force colonialism has left. Pity that the Americans never took the trouble to invent their own names, and didn't even bother to change the european names after the oppressor was thrown out. Even more so, that later also this european habit of protecting names has been taken over with all its disadvantages. Probably the American Arachne clone is going to need another name soon... Anyway, Just looking at our common interests here, I'd say it's about time to go back discussing technical stuff, as we're obviously never going to agree on international politics, and there are too many intercontinental flamewars going on already. The only way out is just to concentrate on what we individually think is of value to the position of us people, in times where a word like "wetware" is the answer to whatever individual dream we might have. So please stick your constitution where I keep mine, and proudly chant the arachne hymn (or think of one) because it's going to get a bit harder to promote our little product with each argument the unprepared dos user is confronted with. (Not to mention our little majordomo trouble, of course) B At 00:39 18-1-03 -0700, you wrote: >Hi all, > >In the desire to legally protect intellectual property, here's a good >idea gone bad ... > >The European Union has announced that it will file a case in the >International Court on behalf of the people of Parma, Italy - the >birthplace of Parmesan cheese. Parma cheese makers believe that imitation >cheese producers are illegally profiting from what, they claim, is an >exclusive trademark. > >Italian politicians are reportedly considering filing a similar case >against the city of Parma, Ohio. They fear that imitation cheese makers >might relocate to the Ohio city and attempt to reclaim the name as a >'legitimate product of Parma - Parmesan cheese'. > >Meanwhile, in York of the United Kingdom, some discussion has occurred >relative to the misappropriation of their ancient name by the famous >American city. > >Last, but not least, a Scandinavian man named Robert has filed for a >'divorce' from his son. The boy, he claims, was actually fathered by a >neighbor named Steven. Robert requested that the judge rename the boy >Stevenson. > >These problems don't exist in Africa. And some call THEM a backward >people? > >What is *logical* seems to be, like beauty, only in the eyes of the >beholder. > >I sure hope Greece doesn't try to take away the name Arachne. > ><><> Bob <><> > > >- > >________________________________________________________________ >Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today >Only $9.95 per month! >Visit www.juno.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 08:53:56 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Can someone contact Charon ?? On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:45:48 -0400, L.D. Best wrote: > Really would like to get confirmation that the firey rings of Hades have > frozen over ... > Billy Gates announced yesterday that Microsoft will declare it's first > dividends in the history of the corporation!!!! That's interesting, to say the least. Also interesting is the remarkable fact that Microsoft has never had any debt and sits upon vast pools of cash. But for the last three years or so the stock has not held its price. So it would make sense to pay out some of that cash as a dividend. Gotta keep the troops happy since their stock options aren't worth much in todays Wall Street environment. Also, the Republicans are about to make dividend income non-taxable. That's right, under the Bush economic stimulus program about to be enacted by Congress dividends will be tax free. I imagine lots of stocks will now pay dividends. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:02:39 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: A question offered for your consideration .. On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 22:18:52 -0400, L.D. Best wrote: > Is it possible that Microsoft servers/server programs are made > specifically to allow untraceable relaying and acceptance of any and all > crap so that they can then provide more, and more expensive, "cures" for > the problem?? > Is such a question truly unreasonable?? Possible and likely. Maybe this new upgrade will fix the problems I've been having with the old version. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 09:30:24 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: International Law (was Iraq vs. N Korea) At this stage of our planetary evolution there is no such thing as "international law". There is no international constitution, no international law making body, no international supreme court to interpret international law, and no international police force to enforce international law. The various nations of the world have not ceded their authority to the United Nations except in limited and particular circumstances. There are agreements, treaties, alignments--but it is all in flux and has not solidified to the point of "law". Perhaps someday there will be international law--but we don't have it yet and the mechanism needed to create it does not even exist. If the United States wants to invade Fiji or Austria or Iraq there is nothing to stop us except world opinion and our sense of fair play and what's right. This is a terrible responsibility for the US to bear when you think about it. I hope we don't screw up too badly. Maybe that's what causes the uneasiness and hatred towards the US--nobody could stop us from doing whatever we wanted to do. