Linux-Advocacy Digest #590, Volume #26 Thu, 18 May 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot. (was
Re: The "outlook" for kooks) (Gerben Bergman)
Charlie Ebert: COMNA's new official punching bag... (was Re: Things Linux can't do!)
("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Ostracus")
Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot. (was
Re: The "outlook" for kooks) (tholenbot)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites ("SUDDN")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451683.943^-000000000003 (tholenbot)
Re: The future... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Doug Alcorn)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Charlie Ebert: COMNA's new official punching bag... (was Re: Things (Charlie
Ebert)
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Brad Wardell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 02:27:02 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Raul Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : > >: >I was a Linux user since kernel v0.92. I used Linux until
> : > >: >late 1996. Do you still wish to debate with me?
>
> : Those were Slackware 96 times, when Windows 95 seemed
> : at light years from GNU/Linux. Take a look now, laugh and
> : see :-)
>
> When I said "Do you still wish to debate with me?", I was responding to
> Charlie's claim that I have never used Linux, and therefore, I have no
> right to debate its merits.
> --
> .-----.
> |[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
> | = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
> | | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
> |_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
I see. You must have been in debate school.
I'm beginning to believe your not the average
"Artifical Intelligence" scientist are you.
You clever bastard you.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 4 year old anecdotal evidence!!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 02:31:15 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : On 18 May 2000 00:44:19 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II
> : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : >Bob Hauck <hauck[at]codem{dot}com> writes:
> : >
> : >: On 16 May 2000 23:40:20 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> : >: wrote:
> : >
> : >: >I was a Linux user since kernel v0.92. I used Linux until
> : >: >late 1996. Do you still wish to debate with me?
> : >
> : >: Linux has come a long way since 1996. Your knowledge is a bit dated.
> : >
> : >I'm sure it is. I'm not arguing the technical validity of Linux here,
>
> : But you are here:
>
> : Message-ID: <8fmlur$i7f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> : http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623294410
>
> : __It's true, that X has been battered and beaten around
> : __very much, and now it is very stable under most conditions,
> : __but Linux has not had the same go around, and it's quite
> : __possible for X to bring Linux down to its knees.
>
> : You are making a claim here. Then you immediately follow with:
>
> : __This
> : __has happened to me several times, and no, it wasn't a
> : __hardware problem.
>
> : You are basing your claim on anecdotal evidence. Wait a minute, that's
> : nearly 4 year old anecdotal evidence!!
>
> *sigh* Perry, you just don't comprehend very well, I'm afraid. No, that
> wasn't an insult... it was an observation.
>
> Let's analyze what I've said:
>
> "...it's quite possible for X to bring Linux down to its knees."
No. This is an untrue statement.
>
> This statement is true. It's true, because such occurrences have been
> documented, and presented. The reason why this has happened is because
> The X Window System runs as a privelged root process. If an X server
> suddenly decides to misbehave, X can lock up. As others pointed out, this
> does not necessarily lock Linux up, but it can make it impossible to get
> to Linux locally.
IF it were the truth it wouldn't require wordy explanation of logic.
It is not true.
>
> Also notice that I said "it's quite possible". I didn't say "it will".
No, it's not possible either.
>
> You are taking what I am saying, inflating it into something it's not, and
> then claiming that I'm using the same arguing tactics as Charlie. In
> effect, you are arguing much like politicians argue. You're looking for
> deep semantic relationships that aren't there from common sense
> viewpoints, but that can be drawn by an irrational need to win an
> argument, it would seem.
My tactics don't include total bullshit.
>
> In short, you keep taking what I say out of context. That is your
> problem, not mine. If you'd stop trying to see what isn't there, you
> wouldn't need to be wasting so much time typing.
You can't take total bullshit out of context.
> --
> .-----.
> |[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
> | = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
> | | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
> |_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
Would you mind SSE...
