Linux-Advocacy Digest #188, Volume #32 Wed, 14 Feb 01 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: The Windows guy. ("Mike")
Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS (chrisv)
Re: KDE Whiners (Matthias Warkus)
Re: The Windows guy. (*Rotten_168*)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (chrisv)
Re: The Windows guy. (chrisv)
Re: Laptop and linux. Which one??? ("Todd")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Neil Cerutti)
Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control) (Mike Martinet)
To Aaron ("Todd")
Re: Linux and the 21st Century Boom - Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on (Karel
Jansens)
Re: The Wintrolls (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Karel Jansens)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Karel Jansens)
Re: To Aaron (J Sloan)
Re: Peformance Test (Neil Cerutti)
Re: The Windows guy. (J Sloan)
Re: To Aaron ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: To Aaron ("Todd")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:10:55 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You have a few windows ports of some older unix
> tools, but you lack the Unix environment that makes
> them really effective. These tools are just a piece of
> the big picture.
Good lord, what a conclusion! All without even knowing who I am, and
certainly without looking at my computer. As it turns out, you're wrong: my
tools are all up to date, for the same reason everyone else's are: we all
download the code and compile it. There is no separate port, and let's face
it: damn near every Unix tool is old. As far as the Unix environment making
Unix utilities more effective, I've never found it to be so. They work the
same on my NT box as they do on my Unix box. Perhaps you can provide an
example?
> Once you get to know Unix, there's no going back.
I use Unix all day, every day.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:20:05 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >BLACK HELIOCOPTERS! HERE THEY COME, RUN FOR COVER!
>> >>
>> >> Yep, we're all paranoid. Microsoft doesn't really want to monopolize
>> >> things. They don't want to maximize the amount of money they make.
>> >
>> >You make it to seem like they have a secret army that will invade
>> >your house if you don't buy their products.
>>
>> Umm..... You're the one who brought up the "black helicopters",
>> dorkweed.
>
>Because you were the doomsdayer. I was making fun of you. Did you
>flunk kindergarten or something?
Hmm.... To the perfectly rational and indisputably correct suggestion
that Microsoft seeks to monopolize in the computer software industry,
you respond with the totally irrational "black helicopters" and
"secret armies" nonsense. And I'm the one who flunked kindergarten?
Sorry, but you are an idiot and make no sense at all.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: KDE Whiners
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:17:46 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 14 Feb 2001 01:15:01 GMT...
...and Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : It looks to me like simple competition, which _always_ benefits the
> : consumer.
>
>
> The competition is not what I object to. I believe that it is a good
> thing and that the community is better off for the existence of *both*
> projects.
<AOL> Exactly. </AOL> The Emacs / XEmacs effect.
mawa
--
Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.
------------------------------
From: *Rotten_168* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:27:38 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > He is working on a Linux web server. He wants to do a global replace in
> VI. I
> > tell him to use sed. He whines a bit, then tries it. I hear from his cube.
> > "Sweet!"
>
> Are you not aware that sed is available for NT?
yeah but DOS doesn't have command completion and running more than one
job concurrently. Also DOS doesn't have piping or redirection, or useful
logical operators (&& is the one I'm thinking of), or the ability to
easily run/write scripts. And if I'm wrong and it does have those
features then Microsoft does nothing to educate it's users on how to
take advantage of those features.
Of course I'm talking console here, because most of Linux's power
advantages come with the console, and I think that any OS's power
features would inherently have to use a console.
Personally I couldn't care less which OS I use. I only use my computer
for light tasks (not server or networked, but gaming and to do Computer
Science work) so the fact that Linux can stay up for months on end
doesn't matter too much to me because I shut down my computer each night
to save energy anyway. But if someone has a way that I can perform the
functions I mentioned in DOS/MSWindows I'd love to hear it (I'm not
being sarcastic, that'd be cool if I could do it).
When I want to casually surf the internet and play Alien vs. Predator
I'll boot Windows. But for programming/productivity I use Linux (with a
few exceptions).
