Linux-Advocacy Digest #270, Volume #29 Fri, 22 Sep 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: "Overclocking" Is A Bad Idea ("PistolGrip")
Re: [OT] Tholen & Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Sam Morris")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge (FM)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: Implications ("paul snow")
Re: GPL & freedom ("D'Arcy Smith")
Re: GPL & freedom (Grega Bremec)
Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: GPL & freedom (Zenin)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 23 Sep 2000 00:34:41 GMT
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 00:01:08 GMT, Richard wrote:
>> I hack software. I also design things.
>
>I eat. I also cook. And no matter how much I eat, it won't make me
>a great chef.
"hack" is slang, so I'd prefer not use this word.
Suffice it to say that design is an essential part of programming. Any
good programmer knows something about design, because writing a decent
nontrivial program requires some basic design skills.
You are trying to pretend that programming and design are orthogonal skills,
but simply put, this is a load of baloney. You can't program without some
design skills.
And I'd argue that you're in no position to design unless you can program,
because sooner or later, a design needs to be implemented and unless you
have some basic understanding as to how it gets implemented, you are not
going to be able to produce a good design.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge
Date: 23 Sep 2000 00:38:39 GMT
On 22 Sep 2000 22:51:43 GMT, FM wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>The only time that this becomes a danger ( in C++ ) is when you want to use C
>>from C++. And it's a problem if you want to use C from any other language.
>>Any proficient programmer knows how a language is "meant" to be used, that
>>is, they have a sense of what is considered "good style" in that language.
>>For example, "good style" in perl would mean preferring foreach to
>>for (...). In C++, it means using OO all the time.
>
>No it isn't. C++ is quite explicitly a hybrid language
>supporting multiple paradigms. There are often very good
>reasons why you'd want to use C++ but use its OO features
>sparingly.
Well I guess STL is a good example of this kind of thing. But for the
most part, I think it's good style to write C++ that really is C++
( as opposed to "C with classes" ) I guess one could use it as a
"better C than C", but it'd be stretching the truth to call code written
in such a way "C++"
>>You'll have a hard time designing anything moderately complex with that
>>approach. Even a head as big as yours can only hold so much (-;
>
>Actually it works quite well for a simple project. For more
>complex projects requiring multiple programmers, writing
>down becomes more important.
Well that's what I said, isn't it ? Thanks for repeating my point though (-;
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "PistolGrip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Overclocking" Is A Bad Idea
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:42:37 -0500
"Jim Broughton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
> > But using a computer that is or *has been* overclocked, for
> > any non-game application, is running a great risk for no
> > benefit whatsoever.
> >
>
> In your opinion and with very little data to actualy back up what
> you say.
I missed the original posters message... this is a Reply to the original
poster.
WTF, this guy work for Intel or what? Maybe he fried his C300a cuz he
didn't know what he was doing?
Ummm... so you're saying that the hundreds of Audio Tracks I've mixed and
the many Videos I've produced on my Dual PII 300's running at 4.5*100 is a
great risk? I've never had any trouble.. In fact, the PII 300's I'm using
are the *exact* same CPU that Intel sells/sold as the PII 450. No
different, *exact* same chip.
This guys obviously has no clue how Intel manufactures then 'grades' there
chips. They sell them at the highest possible clock rate they can. Chips
from the *same exact* batch are often sold at different clock speeds.
I've been overclocking for years... I've even got an old P100 running a
166Mhz for oh.. lets' see how many years now? The argument that
overclocking wears a chip out faster is mute. Sure, it might cause a
failure sooner, but hell with the CPU market now your chip is obsolete in 6
months anyway. Long before a little extra heat/voltage is gonna take it
out.
Please...
Dave
------------------------------
From: "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Tholen & Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:40:48 +0100
> Dave is always [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's his imitators you're having
> a problem with.
Allright, I'm sorry. AS to all your sad sad people who are imitating Dave
for some perverse reason, DON'T YOU HAVE LIVES TO BE GETTING ON WITH? WHY,
WHY?
--
Cheers,
Sam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 23 Sep 2000 00:45:29 GMT
On 22 Sep 2000 22:29:11 GMT, FM wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>That makes the language less safe. For example, inserting a string
>>into a list of integers is probably an error. C++ catches it at
>>compile time. Smalltalk, perl, and java choke at run time. The
>>benefits of catching errors at compile time are substantial.