Run along now and masterbate on some other advocacy group's time.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: 19 May 2000 02:35:27 GMT
Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Thu, 18 May 2000 14:34:50 +1000,
: Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >
: >"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: >> On Thu, 18 May 2000 02:03:23 +1000,
: >> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >> >
: >> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623637730
: >> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623940112
: >> >
: >> >I'm afraid I can't see any lies there. Perhaps you'd care to post the
: >> >specific parts you're referring to ?
: >>
: >> I already did at
: >>
: >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=624137505
: >>
: >> To which he never responded.
: >
: >Presumably you refer to the "I have seen a lot of BSODs in my time, and in
: >every single
: >instance, [...]" quote ?
: >
: Yes, and then he in a followup he changed his story from "every single
: instance" to "most". I guess you didn't finish reading the whole
: thing.
*sigh* I didn't "change" anything.
Perry, please try to read my posts more carefully. I said "every single
instance" in the cases of BSODs __I__ had to deal with. I said "most" in
the cases of BSODs that happen in general.
: >Again, that's hardly an insult.
: It was meant to be condecsending. It contributed nothing toward
: healthy debate. That's his technique and apparently yours too.
*sigh* If that's what you really think, then IIWY, I'd take Christopher's
advice, and leave the advocacy forums. People are not required to be
politicaly correct here, and they sure as hell have every right to insult
you out of thin air, if they wish. With that said, I'm not trying to be
mean to you, Perry. This is what debating is all about. Ribbing is a way
to get a point across. Understand, I'm not intending to offend you.
Hell, Christopher still ribs me on my Linux evangelizing days... I'll
probably never live them down. *grin with humility*
:-)
: >> Anyone he disagrees with enough he labels a zealot.
: >
: >Usually they are.
: A generalization. It doesn't justify the many cases where he calls people
: zealots and he's wrong.
Let me ask you something... can you honestly read Matt Templeton's Mig
Mig's or Charlie's posts, and state with confidence that they are _NOT_
zealots? I'd be very suprised if you can.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: Gerben Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot.
(was Re: The "outlook" for kooks)
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 04:41:17 +0200
Myrat Amodeo writes:
| Gerban Bergmen wrote:
Still having attribution problems, eh Myrat?
| > The ones you're suffering from, Eric.
|
| Having specificity problems, Gerban?
Not at all, Myrat. Why do you ask?
| > Balderdash, Eric.
|
| Typically unnecessary hyperbole.
What alleged "hyperbole", Myrat?
| > He's done nothing of the sort.
|
| More evidence of your evidence comprehension problems.
I cannot comprehend what isn't there, Myrat.
| > You're erroneously presupposing that he has provided the evidence, Eric.
|
| Not at all,
On what basis do you make that claim?
| Pascal.
Who's that, Myrat?
| Still taking evidence denial lessons from Dave "Java 1.2" Tholen?
Ask your mentor, grasshopper.
--
Gerben Bergman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Charlie Ebert: COMNA's new official punching bag... (was Re: Things Linux
can't do!)
Date: 19 May 2000 02:45:36 GMT
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Evan DiBiase wrote:
: >
: > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > > I don't know where they are developing this crap BUT, seems like
: > > everytime I call them on a WEB page,,, they read it,,, then they
: > > change their approach to something different.
: >
: > What? I don't seem to recall you ever pointing me to a web page. Of course,
: > if you want to show me the post where you did, I'd be happy to read the page
: > and tell you what I think.
: >
: > > If you ask me, I think these two are independants.
: >
: > What? Political Independants? What are you talking about here?
: >
: > -Evan
: > Very, very awake... which is a bad thing when one needs to get up in 3
: > hours.
: You can't remember me pointing out web pages?
: Do a sort on my name and go back and find the messages kid.
Uh, you haven't posted a _SINGLE_ URL since you started babbling into
COMNA. The only thing you've put into COMNA, is a load of Linux zealot
whining, and useless insults. What I find amusing, is you seem to think
that you are looking "high and mighty" with all of the nonsense you keep
spewing. The truth is, you simply look "high".