- Brent
--
Rotten168
=============================
http://rotten168.home.att.net
=============================
ICQ# 51265871
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Reply-To: Stefan Ohlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Feb 2001 16:37:31 +0100
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:19:47 GMT, Johan Kullstam wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson) writes:
>>On Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:52:31 GMT, John Hasler wrote:
>>>Who are "the" atheists?
>>>Stefan Ohlsson writes:
>>>>I know the atheists have a theory that man will develop to a super-man
>>>>that can travel back in time and will create it all. That's the simple
>>>>version anyway. I know, sounds weird.
>>Are you complaining about "grammar"? I'm sorry, but I'm not a native
>>speaker of this language.
>no we are not complaining about grammar. we are complaining about
>what seems to be your implicit assumption that atheists share some
>beliefs beyond simply not believing in an active god or gods.
>
I'm sorry if I offended anyone. I made an inappropriate generalization.
That was presented as an atheist theory however, by a man that said he
had been an atheist (and therefore, I assume, should know).
>>How do they explain the universe? Or don't they?
>some explain the universe; some don't. it depends upon which atheist
>you ask.
>
OK.
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] � There will always be survivors - Robert A. Heinlein � []
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Reply-To: Stefan Ohlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Feb 2001 16:39:53 +0100
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:47:37 GMT, John Hasler wrote:
>Stefan Ohlsson writes:
>>How do they explain the universe?
>How do theists explain God?
>
I'd like to know that too.. but they usually don't.
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] � There will always be survivors - Robert A. Heinlein � []
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:41:55 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking) wrote:
>We need more people to get fed up. Why do stores insist on knowing your name
>and address when you pay cash anyways?
Insist? They request, and I decline. Really, I'm always amazed when
I see people cough-up their phone number or address when asked.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:49:04 GMT
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>He is working on a Linux web server. He wants to do a global replace in VI. I
>tell him to use sed. He whines a bit, then tries it. I hear from his cube.
>"Sweet!"
Since when is a global replace in a text file difficult to do in
Windows?
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laptop and linux. Which one???
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:53:54 +0800
I just bought an HP (I work for that company) Omnibook 500.
Windows 98 was pre-installed (and quickly erased). I did successfully
install Windows 2000 advanced server (Windows 2000 drivers are available).
The machine seems to be non-proprietary mostly -- seems more open than most
laptops (including past HP models) in terms of standard equipment.
I usually don't praise HP laptops since I never liked most of them, but if
you can get Linux running on it I highly recommend it as everything works
great.
If I didn't depend on this machine for work, I'd attempt to install my copy
of redhat 7.0 on it... maybe at a later time.
-Todd
"Gerardo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:966kim$avo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello,
>
> I want to buy a laptop, and I want to have a dual boot system
> (Nt/Linux). Many of the laptops are "windows designed".
> Which brand/model would you suggest to have this running in a descent
> way? I mean driver support for screen, CDROM/DVD, floppy, sound, etc.
>
> Thank you,
> Gerardo
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: 14 Feb 2001 16:02:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chad Myers posted:
>Multiple language common runtime? Please point me to a URL where
>I can see where this has been done in the past.
>
>See above. If you really knew what it was, you'd see how
>exciting it is.
Microsoft is re-inventing the z-machine!? I guess text adventures
really are coming back.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"If you're gonna score 125 points in a game, you've only got to
play good enough defense to hold the other team to 124. How
the hell hard is that?" -- Red Auerbach
------------------------------
From: Mike Martinet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control)
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 09:08:48 -0700
Ian Pulsford wrote:
>
> Adam Warner wrote:
> >
> > http://www.wirednews.com/news/technology/0,1282,41614,00.html
> >
> > ---Begin 1st Quote---
> > According to Microsoft, right now the current SAP function will play any
> > files, but after the company's market share for the Windows Media Player --
> > which is also built into Windows -- is sufficiently large, the company will
> > turn on SAP and play only secured files.