>
>I don't think you guys are agreeing on what it means for a
>language to be weakly typed. At least using my definition,
>There's really no substantial benefit to weak typing in a
>high-level language, if the language's type system is
>powerful enough, perhaps other than mere convenience.
I'd agree. In fact I moved from perl to C++, partly because I preferred
C++'s stronger typing.
>Dynamic typing, of course, is another matter. I also think
>C++ is more weakly typed than Java, though I'd have to
>look at the details to be sure.
Java needs to resort to the use of universal objects to support containers.
>>The benefit of C++ is that you get a lot of compile time checking ( which
>>means that you don't have an "exceptions-are-the-norm" situation ala java )
>>and you still get dynamic behaviour.
>
>Which is really static typing vs. dynamic typing. You get
>dynamic behavior through bypassing the static type checking
>temporarily, so I wouldn't really hold this as an advantage
>for C++. Java in general catches far more errors than C++
>ever does.
My point is that ( for example ) C++ has proper support for generic
programming, but java doesn't. If you make a linked list of "objects"
in java, you won't catch type errors until runtime. With C++ and templates,
you will.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge
Date: 23 Sep 2000 00:46:05 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well I guess STL is a good example of this kind of thing. But for the
>most part, I think it's good style to write C++ that really is C++
>( as opposed to "C with classes" ) I guess one could use it as a
>"better C than C", but it'd be stretching the truth to call code written
>in such a way "C++"
Well but what is really C++? I'd say procedural
programming's just a fine style well-supported by
C++. As is generic programming without getting
buried in OO. There's really no reason why one
would use C++ if one was to follow OOP rigorously.
C++ doesn't even support polymorphism outside of
templates without the use of pointers.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 23 Sep 2000 00:52:14 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What about different tastes in art and music. Some people can stans Wagnerian
>> operas, other people love them. Those do not coincide in any way.
>A star looks completely different from a dog, but both are made up
>of objects that follow the same laws of physics. Similarly, objects
>perceived by humans as beautiful need not be perceived as the same
>in order to follow the same laws of beauty and order.
And you have no idea what those "laws of beauty and
order" are. So stop pretending that you have this
objective view that other people lack.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: "paul snow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.software.config-mgmt
Subject: Re: Implications
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 01:45:25 GMT
> I mean that the software does not make the machine. The only ware that
> makes a machine into what it is are the small routines implemented
> into the ROM. Without protocols for maintaining cache coherence an SMP
> wouldn't be an SMP. Without the microcode, the Motorola 68000 would
> never have been able to execute the early Mac OS.
Here is the equation:
X --> P --> E
[X] You install software from some source (installation disks, files
downloaded from the web, type it in from memory, a backup tape, whatever)
.....
-->
[P] Onto your hard disk. That is where software goes, into some persisted
storage that implements the program store for a computer system. Why a
program store? Because the nature of computer systems is that we want to be
able to turn them on and off, survive an application crash, etc. But at
some point, we are interested in using the computer system...
-->
[E] And we go into the execution environment, defined by everything that we
have installed, and run our operating systems, applications and whatever.
What part of this do you disagree with? It is this observation, and the
natural separation it implies, has implications for all the groups I posted
to.
Paul Snow
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:22:53 GMT
"Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This of course, includes any attempt at removing the deceptive
> preamble.
Well this seems to be the crux of your whole argument.
What exactly do you find "deceptive" about the preamble
or the GPL license as a whole. Please don't try to pick
individual parts - the license has to be looked at as a
whole.
> In short, it's nothing close to, "all code shale be free", it's
> simply, "all code shale be GPLed".
Which makes it free ;-) Just not in the way you would like ;-)
..darcy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grega Bremec)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:32:24 GMT
...and Zenin used the keyboard:
>
> No, actually, you can't modify the GPL at all:
OK, I must apologize at this point. This one really was stupid,
entirely on my behalf. I don't really know, perhaps I pulled it out of
my ass or something, but somehow I "remembered" that changing the GPL
wasn't actually a problem. I must admit I was wrong here.
>: Anyway, if you want to restrict or loosen the licensing terms on some
>: particular code, you have all the options to indeed do so - do a complete
>: rewrite of the work in question, base it only on common functionality, and
>: release that product under a different license alltogether.
>
> So much for code reuse or the greater good of software at large. :-P
Who said you couldn't base your rewrite on the original code? Nobody
is preventing you from using similar algorithms, heck, just don't
translate it or cut & paste, man. Browse your way through the source,
read it, memorize (**the abstracts of**) the parts you think might
come handy and start over.