I'm afraid, dear Charlie Brown, that you've missed Lucy's football yet
again, and it is _you_ that is laying there, with the crack pipe sticking
out of your mouth. Why don't you get off your lazy rear, and try backing
up some of those wild claims you've made earlier? Could it be that it's
because you know as well as the rest of us do that you're so full of crap,
that you've become a pez dispenser for plants?
: By Independants, I mean you seemingly don't have an opinion.
: You just like to advocate.
Huh?! Are you actually saying these words? You have just described
yourself with the precision of a surgeon. Are you for real, or are you
just here for the sole purpose of annoying people?
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: 19 May 2000 02:46:26 GMT
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > http:\\www.freebsd.org
: ^^
: *snort*
ROTFLMAO! I _NEVER_ would have noticed that. Thanks Donal. :-)
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: "Ostracus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 21:53:29 -0500
In article <Q%5T4.8830$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bloody Viking
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found the above funny. One thing computer-wise that Linux can't do to
> my knowledge is config a mouse driver for lefty operation. I could be
> wrong. If I'm wrong, it's no problem as I leave the mouse config alone
> and leave it righty while I use it lefty. I do it that way for
> righty-compliance. I would sooner add a toggle switch to a mouse than
> fuck with a mouse driver config.
>
Try this in Gnome.:Program>Settings>Peripherals>Mouse.
Under mouse buttons pick Left-Handed. Enjoy!
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot.
(was Re: The "outlook" for kooks)
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 22:55:10 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gerben Bergman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eric Bennett writes (using a pseudonym again):
>
> | > I'm aware of Bennett's attribution problems, Myrat, like I'm aware of
> | > yours.
> |
> | What alleged "attribution problems"?
>
> The ones you're suffering from, Eric.
Illogical, as Eric is not suffering from any "attribution problems". If
you had decent reading comprehension skills, you would have recognized
this fact.
> | > Evidence, please.
> |
> | He has already provided the evidence.
>
> Balderdash, Eric. He's done nothing of the sort.
Liar.
> | Predictably, you failed to comprehend its significance.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that he has provided the evidence, Eric.
On the contrary.
--
On what basis do you claim "this is the end, my only friend, the end"?
------------------------------
From: "SUDDN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 02:54:40 GMT
I am no fan of Microcrap but this turned out not to be a backdoor at all.
Too bad.... I would have loved to see Microcrap get grabbed by the knarlies!
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451683.943^-000000000003
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 22:58:29 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Today's Tholen digest is full of nothing:
Are you suggesting that your post does not contain any material?
Illogical, but that is to be expected, coming from you.
--
On what basis do you claim "this is the end, my only friend, the end"?
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The future...
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 02:58:36 GMT
mlw wrote:
>
> Looking over the landscape of the computer industry, here are some
> observations.....
Okay.
>
> The Server market distinct from the Workstation is gone. Desktop PCs
> will either get smaller in the direction of thin-clients, or be
> indistinguishable from servers.
They have enough power today to make that work in the home or small
business.
I just can't imagine how this concept would be effective in large scale
industry. For instance, how would you effectively administer SQL power
from a ORACLE engine across such a system in a large business say 350
employees
and on up.
I guess I can't figure out that redundant cluster you've placed here.
But I will say the office cluster concept is extremely interesting.
>
> I think the NOS market is gone. Novel and whom ever is pursuing it is
> wasting their time. All real OS's will just do it right.
I must admit. I'm left scratching my butt over this comment.
I don't quite know what to make of it.
To say this is exactly like saying NT server is dead, OS2 server is
dead, Linux server is dead, that the server lan wan thing is dead.
Well, I CAN agree that lan wan is dead. The Thin Web client is
the wave of the future. The centralized processing model is on
it's way back. But this leads me blank when I see your
server less, non centralized, office cluster idea.
