Linux-Advocacy Digest #208, Volume #28 Thu, 3 Aug 00 13:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("kevhsu")
Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one of
Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Marcus Turner")
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("kevhsu")
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("kevhsu")
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Marcus Turner")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:53:35 -0400
SemiScholar wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 03:03:37 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >SemiScholar wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:26:06 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >CompleteDolt wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:58:54 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" escribi�:
> >>
> >> >> Who decides which laws are unconstitutional?
> >> >
> >> >The Constitution itself makes it clear what laws are constitutional
> >> >and what laws are not.
> >>
> >> <guffaw> Right - that's why there are so many different opinions
> >> about those things - and that's why all Supreme Court decisions about
> >> the constitutionality of a particular law are unanimous. Yeah,
> >> right.
> >>
> >> >If there is still any confusion, then the
> >> >authors of the document can be consulted, via their writings in
> >> >"The Federalist Papers," "The Anti-Federalist Papers" and the like.
> >>
> >> Bzzzzt. Sorry, that is incorrect. The answer: the Supreme Court
> >> decides, and has the last word. Thanks for playing, and please enjoy
> >> the home version of our game...
> >
> >If that were the case, then how did the Supreme Court rule
> >that the earlier Dred Scott ruling was unConstitutional????
>
> Beg pardon? You're asking how the SC decided the constitutionality of
> an issue in an attempt to show that the SC doesn't decide those
> issues?
http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/dred.htm
The Dred Scott Decision
Dred Scott was the name of an African-American slave. He was taken
by his master, an officer in the U.S. Army, from the slave state of
Missouri to the free state of Illinois and then to the free territory
of Wisconsin. He lived on free soil for a long period of time.
When the Army ordered his master to go back to Missouri, he took
Scott with him back to that slave state, where his master died.
In 1846, Scott was helped by Abolitionist (anti-slavery) lawyers
to sue for his freedom in court, claiming he should be free since
he had lived on free soil for a long time. The case went all the
way to the United States Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney, was a former slave owner from
Maryland.
In March of 1857, Scott lost the decision as seven out of nine
Justices on the Supreme Court declared no slave or descendant
of a slave could be a U.S. citizen, or ever had been a U.S.
citizen. As a non-citizen, the court stated, Scott had no
rights and could not sue in a Federal Court and must remain
a slave.
>
> Besides, what do you mean the SC ruled that the Dred Scott ruling was
> unconstitutional? Which ruling was that, exactly?
>
> >
> >Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
> >
> >The Supreme Court is just a collection of people,
>
> "Just a collection of people"? <guffaw!>
Well educated (one hopes), but certainly susceptible to personal
biases and fiobles as much as any other people.
If that were not the case, then it would not be so easy to
accurately predict how each justice will vote on any particular
case.
When the court's decisions are handed down, most predictions
by court watchers, as to which way each justice will vote,
only rarely err by more than 2 of the 7 votes.
If these were 7 infallible people, then every decision would
be unanimous verdicts, 7-0.
The fact that very few decisions are unanimous indicates that
at least one member of the SC is wrong on practically every case.
>
> > some of whom
> >care not the slightest for what the Constitution means,
>
> LOL!!! No matter what you might think about any of them, that
> statement is not likely to have any truth at all in it.
>
> > in
> >preference for how they can distort the words to their own
> >statist ideals.
>
> ROTFL!!!
>
> >
> >If the Supreme Court rules that "The pursuit of happiness" justifies
> >rape, would that make it so?
>
> Legally, sure. If they decided that the Mickey Mouse could be
> president, we could be listening to the band playing Hail To The
> Mouse.
>
> >
> >Obviously not.
>
> Think again.
>
> Just because you can come up with some stupid decision that would not
> make sense doesn't mean anything - they have not actually (and would
> not) made such a decision. But each and every decision they HAVE made
> IS the law, yup. That is the way it works, whether you like it or
> not.
>
> >
> >Thus, it is evident that the SC is not the ultimate bearer of truth,
>
> Nobody said they were. But they ARE the ultimate (aside from the US
> citizenry) arbiters of the law.
>
> >but merely yet another political body,
>
> No - they are not political. That's why they are appointed for life.
Does the Supreme Court have political power?
A) no
B) YES
>
> > which can hand down any
> >sort of nonsense which they so choose.
>
> And it has the full force of the Law of the Land.
You make my point for me.
>
> You are in some serious need of education.
You just agreed with me, fool.
>
> - SemiScholar
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "kevhsu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:04:29 -0700
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Really?