You can learn a _LOT_ from the GPLed code, when it comes to solving
problems you're not that good at. And when you start that rewrite of
yours, you'll have a whole new idea of how to handle certain caveats,
avoid thin ice, etc. That is also a part of code reuse. You don't need
to cut & paste to reuse it.
> In short, it's nothing close to, "all code shale be free", it's
> simply, "all code shale be GPLed".
Nobody is preventing you from writing your own program from scratch.
Hairsplitting we can play anytime, though.
--
Grega Bremec
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gbsoft.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge
Date: 23 Sep 2000 02:45:25 GMT
On 23 Sep 2000 00:46:05 GMT, FM wrote:
>C++. As is generic programming without getting
>buried in OO. There's really no reason why one
>would use C++ if one was to follow OOP rigorously.
>C++ doesn't even support polymorphism outside of
>templates without the use of pointers.
I am not sure what you mean. virtual method dispatch works
on references as well as pointers.
// Look ma, no pointers (-;
Derived B;
Base& C = B;
C.foo(); // calls Derived::foo() if foo is virtual
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 22:42:06 -0400
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
> >Nathaniel Jay Lee writes:
> >> I don't mind trollers,
> >
> >Why not?
> >
> >> and I don't mind morons so much as long as they are entertaining.
> >
> >So, we can add you to the list of people actually encouraging such
> >behavior and therefore contributing to the overall decline of USENET.
>
> The morons are going to be present with our without
> encouragement. I don't encourage them, I accept them.
> Are morons any less human just because they are morons? I
Look at Tholen, and tell us what you see.
Heeeeeeeee!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 02:57:02 -0000
Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: ...and Zenin used the keyboard:
:>: Anyway, if you want to restrict or loosen the licensing terms on some
:>: particular code, you have all the options to indeed do so - do a
:>: complete rewrite of the work in question, base it only on common
:>: functionality, and release that product under a different license
:>: alltogether.
:>
:> So much for code reuse or the greater good of software at large. :-P
:
: Who said you couldn't base your rewrite on the original code? Nobody is
: preventing you from using similar algorithms, heck, just don't translate
: it or cut & paste, man. Browse your way through the source, read it,
: memorize (**the abstracts of**) the parts you think might come handy and
: start over.
Which, of course, is how the great majority of GPL code has come
about.
Personally, I'd rather spend time being innovative and creating
something new and different...then constantly reinventing the wheel
for little more then the sake of reinventing the wheel. And if I
*must* reinvent the wheel, for the common good I'll let (keyword:
"let", as in "my choice") the community benefit from using my wheel.
In exchange I ask (not demand) others to do the same.
Funny thing...even without the GPL...they do, in mass.
The code I've given away to the community is not "personal hacking
time" or school work; it's nearly all been on my company's dime. My
company makes a large use out of public code to more efficiently
bring quality solutions to our customers and understands that just
as in a good personal relationship, it's a matter of give and take;
but never, ever forced. And so we try to return as much as we can
and is relevant.
: You can learn a _LOT_ from the GPLed code, when it comes to solving
: problems you're not that good at. And when you start that rewrite of
: yours, you'll have a whole new idea of how to handle certain caveats,
: avoid thin ice, etc. That is also a part of code reuse. You don't need to
: cut & paste to reuse it.
Most GPL code does not come with design docs. If you're going to
reuse a design pattern...you really need to be familiar with the
design...which is painfully difficult from simply looking at the raw
code in most cases.
:> In short, it's nothing close to, "all code shale be free", it's
:> simply, "all code shale be GPLed".
:
: Nobody is preventing you from writing your own program from scratch.
: Hairsplitting we can play anytime, though.
If to make my own bread I can simply go to the store and get flour,
milk, eggs, etc; it's a reasonable operation.
If however, to make bread I need to personally plant and farm my own
wheat, raise and milk my own cows, and tend to my own chickens...it
becomes a much more unreasonable operation.
The FSF would like as many stores as possible to be GPL and as such
make it a case of use GPL code to bake a simple loaf of bread, or
start your own damn farm from scratch.
It has nothing to do with splitting hairs. The intentions, the
methods, and the results are extreme.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 22:52:29 -0400
Jack Troughton wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Jack Troughton wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:07:06, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Jack Troughton wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Jack Troughton wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:54:02, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > >Jack Troughton wrote:
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 21:31:39, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> >Jack Troughton wrote:
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > Jason Bowen wrote:
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > Bob Germer wrote:
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > On 09/18/2000 at 06:38 AM,
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
> > > >> > > >> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > Except I didn't do that. I pointed to some facts and
>didn't make claims
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > as fact. CFC's are man made and the CO2 level is
>verifiably higher than
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > > it has been in 600k years.