>
> Windows is going to die. Not because of MS, exactly, but because the
> world is going towards standards. While UNIX is not a majority player,
> it is a standards based multi-vendor platform. MS will bluster about
> being the "defacto-standard" but more and more IT people are realizing
> that public standards are better than ubiquitous proprietary standards.
Ummmm.
The World Wide Web does seem to be authoring it's own standards and
Microsoft is trying to stay up with them as the changes happen.
So's everybody else. Microsoft isn't leading the world in this
arena as they thought they would be doing.
I think if they were to survive, and their not, but if they did,
they would be a team follower just like everybody else.
But the day's of hooking people on the face to show them the
way are over for Microsoft.
Now, what about Word?
Do you really feel this way?
Not breakup then competition then public demise.
But rather general directional tuning followed by a bought of
dis-interest.
Wouldn't that indicate intelligence on the part of the users?
Isn't that the real flaw in this kind of reasoning.
>
> --
> Mohawk Software
> Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
> Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
I'm not really trying to make silly of your comments mlw as I respect
your opinion most of the time. You've always been somewhat of a camp
leader around here for years.
> Have you noticed the way people's intelligence capabilities decline
> sharply the minute they start waving guns around?
Ha! You know the same can be said of using Microsoft OS's for
your companies internet needs! Isn't that amazing..
I'm afraid it's true that one IBM 390 might be a more efficient use of
corporate money than 14,000 PC's on a lan system.
Yet, this isn't what you were saying. I'm not sure the economics
are going the PC way anymore.
I see more and more people saying the PC era is dead.
An IBM 390 can have 14,000 users running the OS of their choice
on it for about 2 million dollars.
You can't buy the workstations, servers and such for 14,000 people
for 2 million dollars.
Yet, if we look at SUPER COMPUTERS, the clustering concept has
made it possible for 136 IBM aptiva servers to be chained together
in cluster to beat the worlds biggest Cray!
IF anything the PC's and the mainframes have actually switched placed
in their independent, fanatic goals of displacing one another.
This in itself could be yet another strange way Microsoft would die.
Charlie
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: Doug Alcorn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 03:00:25 GMT
Prasanth Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doug Alcorn wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
> > > >
> > > >First, the Qt library _is_ now free. Trolltech decided to license it
> > >
> > > It's 'kinda' free. It's still owned by Trolltech.
> >
> > OK, I stand corrected. I really don't think their license is as free
> > as other licenses (although the Open Source Group. With that said,
> > the ownership of the code as little to do with its freedom. The
> > freedom is all in the license. Ghostscript is a good example of free
> > software that is exclusively owned by Aladin Software.
>
> Can you elaborate in what way the QPL is less free than the GPL?
>
I thought I did elaborate. My next paragraph talked about the
limitations of TrollTech being the only one who can distribute derived
works. Or rather, your derived works must be distributed through
trolltech.
--
(__) Doug Alcorn (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.lathi.net)
oo / Win a 66MB capacity tape drive. Help me win too!
|_/ http://www.ecrix.com/extreme/getReferrals.cfm?ref=7612
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 03:00:26 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : On Thu, 18 May 2000 14:34:50 +1000,
> : Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : >
> : >"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : >> On Thu, 18 May 2000 02:03:23 +1000,
> : >> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : >> >
> : >> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623637730
> : >> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623940112
> : >> >
> : >> >I'm afraid I can't see any lies there. Perhaps you'd care to post the
> : >> >specific parts you're referring to ?
> : >>
> : >> I already did at
> : >>
> : >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=624137505
> : >>
> : >> To which he never responded.
> : >
> : >Presumably you refer to the "I have seen a lot of BSODs in my time, and in
> : >every single
> : >instance, [...]" quote ?
> : >
>
> : Yes, and then he in a followup he changed his story from "every single
> : instance" to "most". I guess you didn't finish reading the whole
> : thing.
>
> *sigh* I didn't "change" anything.
>
> Perry, please try to read my posts more carefully. I said "every single
> instance" in the cases of BSODs __I__ had to deal with. I said "most" in
> the cases of BSODs that happen in general.