> >
> > The system is designed to work behind-the-scenes, so that consumers aren't
> > aware of any digital rights management. When the operating system accesses
> > media files, noise is added so that if the audio is intercepted, it won't be
> > usable. Once the file makes it through the hardware device and passes it to
> > the Windows Media Player, the noise is removed and the file plays.
> > ---End 1st Quote---
> >
> > ---Begin 2nd Quote---
> > "In order for an encrypted stream to play, Microsoft has to approve the
> > driver for your soundcard and sign it," software consultant David E. Weekly
> > wrote in an e-mail. "Without a signed driver, the digital rights management
> > content won't play. With video digital rights management coming soon
> > hereafter, what this really does is give Microsoft the power to determine
> > what hardware it will allow to run Windows."
> > ---End 2nd Quote---
> >
> > Regards,
> > Adam
>
> I thought it was strange that M$ was against CPRM hard disk lock out
> (some crap about OEMs not being able to mass install windoze) and then a
> little while ago I read something that suggested that M$ wanted to do in
> software what CPRM wants to do in hardware. This confirms it. I see a
> war brewing over digital media delivery and it's the consumer who is
> going to lose unless Open Source (and 'Open Hardware' possibly for that
> matter) becomes the kingpin real soon.
>
> I would like very much to see the rise of an Open Anti-Hollywood. Where
> upcoming film and music creators aware of these issues of excessive
> media protection (waayyy beyond mere anti-piracy) schemes, choose not to
> go with the big boys for production/distribution. Sure it means a pay
> cut, but there is a principle at stake here, and a huge reversal of the
> sort of freedom that the invention of the printing press ultimately
> conferred.
>
> I do not agree with piracy but these sorts of schemes could be just the
> thing to change my mind, if only to stick it to the greedy media
> companies.
>
> IanP
What disgusts me is a manufacturer ASSUMING that people are going to do
something illegal. Where the hell does Microsoft (or anyone else who
attempts to foist crippled hard/software on the public) get off? This
just chars my grits.
Here's an excellent essay/rant on the subject of content protection, in
case you haven't seen it already.
http://cryptome.org/jg-wwwcp.htm
MjM
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: To Aaron
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:18:23 +0800
Ok,
So check out www.tkpowers.com now... you will see that I have finally
*PROVEN* you wrong...
I am not Todd Needleham from MS or whoever...
So, now that the facts are put out in front of you, will you be a man and
admit you were wrong?
The fate of Linux advocates rests in your hands...
-Todd
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and the 21st Century Boom - Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:04:10 +0100
Mart van de Wege wrote:
>
> In article <BR7i6.983$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik
> Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip some stuff>
> >> So apologies for the first (slightly incorrect) post, but I
> >> still stand by my original contention, that MS licensing
> >> practices *effectively* prohibit OEMs from shipping anything
> >> but windows. Now you give me a link to prove that it isn't so.
> >
> > So far your only evidence is the IBM situation, which had
> > extenuating circumstances related to IBM violating their
> > license with Windows 3.1 due to non-payment. All IBM had to do
> > was pay their bill and MS wouldn't have had any ground to offer
> > a settlement.
> >
> Ok Erik,
>
> Glad you accepted my apologies. I am doubly glad that you
> concede my point that in *at least* one case MS used their
> licensing to pressure OEMs.
> I'll make you a deal: find me a case where MS didn't abuse that
> power to stop an OEM from shipping an alternative to Windows,
> and I'll go hunting for supporting evidence to my claim. Despite
> some hot-headed reaction on my side, and some extenuating
> circumstances on your side of the argument, the score is still
> (by your own admission) 1-0 in my favour.
> The ball's in your court, Erik.
>
Back in '95 Escom included OS/2 Warp 3 with their PCs, at no extra
cost. Soon after Windows 95 appeared, they offered a choice between
the operating system and the operating environment <G>. I believe it
was around mid '96 when they dropped the default option to choose
between the two. I have never heard it confirm that this was due to
pressure from Microsoft (but never heard it deny either). Maybe
someone can shed light on this?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:26:33 +0100
Joseph wrote:
>
> Deepak Chandrashekar wrote:
>
> > I think this thread is 100% pure unadultrated bullshit.
