Linux-Advocacy Digest #189, Volume #31 Tue, 2 Jan 01 09:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Uptimes (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Linux, it is great. ("Todd")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 14:15:22 +0100
Chad C. Mulligan wrote:
>
> Did you determine what happened. Doing nothing at all sounds far too much
> like the typical response a help desk gets when asking someone what they
> were doing when their problem developed. Idle computers don't crash as a
> general rule unless hardware fails, if it couldn't be rebooted that seems
> to be a hardware failure on the surface.
>
Yep, there was nothing wrong with the hardware. It still runs unchaged
(since more than 1 year now) with linux. Only that i recently updated it to
SuSE 7 Pro.
Again, this microshit NT4 (was on SP4 at that time) simply crashed wile
doing nothing. 2 weeks later my other machine, which for a while ran Warp4
afterwards (OS/2 is a LOT better than NT!) also just crashed, this time
without loosing the ability to reboot. But that was it, no longer NT. It's
just not worth the hassle. And because of all these lies from Microsoft
about how good it is, I do not have ANY trust at all that w2k would be ANY
better. I simply do not believe it.
Now you will come and say "just try it, it works", I'd say thanks, but NO
thanks. I value my own time too much. Would also be a quite costly try!
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:28:08 +0800
I agree with your post. I also see Linux selling in various distributions
(RedHat seems to be most popular) in almost every computer store I visit.
Funny thing is, even when Window is so much more expensive and supposedly
far inferior, it still seems to be the dominant choice by users like myself
and others.
I personally run Linux 7.0 and Windows 2000, and could never give up 2000.
I don't actually *use* Linux because I haven't found a need for it beyond
what 2000 can do a lot easier...
I will say that RedHat Linux has come a long way with its installation -
impressive. Although, it is still not as easy as Windows 98/2000.
Another point... the *initial* cost of Linux is becoming a more and more
expensive. RedHat 7.0 set me back about US$50. And there are more
expensive versions. Thankfully - the licensing is still good in terms of
pricing... I will never be a convert of open source simply because I think a
lot of the work is of low quality. As a system architect and programmer, I
would never want to give away source code. I know a lot of professional
programmers who feel the same.
Anyway, given the cost of Linux, it is an impressive system. However, I
still feel that Windows 2000 is a technically superior product ( I work with
many 2000 boxes everyday ).
The real future is yet unknown... what device will replace the PC if any? I
haven't been impressed by the so-called 'applicances' - I've bought a couple
PDAs and other stuff, but only use them for about 2 months - then the
novelty wears off.
Hmmmm...
Oh well, hope everybody (including Linux users :-) ) had a good holiday!
-Todd
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It is funny, several years ago I had to do some research about what the
> right OS should be for an embedded system. I had originally concluded
> that it should be FreeBSD, but abandoned that for Linux in favor of
> third party support.
>
> Today, if one looks at Linux, it is simply amazing at what is available
> for no cost.
>
> PostgreSQL, a full relational, enterprise ready SQL database.
> Star Office, a full featured office packages.
> Full TCP/IP networking support.
> Apache, a world class web server.
> PHP, a world class web scripting language.
> KDE2, a very good desktop environment.
> GCC, a world class C/C++ compiler.
> Countless languages and utilities.
> CD ROM creation utilities.
> MP3 generation.
>
> Too many programs to mention. All free. Sweet!
>
> Windows may have more games, and support a few pieces of hardware that
> Linux does not, but Linux does almost everything, is free, and is more
> stable.
>
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 08:20:01 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/01/2001
at 04:21 PM, "Mark L. Kahnt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>It is a legacy aspect from when punched cards were 80 characters
>long,
Actually, not. The behavior of XEDIT is driven by the architecture of
the 3270.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 08:16:11 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 07:43 PM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Why should I, or any other user, be required to give special
>instructions to make the editor behave in a rational manner?
You shouldn't, you moron, which is why IBM chose a rational default.
If you had two functioning neurons to rub together then you would
understand why defaulting to nulls on would confuse and irritate 99%
of the users.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 08:13:03 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 05:26 PM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>You still have not answered the goddamned fucking question...
Possibly because the question assumes things that are contrary to
fact.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 08:11:36 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 05:07 PM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Regardless...the DEFAULT behavior of an editor should NOT be to "pad"
>existing text with non-existant characters out to the maximum legal
>line length.
XEDIT does no such thing; it pads the text with blanks that exist,
just as the blank at the end of your sig delimiter exists. You don't
like the default, change your profile. But don't come whining here
about what happens when you have trailing nulls instead of triling
blanks.
Before you complain about an editor's default, why not find out the
consequences of changing it. XEDIT does as well as is possible dealing
with the flawed architecture of the 3270, and it is impossible to
inteligently discuss XEDIT without first understanding that
architecture. Which part of IT'S NOT THE SOFTWARE, IT'S THE HARDWARE
don't you understand?