>
> : >Again, that's hardly an insult.
>
> : It was meant to be condecsending. It contributed nothing toward
> : healthy debate. That's his technique and apparently yours too.
>
> *sigh* If that's what you really think, then IIWY, I'd take Christopher's
> advice, and leave the advocacy forums. People are not required to be
> politicaly correct here, and they sure as hell have every right to insult
> you out of thin air, if they wish. With that said, I'm not trying to be
> mean to you, Perry. This is what debating is all about. Ribbing is a way
> to get a point across. Understand, I'm not intending to offend you.
>
> Hell, Christopher still ribs me on my Linux evangelizing days... I'll
> probably never live them down. *grin with humility*
>
> :-)
>
> : >> Anyone he disagrees with enough he labels a zealot.
> : >
> : >Usually they are.
>
> : A generalization. It doesn't justify the many cases where he calls people
> : zealots and he's wrong.
>
> Let me ask you something... can you honestly read Matt Templeton's Mig
> Mig's or Charlie's posts, and state with confidence that they are _NOT_
> zealots? I'd be very suprised if you can.
> --
I am a zealot and damn proud of it SSE!
> .-----.
> |[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
> | = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
> | | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
> |_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Charlie Ebert: COMNA's new official punching bag... (was Re: Things
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 03:02:52 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : Evan DiBiase wrote:
> : >
> : > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> : > > I don't know where they are developing this crap BUT, seems like
> : > > everytime I call them on a WEB page,,, they read it,,, then they
> : > > change their approach to something different.
> : >
> : > What? I don't seem to recall you ever pointing me to a web page. Of course,
> : > if you want to show me the post where you did, I'd be happy to read the page
> : > and tell you what I think.
> : >
> : > > If you ask me, I think these two are independants.
> : >
> : > What? Political Independants? What are you talking about here?
> : >
> : > -Evan
> : > Very, very awake... which is a bad thing when one needs to get up in 3
> : > hours.
>
> : You can't remember me pointing out web pages?
> : Do a sort on my name and go back and find the messages kid.
>
> Uh, you haven't posted a _SINGLE_ URL since you started babbling into
> COMNA. The only thing you've put into COMNA, is a load of Linux zealot
> whining, and useless insults. What I find amusing, is you seem to think
> that you are looking "high and mighty" with all of the nonsense you keep
> spewing. The truth is, you simply look "high".
>
> I'm afraid, dear Charlie Brown, that you've missed Lucy's football yet
> again, and it is _you_ that is laying there, with the crack pipe sticking
> out of your mouth. Why don't you get off your lazy rear, and try backing
> up some of those wild claims you've made earlier? Could it be that it's
> because you know as well as the rest of us do that you're so full of crap,
> that you've become a pez dispenser for plants?
>
> : By Independants, I mean you seemingly don't have an opinion.
> : You just like to advocate.
>
> Huh?! Are you actually saying these words? You have just described
> yourself with the precision of a surgeon. Are you for real, or are you
> just here for the sole purpose of annoying people?
> --
> .-----.
> |[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
> | = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
> | | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
> |_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
I've posted http://www.freebsd.org twice now.
You laughted at http:\\www.freebsd.org once and posted
at it!
So how can you say all this crap?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Brad Wardell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 03:03:09 GMT
"John S. Dyson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Dave Sneddon wrote:
>
> > ax wrote:
> >
> > > Is this an "American Dream"?
> > >
> > > No mather how much you dislike Bill Gates, he is still your American
pride,
> > > but Linus is not.
> >
> > That's because Linus is from Finland, and is a national celebrity there.
>
> I some circles (but certainly not mine), Bill Gates is well liked.
However,
> this
> is from mostly those who have made LOTS of money from Microsoft. I don't
> think that there is anything "American" about Bill Gates, except for his
ability
>
> to become successful. The way that he has used his success (and some of
> his methods) are certainly not "American."
Doesn't Linux now live in the United States?
Brad
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