> > Everyone knows that Windowzblowz is complete crap
> > when it comes to robustness and uptime !!
> >
> > So if is for such apps. then go get Linux/Unix or something.
> > Else, if u want to use some "kiddie" application such as MS-Word
> > then .......
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------->>>>>
> > I dont want to pay M$ Tax
> > <<<<<---------------------------
> >
> > Deepak
> >
> >
> >
> Kiddie application? Although there are many applications that are of
> questionable quality on Windows, Word is not one of them. Word is one of
> the best "office" word processing applications in the market. By office I
> mean common everyday business document creation not special purpose
> scientific or engineering documents which may require special notations.
> Using this requirement yardstick MS-Word far exceed anything in the market
> in terms of ease of use and functionality. Think about office documents.
> What are actually needed? Maybe some nice fonts, bulleted lists, mail
> merge, simple formating such as bolding, italics or underlining...
> All these tasks are all easily done on Word.
> ---
> JoE uSeR
This is satire, right?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:18:19 +0100
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 11:39:05 +0100, Karel Jansens
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> >> Chad thinks that anything he's never seen and that doesn't run on
> >> Windows is a joke.
>
> >But Applix Office _does_ run on Windows (it doesn't like to, but
> >nevertheless...)
>
> My mistake then.
>
I'd rather think it was Chad's.
Funny thing: There is a Win32 version of Applix Office (I don't know
if it is version-par with linux), but the manual warns the user that
not all functionality described is available in Windows.
How true in so many ways...
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:15:25 +0100
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> > I'll try to rephrase in Windows terms: printer setup creates a printer
> > queue (which would - extremely roughly! - be the equivalent of an
> > installed printer in Windows - it's not, but let's not split furs). You
> > can have many different queues, just as you can have many different
> > printers installed in Windows. Right? If in Windows you choose to print
> > to a Canon bubblejet, while your printer port has a LaserJet hanging
> > onto it, you get the same surrealistic results in Windows.
> >
> > Now the differences: In Windows everything has to go through the Windows
> > printing system (which rasterizes your output and translates it into
> > something a particular printer can understand), but in linux,
> > applications can (and often do) come with their own printer drivers
> > (StarOffice, WordPerfect, Applix Office...), so you can bypass the
> > rasterizer (in linux: Ghostscript) completely.
>
> Also, under Linux, you can have as many rasterizers on the queue as you
> want. So my printer appears to understand PS, DVI, PDF and a few other
> kinds of file. It also understands text and PCL which are passed straight
> through.
>
I didn't want to make it *too* difficult <big G>.
BTW, can DVI output directly to a printer? I wa under the assumption
it had to be translated into PS first. Unless you happen to have a
2400 dpi typesetter on your desk, of course.
>
> > Why is this a good idea? System-wide printing subsystems have to go for
> > the lowest common denominator, because it has to work for every printer
> > possible. But specific printer drivers can go to the bone and squeeze
> > the last dot out of the drum, or achieve faster-than-light printing
> > results (i.e. in Applix, using the native PCL driver, my LaserJet 4
> > spews out copy so fast the paper hits the opposing wall
> > <G>).
>
> In some cases it doesn't matter. I have a hp500. My computer can handle
> PS much faster than the printer can print.
>
Printing to the LaserJet, using the built-in fonts, is worryingly fast
under Applix. My 550c is slow anyway, and it doesn't get used that
often (I'm waiting to replace it with a dirt-cheap Lexmark z11, but
the linux drivers aren't up to speed yet).
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:39:04 GMT
Todd wrote:
> Ok,
>
> So check out www.tkpowers.com now... you will see that I have finally
> *PROVEN* you wrong...
Oh well, Aaron is human after all - it's easy to
confuse the 2 todds, since their message and
style were amazingly similar.
>
> I am not Todd Needleham from MS or whoever...
Yep, you're the other todd - todd kepus, who IIRC
ostensibly worked in japan when haunting this
newsgroups years ago, and claimed, IIRC that
"nobody in Japan has ever heard of Linux".