> Show me an NT box with 80 GB/sec bandwidth
Um, show me *any* box with 80 GB/sec bandwidth.
> Show me an NT box with 700 GB/sec bandwidth.
Um, show me *any* box with 700 GB/sec bandwidth.
------------------------------
From: "Marcus Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Aaron Kulkis -- USELESS Idiot -- And His "Enemies" -was- Another one
of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:50:02 GMT
"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:19:23 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> >but merely yet another political body,
> >>
> >> No - they are not political. That's why they are appointed for life.
> >
> >Perhaps Partisan would be a better word. There are distinct tendencies
> >within the group.
>
> I don't think that's accurate either. I think they are not "partisan"
> just because they have opinions about how the world should and does
> work. But that doesn't make them "Democrat" or "Republican". I think
> they are always free to view the world on the "liberal/conservative"
> continuum as they choose, but that's not "politics", that's
> "philosophy".
"Philosophy" _is_ a better word than Partisan or Political but I'm not
entirely happy with it either.
But I also don't have a better suggestion.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:57:00 -0400
SemiScholar wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:47:13 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >SemiScholar wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:41:08 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Retard wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:34:50 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Retard wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:07:11 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >Loren Petrich wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >> >> >> Steve Chaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >On 1 Aug 2000 06:12:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >How good does a power mac work with Linux? That processor should be
> >> >> >> >> >screaming without the limitations of (pick your Apple OS of the day).
> >> >> >> >> >It sure turns out x86 screams without the limitations of Windows,
> >> >> >> >> >that's for sure!
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> It performs excellently under the BeOS, though I haven't tried a
> >> >> >> >> PowerPC flavor of Linux yet.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Apple is still too slow with MacOS X :-(
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Well, maybe if you got some hardware that wasn't stuck in the 1980's....
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ROTFL!!! This from a "Unix Systems Engineer"?? Hahhahahahahah!!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Unix was a good idea. ... ... in 1969
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So you think a G4 is a 1980's processor? LOL!!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Unix had windows before Microsoft even wrote MS-DOS.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> LOL!
> >> >
> >> >It's TRUE, it's TRUE!
> >>
> >> Details, details. I was _there_ back then, and I don't remember no
> >> steenking "windows".
> >
> >Hiding in the closet doesn't count, asshole.
>
> ???
>
> I'm still waiting for the name of the "windows" system used by Unix
> before 1980. And BTW - Microsoft didn't write MS-DOS.
Correct...like every other Microsoft product, they stole it.
Can you name one software product which Microsoft has developed
successfully by themselves?
>
> - SemiScholar
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "kevhsu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:07:26 -0700
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You made the claim that NT machines can keep up Unix machines.
>
> The best NT machines have, at best, 8 GB/sec bandwidth.
> Hence, there are ZERO NT machines that can keep up with even
> moderate Unix clusters.
So a Unix box can transfer data almost twice as fast as DDR RAM?
lol
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:58:41 -0400
Marcus Turner wrote:
>
> "SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > And BTW - Microsoft didn't write MS-DOS.
>
> Eh, Yes they did. They bought PC-Dos from a Seattle software company but
> they wrote MS-Dos.
I.e. they BOUGHT a product, and then rewrote said product.
That is fundamentally different from original development
>
> Of course, the guy who wrote PC-Dos at the other company was working for MS
> at the time they wrote MS-Dos, so it's easy to get confused...
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "kevhsu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:09:53 -0700
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 1. I'm a combat veteran.
> 2. I'm still a soldier to this day
> 3. I'm in the infantry
> 4. Fuck with me and I will kill you.
> 5. That's a promise.
Newsgroups have hit a new low.
------------------------------
From: "Marcus Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:54:08 GMT
"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:23:27 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> And BTW - Microsoft didn't write MS-DOS.
> >
> >Eh, Yes they did. They bought PC-Dos from a Seattle software company but
> >they wrote MS-Dos.
>
> Same thing, my friend. "PC-DOS" was just the name on the version sold
> by IBM. But they were identical. Of course, after they bought it,
> they began _modifying_ it, and I'm sure by the release of, say,
> version 5 or so, there was little of the original code left, so I
> suppose you could say they "wrote" it in that sense.
>
> >
> >Of course, the guy who wrote PC-Dos at the other company was working for
MS
> >at the time they wrote MS-Dos, so it's easy to get confused...