> > > >> > > >> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > You claim the CO2 level is higher now that it was 600 years
>ago based on
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > experiments on artic ice. You claim that CO2 levels are
>higher in North
> > > >> > > >> >> > > > America when the facts prove they are in deficit!
> > > >> > > >> >> > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > > You don't understand what is being discussed. North America as
>a continent produces less CO2
> > > >> > > >> >> > > than the plant life on it consumes. The rest of the world
>produces way more than is consumed.
> > > >> > > >> >> > > It is called the addtive property of numbers and perhaps and
>elementary algebra class will help
> > > >> > > >> >> > > you understand.
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > Then maybe you ought to convince those OTHER countries to reform
>THEIR
> > > >> > > >> >> > ways, and keep your fucking opinions to yourself in this country.
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > MORON
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> You really are into silencing dissent, aren't you? I was under the
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >No. I'm into getting the Ignorami among us to stop spreading their
> > > >> > > >> >baseless PROPAGANDA.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> How do you know it's propaganda?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Note: No response.
> > > >>
> > > >> Still no answer on this question. C'mon Aaron, tell us why it's
> > > >> propaganda.
> > >
> > > And yet again, Aaron is incapable of defining why it's propaganda.
> > >
> > > Here's a hint Aaron; it's not self-evident in the way the truths of
> > > the American Constitution are.
>
> Aaron, you cannot call this stuff propaganda and lies and expect it
> to stick just because you say so. You have not yet offered one piece
> of real evidence that this is the case. You haven't even offered any
> real evidence that the people who think there might be a problem are
> even wrong. Your opinion does not suffice as evidence. Your rudeness
> makes it even less so.
>
> Clearly you have no real leg to stand on. All you do is to mentally
> masturbate and proudly display your self-abusing tendencies by
> spraying your logorrheic discharge all over the world via usenet.
>
> > > >> > > >> >> impression that the intellectual foundations of the US system of
> > > >> > > >> >> governance were all about making sure that people didn't keep their
> > > >> > > >> >> opinions to themselves.
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >Are you saying arguing that it is good to NOT oppose liars....
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> You can oppose liars all you want... until the method of opposition is
> > > >> > > >> silencing them. Or have you forgotten the right to speech enshrined in
> > > >> > > >> the US consititution?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >I'm calling on YOU to be a good man and STOP SPREADING LIES.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Exactly what lies is it you're accusing me of?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The Eco-bullshit propaganda...
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry, that does not suffice as an answer. What lie exactly is it
> > > >> you are accusing me of? Go find a quote where I lied. 'Eco-bullshit
> > > >> propaganda' is a nice vagueness that may satisfy the weak-minded
> > > >> paranoiacs among the audience, but hardly suffices as anything more
> > > >> than a wild accusation by the intellectually bankrupt. Try again.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Are you really that fucking stupid that you don't know what the thread
> > > >is about?
> > > >
> > > >Check the fucking SUBJECT LINE you imbecile.
> > >
> > > I don't care about the subject of the thread. You said I was lying.
> > > I'm asking you to point to the lie that I said.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that you are in fact incapable of doing so, so you are
> > > resorting to name calling to try and cover up your mendacity.
> > >
> > > Pitiable or contemptible; either you are incapable of argument or
> > > unwilling to argue and so resort to name calling.
> >
> > You are attempting to add credibility to a lie.
> > Thus, you are partaking in a lie.
>
> You're weaselling, Kulkis.
>
> As I have asked you many times above, and which you have yet to
> answer, you have yet to display one piece of real evidence that any
> of the claims that people may make regarding climate change are a
> lie. You haven't even offered any credible evidence that they are
> mistaken, let alone lying. Finally, you have been happily stuffing
> words in my mouth. You know this because when asked to provide
> evidence, all you can do is to say that since you, who so clearly
> considers yourself the final arbiter on what is right and wrong, say
> that it is a lie it must clearly be a lie. However, this doesn't cut
> it for normal people.
>
> > GAME
> > SET
> > MATCH
> >
> > YOU FUCKING LOSE!
>
> Wow, nice display of how not to win friends and influence people.
> You are a spoiled child.
>
What part of "I'm not here to make friends" do you not understand?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: Loren 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: 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
******************************