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:59:02 -0500 (EST) From: Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Iraq vs. N Korea On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Richard Menedetter wrote: <massive snippage> > US Constitution doesn't even contain the MOST *BASIC* human rights ... > as in the UN human rights charta ... The UN Declaration of Human Rights only recognizes human rights "given" by law. The Bill of Rights recognizes inherent rights. I wish you would read both documents, and understand the difference between rights given by a State, and rights already owned simply by virtue of birth. Both, however, are simply pieces of paper. All ten of the Bill of Rights have been violated in this country, as have all the declarations in the UN paper been violated. A piece of paper ultimately contains only as much power as someone is willing to pay for, whether it be with blood, sweat, compromise (or yes, even money or deceit). Yes, the US government has ignored its own Constitution many times... as has every government on Earth ignored its own written law. All governments are evil. That is axiomatic. Therefore, creating an even larger, more remote, less accountable world government will not change a thing, except to enable it to be even more daring in its various abuses of power. Governmental power can only exist at the expense of individual rights. There's no way around it. ... and I now bow out of any further political discourse. - -- Steve Ackman http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?) http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:44:7 +0000 From: "J J Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Legal Logic ??? Bob wrote: >In the desire to legally protect intellectual property, here's a >good idea gone bad >... <snipped> American companies were the first to trademark common turns of phrase in their advertising copy. The 3 Ms: Micro$oft, McDonalds and Monsanto need reining in. I searched for a local company, AOS Technology. They better watch out: no doubt Bill has a bot searching for top-ranking Google hits, so he can take pleasure squashing rivals in unrelated industries, because I see M$ now has their own AOS Technology, whatever that may be. McDonalds also zealously guard their "good" name and squash any trademark infringements or dissent, while bribing kiddies with Disney spinoffs. I don't like Disney cos they don't like beards, and a lady can display as much facial hair as she wants as far as I'm concerned. Monsanto seek to force-feed their GM foods to unwilling consumers in Europe. Generally, these US corporations pursue cases that make them look heavy-handed and stupid. They seem to have legal departments seeking to justify their existence, but the end result is a harming of the company image. Why the heck shouldn't Parma protect the good name of their traditional products (ham, as well as cheese). Didn't Hormel Foods try to do the same over Spam? My local town's pork pies are a protected name: you or anyone can try making and selling pork pies, but you better not call them Melton Mowbray Pork Pies if you are from outside of the designated area. Same goes for Stilton Cheese. Call it something else and build your own sales and your own reputation for quality, cheapness, exclusivity-due-to-erratic-supply or whatever else constitutes your Unique Selling Points(TM). Long live regional foods! -- as well as standardized irradiated pap available globally for wary tourists with weak stomachs (due to the pap they usually eat...). Something to watch out for: Human Rights being extended to Corporations. Best regards, Jake Young 2003-01-18 14:30:29 GMT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:44:10 +0000 From: "J J Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: Granny Oakley Roger quoted: >Army and marine sources, who do not wish to be identified, >privately state, "We could use a grandmother like that!" Still finding nothing funny about people being killed, I'd hope that the armed forces of your great nation had as their principal aim the preservation of life. This woman may have also caused great pain to her own daughter and grandchildren. Who wants a grandmother like that? It's sick, this use of death as entertainment. Best regards, Jake Young 2003-01-18 15:41:43 GMT ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:33:39 -0500 From: Roger Turk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Willie and Joe A dog face soldier during WW2 started drawing cartoons of the daily conditions that soldiers faced on the front lines during the war and put them in a humorous light. The main characters were two disheveled, unshaven dog faces, Willie and Joe. The creator of these characters was another dog face, Bill Mauldin. Bill Mauldin's ability to put intolerable conditions in a humorous light made intolerable conditions more tolerable and were a boost to morale. An American characteristic that used to amaze Europeans was the ability of Americans to laugh at themselves and their foibles. Even at funerals, eulogies contain references to humorous aspects of the deceased, not to be irreverent, but to recognize the human qualities of the deceased. A current master of making commonly occurring situations humorous is Jay Leno. With no apologies, Roger Turk Tucson, Arizona ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:53:07 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Willie and Joe On Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:33:39 -0500, Roger Turk wrote: > A dog face soldier during WW2 started drawing cartoons of