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 07:58:47 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 01:14 AM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>The problem is that if you move the cursor to the end of a line, and
>start typing, you will notice that the little "X" symbol at the
>bottom of the screen appears, indicating that the program is not
>accepting your input
The X indicates no such thing. It indicates that you are attempting to
inset data into a field, and that there are no nulls after the
insertion point. The X is not displayed by the software on the
mainframe. If you're trying to type data over trailing nulls, then you
should be turning Insert Mode on. If you're trying to extend a field,
you can't; the 3270 architecture doesn't allow it.
>It did in 1980-83 on the Oakland County Schools S/370,
>in 1985 on a S/370 at Purude University, in 1997 at Ford Motor
>Company, and 1999 at Kmart.
Nope, you just jumped to conclusions at Oakland County Schools, Purude
University, Ford Motor Company and Kmart.
Now, if you want to retract your belief in IBM's haedware quality and
complain about the 3270 architecture, you may regain some of your lost
credibility.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 07:46:59 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 01:09 AM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I need to Read the manual
Clearly, since you obviously haven't got a clue as to what is done in
the hardware and what in the software.
>Clue for the fucking clueless: the non-existance of characters past
>the last existant character on a line SHOULD BE THE DEFAULT.
Clue for the willfully clueless: THE BLANK EXISTS.
>one would expect
You would expect; someone more intelligent would read the
documentation instead of jumping to conclusions.
>IBM's software standards
Second clue: YOU'RE CONFUSING HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE.
>Every IBM system I have ever used has been a huge freaking pain in
>the neck to deal with
No surprise, if you refuse to RYFM.
>System 370 using VM/CMS
Well, if you can't even get the nomenclature right it's no surprise
that you don't understand the behavior.
>at the beginning, IT WAS THE ONLY
>THING I KNEW....
No, because obviously you didn't know it, you were just hacking
blindly at it.
>Conversely, Even Apple ][ had a better editor....
More likely, you took the trouble to learn it. Every editor that I've
seen on Apple II was ghastly.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 07:37:33 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/31/2000
at 01:04 AM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>First, on the S/370 I worked on in high school, then another IBM
>mainframe that I used at Purdue, a 3rd one that I used at Ford, and a
>4th one I used at Kmart.
And in all of that time it never occured to you to RYFM? Your
description sounded like it was written by Jane Fonda, and is flatly
incorrect. The blanks are "really" there, just as the blank at the end
of your sig delimiter is "really there", and you don't have to delete
the blanks in order to append non-blank data. You do have to delete
the blanks if you want to insert data in the middle, but that has
nothing to do with XEDIT.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 13:19:47 GMT
In article <92jjcb$964$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : I personally am switching wherever I can to CUPS. It can connect to SMB
> : printers just as easily, allows better configuration of the printers, has a
> : larger driver list (as long as you explore linuxprinting.org a bit ;-), and
> : supports jetdirect, which I have run into (and is a pain to configure in
> : printtool).
>
> I use a pair of HP jetdirect printers at work, and they are wonderful
> for using with dissimilar client machines. They act as unix 'lpd'
> style printers as well as SMB LanManager type printers and whatever
> it is that Macs use - the little network card in those printers
> speaks all those protocols, and the printer itself is a postscript
> capable printer with most larger HP models, so you don't have to
> muck about with ghostscript either. I love the things. What is
> the problem they are giving you with configuring them in printtool?
> Just curious.
The problem is the 3-port jetdirects. In those, lpd always connects to
the first printer, regardless of queue name (at least that's what
happened when I tried it). Since these particular JD's had a matrix/
laser/deskjet each one, that was a mess.
On CUPS, just change the port on the URL :-)
> : It also gives better printing feedback and has a nice GUI tool
> (KUPS) if you : dislike the web interface.
>
> I'll look into it when I get the time.
Try it, it's nice :-)
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 13:26:30 GMT
In article <92j7hc$lj6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:92j3of$456$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <92isv1$fu3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:b6W26.52507$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:92h7sc$mqn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Because IT WOULD MAKE SENSE. That's why.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why just those? Why not every window manager known to man?
> > > > >
> > > > > Why not make a file like RPM, so each application can have,
> > which will
> > > > > contain its configurations and will be openable by some common
> > program.
> > > > > And no, I'm talking about
> > > > > pico/ed/whatever-other-text-editor-you-had-in-mind.
> > > > > XML would do nicely here.
> > > >
> > > > XML is just syntax. It saves you from writing a parser or reusing
> > > > any of the more free-form parsers already done, but nothing
> > > > else. This is not unreasonable for new programs but the
> > > > people who have copied the same config files from machine
> > > > to machine for the last 20 years and know how to read and
> > > > type them aren't going to be happy if they suddenly are forced
> > > > to make them ugly and unreadable. XML is easy for the
> > > > computer to parse but I'm not sure it makes sense these days
> > > > to make it harder for the human and easier for the CPU.
> > >
> > > The advantage XML has is in that it's both human & machine readable.
> >
> > So is sendmail.cf for some value of readable, human and computer ;-).
>
> Which use different fomrat than what other config tools user.
Parse error, if you pardon the topical pun.
> > > And building a program that would be able to read & change every
> > > program's setting that I can think of would not be a problem.
> >
> > There is one, it's called "pico". Just because a program can parse
> > XML, it doesn't mean that it can figure out what the XML means.