> So, now that the facts are put out in front of you, will you be a man and
> admit you were wrong?
>
> The fate of Linux advocates rests in your hands...
Not really.
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Subject: Re: Peformance Test
Date: 14 Feb 2001 16:40:46 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erik Funkenbusch posted:
>I've never had a problem unplugging my mouse and plugging it
>back in. In fact, I just did it to test, and it still works
>fine.
>
>I don't know what you are doing wrong.
It's a good way to fry your PS2 port, I believe.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:45:37 GMT
Mike wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > You have a few windows ports of some older unix
> > tools, but you lack the Unix environment that makes
> > them really effective. These tools are just a piece of
> > the big picture.
>
> Good lord, what a conclusion!
conclusion? who sees a conclusion here?
> All without even knowing who I am, and
> certainly without looking at my computer. As it turns out, you're wrong: my
> tools are all up to date, for the same reason everyone else's are: we all
> download the code and compile it. There is no separate port,
of course there is, you can't simply take the souce
code and type "make" on a windows pc - that is,
unless it has been ported, i.e. lots of ifdefs to work
around or emulate the missing pieces.
> and let's face
> it: damn near every Unix tool is old.
Like chkconfig? or usbview? how old are they?
> As far as the Unix environment making
> Unix utilities more effective, I've never found it to be so. They work the
> same on my NT box as they do on my Unix box. Perhaps you can provide an
> example?
>
> > Once you get to know Unix, there's no going back.
>
> I use Unix all day, every day.
I'd be curious what "unix" you use, and to what degree
you use it - if by "unix" you mean these few little utilities
on your windows pc, that's not unix.
BTW I see ms windows every day as well, but thankfully,
I don't really use it that much -
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: 14 Feb 2001 16:48:03 GMT
Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok,
> So check out www.tkpowers.com now... you will see that I have finally
> *PROVEN* you wrong...
> I am not Todd Needleham from MS or whoever...
> So, now that the facts are put out in front of you, will you be a man and
> admit you were wrong?
> The fate of Linux advocates rests in your hands...
What the fuck does what he typed have to do with anyone or anything else?
You may not be that todd needleham person, but you are beyond the shadow
of a doubt a complete moron.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:53:47 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Tom Wilson writes:
>
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>
> >>> Thanks for proving my point, donkey raper.
>
> >> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
>
> > Somebody stomp on the floor...Tholen's needle is skipping again!
>
> Illogical; I'm simply responding to Kulkis' multiple instances of
> invective. Perhaps you should investigate why Kulkis' "needle is
> skipping again".
I'm amusing
You're not
Hope that helps, oxygen thief.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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 (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her 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: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 11:55:20 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> chrisv writes:
>
> >>> Sheesh, can't you morons trim your posts?
>
> >> Who are the alleged morons here?
>
> > You and Kulkis.
>
> On what basis do you include me? Note that I *have* been trimming
> away Kulkis' ridiculous .sig.
If a thing does the job which it is designed to do, and does it
well, then you must be using a definition of ridiculous which
differs from the rest of the world.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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 (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her 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: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:57:03 +0800
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Todd wrote:
>
> > Ok,
> >
> > So check out www.tkpowers.com now... you will see that I have finally
> > *PROVEN* you wrong...
>
> Oh well, Aaron is human after all
Why yes he is :)
> - it's easy to
> confuse the 2 todds, since their message and
> style were amazingly similar.
>
> >
> > I am not Todd Needleham from MS or whoever...
>
> Yep, you're the other todd - todd kepus, who IIRC
> ostensibly worked in japan when haunting this
> newsgroups years ago, and claimed, IIRC that
> "nobody in Japan has ever heard of Linux".
Well, at the time, there was very little press regarding Linux... times have
a changed.
> > So, now that the facts are put out in front of you, will you be a man
and
> > admit you were wrong?
> >
> > The fate of Linux advocates rests in your hands...
>
> Not really.
The point is, even Linux advocates can make mistakes... right?
-Todd
>
> jjs
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