>
> I don't think that's correct. They guy (Tim Patterson, I believe)
> sold the rights to his CP/M clone (which he simply called DOS, a
> commonly used name in those days for a number of O/S's) to Microsoft,
> but I don't think he ever went to work for them. In any case,
> "PC-DOS" and "MS-DOS" were identical except for the marketing name.
Not according to Tim or Seattle Software. Q-Dos was the Seattle Software(?)
product they bought for $50,000 in '80. Seattle Software later sued MS and
got another $500,000, I think.
I do know that Patterson was with Microsoft from 80 - 96. I don't know if
he is still there or not.
I've got an article at home about it. I'll grab it and give you the
sources.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:00:20 -0400
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, at least you post pro-Linux posts in the Linux newsgroup. Drestin
> > > > > on the other hand...
> > > > >
> > > > > Annoyance factor: Drestin > Aaron
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Unless your name is Drestin Adress
> > >
> > > True enough. But, that's the beauty of perspective.
> > >
> > > To Windows advocates, even the most reasonable *nix advocate is a
> > > trollish idiot.
> >
> > Which is why I adopted the policy of being completely "unreasonable"
> > in my intolerance for stupidity. I use the full force my Purdue
> > education to soundly beat the stuffing out of any MS-Losevocate
> > who tries to trout out the standard MS marketing bilge.
> >
> > Those who carry water for a tyrant deserve to be tortured and
> > humiliated.
> >
>
> Yeppers. Which is why I say you aren't as annoying as Drestin, or Kurt
> Angle (where we started). You at least have a point, while most of the
> time Dresty doesn't, other than to piss people off. Why else would you
> post Windrivel into a *nix group.
>
> And I know that this is cross-posted. I'm not removing the cross-post
> for the integrity of the thread. Maybe sounds stupid, but I think
> people that pull a thread out of a group just to bad-mouth the people
> that are in that group are cowards, and no better than the people that
> originally cross-posted to begin with.
>
> I've got nothing against Windows advocates in general, just against
> those that consider it important to piss off *nix advocates by entering
> their domain to proclaim what shit we use with no logical information to
> back them up.
Actually, it's more of a propaganda campaign to scare off those who
might leave the Microsoft cult.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Nathaniel Jay Lee
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism,soc.singles
Subject: Re: one of Lenin's Useful Idiots denies reality
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:02:18 -0400
SemiScholar wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:23:27 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"SemiScholar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> And BTW - Microsoft didn't write MS-DOS.
> >
> >Eh, Yes they did. They bought PC-Dos from a Seattle software company but
> >they wrote MS-Dos.
>
> Same thing, my friend. "PC-DOS" was just the name on the version sold
> by IBM. But they were identical. Of course, after they bought it,
> they began _modifying_ it, and I'm sure by the release of, say,
> version 5 or so, there was little of the original code left, so I
> suppose you could say they "wrote" it in that sense.
No... that's merely modification of someone else's work.
>
> >
> >Of course, the guy who wrote PC-Dos at the other company was working for MS
> >at the time they wrote MS-Dos, so it's easy to get confused...
>
> I don't think that's correct. They guy (Tim Patterson, I believe)
> sold the rights to his CP/M clone (which he simply called DOS, a
> commonly used name in those days for a number of O/S's) to Microsoft,
> but I don't think he ever went to work for them. In any case,
> "PC-DOS" and "MS-DOS" were identical except for the marketing name.
>
> - SemiScholar
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:03:37 -0400
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8mbt5v$k3v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Is it just me, or is Aaron, a confirmed MS hater posting from Windows 98?
>
> You need to reference the message so we can all look at the headers to
> confirm it. If he is using 98 then he certainly looks foolish :-)
I run my headers through sed.
This conceals
a) the actual OS of the system which I am posting from
b) the software I am using to post to USENET
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:04:39 -0400
abraxas wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >>
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > > > You dare to claim "unix boxes are essential to running
> >> microsoft.com?"
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes. And based on the existance of Unix boxes at microsoft.com,
> >> > > > Microsoft believes this, too.
> >> > >
> >> > > Prove it or continue to be considered the poorest liar on usenet
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Look who's making accusations of spreading lies...
> >>
> >> Prove it or continue to be considered the poorest liar on usenet.
> >
> > Aren't you the guy who claimed to be a good programmer, and then
> > posted an Endian-switch algorithm using string functions?
> >
>
> Months ago he also claimed to know all about UNIX and then was found to
> not even know what 'su' does.
In Lose2K, it stands for "Soft Underbelly"
>
> -----yttrx
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