the daily > conditions that soldiers faced on the front lines during the war and put > them in a humorous light. The main characters were two disheveled, unshaven > dog faces, Willie and Joe. The creator of these characters was another dog > face, Bill Mauldin. Bill Mauldin's ability to put intolerable conditions in > a humorous light made intolerable conditions more tolerable and were a boost > to morale. > An American characteristic that used to amaze Europeans was the ability of > Americans to laugh at themselves and their foibles. Even at funerals, > eulogies contain references to humorous aspects of the deceased, not to be > irreverent, but to recognize the human qualities of the deceased. > A current master of making commonly occurring situations humorous is Jay Leno. > With no apologies, > Roger Turk > Tucson, Arizona The popular patriotic song "Yankee Doodle", which became the favorite marching song for the Americans in the American Revolution was written by a colonel who was a surgeon in the British Army. The song was intended as an insult. The manuscript was found by the Americans in the composer's tent, which had been hurriedly evacuated and abandoned by the British colonel because of the American's over-running the British encampment. When the song was found, some Americans who could read music started whistling the tune and some others started to sing the lyrics. They all laughed at themselves and marvelled over the British colonel's great talent for poking fun at the Americans. They liked the song very much and they adopted it as their own. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser: http://browser.arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:57:29 -0500 From: "Sam Ewalt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Willie and Joe On Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:33:39 -0500, Roger Turk wrote: > An American characteristic that used to amaze Europeans was the ability of > Americans to laugh at themselves and their foibles. Even at funerals, > eulogies contain references to humorous aspects of the deceased, not to be > irreverent, but to recognize the human qualities of the deceased. > A current master of making commonly occurring situations humorous is Jay Leno. Roger, It wasn't clear that "Granny Oakley" was a joke told by Jay Leno. (American TV comedian) It's funny as a joke. Not funny if it's a real story told about a real Grandmother who kills her son-in-law at 220 yards. And although it seems far fetched I could relate many stories from the news which seem just as far fetched but actually real, tragic and not funny at all. What we have here is a failure to communicate. Sam Ewalt Croswell, Michigan, USA - -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:19:21 +1000 From: "Ronald Bleckendorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Legal Logic ??? - ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 5:39 PM Subject: Legal Logic ??? - ---- snip ---- > > Last, but not least, a Scandinavian man named Robert has filed for a > 'divorce' from his son. The boy, he claims, was actually fathered by a > neighbor named Steven. Robert requested that the judge rename the boy > Stevenson. It's a valid request. My inlaws are Swedish, and until not that long ago, the surname of all Swedish children was the first name of their father, with the ending of "son" or "dottir", whichever the case may be. This custom is still largely practised in Sweden today, and I understand it if a man does not want to give his name to children that aren't his. Furthermore, the man named Robert could not have filed for divorce from his son, because it is NOT his son in the first place. Two other northern countries, Iceland and �land, use the father's first name as a surname exclusively. That's why the telephone books of those countries are sorted by the first name. > > These problems don't exist in Africa. And some call THEM a backward > people? > > What is *logical* seems to be, like beauty, only in the eyes of the > beholder. > > I sure hope Greece doesn't try to take away the name Arachne. > > <><> Bob <><> > > > - > > ________________________________________________________________ > Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today > Only $9.95 per month! > Visit www.juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 01:32:39 -0500 (EST) From: "Thomas Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Fw: arachne list cancelled from Binky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > My vote is to keep this as a Majordomo list. I don't > understand why the unsubscribe problem can't be fixed. > I have been on other Majordomo lists for years that > were maintained by people a lot less knowlegeable than > Michael, and there have never been any problems. Why > can't Michael (or a trusted volunteer) just manually > delete the addresses of the people who have been > trying to get off the list until the unsubscribe > function can be fixed? I mean, how much time could > that take? > Binky As of my last email download, which was a little after 10:00 GMT January 17, it has already taken months. I remember the ugly sendmail config file, sendmail.cf, a nightmare to read through and see what was happening. I never got into qmail. Any other possibilities, exim maybe? Michael said he had no more time to continue work on Arachne, so maybe the list should be switched to other hands? When should I send a subscription request to yahoogroups? Tom ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #2027 ******************************