>
> But it means that the file contain all the options, and that one
> program can be used to config all the config files without the user
> needing to know about the file's format.
XML means nothing like that. A specific file format based on XML MIGHT
mean that, in SOME cases, though. For some apps, XML just doesn't
have enough power. For instance, XEmacs' config files are programs!
> > Take, for example, a very simple config file format: INI-like files.
> > You know, tag/value pairs grouped on sections?
>
> Yeah, I know, and that is why it's bad.
>
> take apahce's configuration, frex:
>
> ServerType: standalone
>
> The other option is "inetd"
>
> No where it the config file there is even a *hint* about the other option.
>
> This mean that if I want to write a program that configure apache, I
> will need to store the other option *inside* the program.
> And this mean that if apache has a new version with another value to
> ServerType, I'll have to update my program to include this.
> And if I want to write a tool such as LinuxConf, I've to store
> inside the program *all* the programs options, and when one program
> config file is changed, I need to update the program.
On the other hand, you are proposing that all config files contain all
possible options. I am not sure that's feasible in all cases. And in
the cases where it's feasible, it's not because of XML.
> This mean that writing LinuxConf or similar tools will be *hard*. Because
> I've to store both old settings & new settings, and find out what version
> each program is running, and fit itwith its sets of options.
>
> OTOH, if all programs adhered to some sort of a common format, such as
> this*:
> http://www10.ewebcity.com/ayende/lmc.xml
>
> Building such a tool would be very easy, and will mainly include finding
> GPLed XML phraser and writing the UI.
>
> This way, the config file itself is the one who stores all the options. If a
> new version, with new options, comes out, the same tool, with absolutely no
> modifications, be able to handle it.
And probably screw it to death. Really.
> > They are trivial to parse for men and computers (much simpler than
> > XML!). They are used by many apps (all KDE apps, all GNOME apps).
> >
> > Now, write a program that can configure all KDE and all GNOME apps.
>
> No, because of the reasons mentioned above, the config files don't
> contained the other options, so building such a tool would be quite
> hard. Assuming that the programs follow a format as I purpose, or a
> similar one, it would be far easier.
Then it's totally orthogonal to XML. Therefore, please abstain to push
your format by force of buzzword.
I propose you say "hey, let's use a file format that contains the
options".
Thanks in advance.
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 13:29:06 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:fFj46.11915$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:u3R36.62473$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 31 Dec 2000 15:19:01
> > > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 30 Dec 2000 23:01:49
> > > >> [...]
> > > >> >While your at it, please show where Republicans have bent the rules.
> > > >> >After all, this is what T. Max was claiming, which is an obvious
> > > >> >lie. I called him a liar, and I proved it. Now, prove why I am a
> liar.
> > > >>
> > > >> You just did.
> > > >
> > > >You have a warped sense of lying.
> > >
> > > Guffaw.
> > >
> > > >You claimed that Republicans bent the rules. They did not, I proved it,
> > > >thus proving you a liar.
> > >
> > > No, you claimed that the Democrats were trying to "subvert the rule of
> > > law."
> >
> > Which they were. You didn't even answer the claims, instead stooping to
> > name calling.
> >
> > > I merely pointed out, which caused you to thrash wildly in
> > > partisan posturing,
> >
> > Spare me the story telling, Grandpa.
> >
> > > that unless you can recognize that the Republicans
> > > were doing the same thing,
> >
> > Which they weren't. You have not made one attempt to even back this claim
> up.
> > This was the claim, in fact, that I proved you were lying, or, at least,
> > grossly ignorant.
> >
> > > and to the same degree, then your
> > > consideration of the reality of the situation is obviously, and deeply,
> > > flawed.
> >
> > Please show me ONE, just ONE example where the Republicans "bent" the law.
> >
>
> Watergate
In the Florida Election process.
If you want to go into the past and point out times when Dems and Reps broke
the law, I could cite far more Democratic law-breakings.
Anyhow, Nixon did that on his own, that wasn't sanctioned by the RNC, whereas
this Florida fixing was sactioned by the DNC.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 13:30:32 GMT
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bob Hauck wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 01 Jan 2001 01:28:58 GMT, Chad Myers
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > >> No, you claimed that the Democrats were trying to "subvert the rule of
> > >> law."
> > >
> > >Which they were. You didn't even answer the claims, instead stooping to
> > >name calling.
> >
> > How is going to court "subverting" the rule of law? I've always been
> > under the impression that you went to court to get an interpretation of
> > the law, not to subvert it. Subverting would involve something
> > extra-legal, such as paying off the people counting the ballots or
> > voting on behalf of dead people.
> >
> > Maybe I missed a civics lesson someplace where they defined lawsuits as
> > "subversion".
> >
>
> The lesson you missed is a common notion since written
> history exists. A court ruling in your favor is
> "interpreting" the law. A court ruling in favor of your
> opponent is "subverting" the law. That's what keeps
> discussion alive!
<sigh>
Ask any self-respecting legal scholar or lawyer what they
thought of the two FL Supreme Court rulings. If they say
anything other than "Partisan" or "way off base", then they're
not a self-respecting legal scholar or lawyer.
-Chad
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
