Linux-Advocacy Digest #267, Volume #33 Mon, 2 Apr 01 02:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Interesting Article (Tim Hanson)
Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Communism (Gunner�)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 05:09:12 GMT
Said Roger in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:50:25 -0500;
>On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:27:22 -0500, someone claiming to be JS PL
>wrote:
>>"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>>> Off topic for this thread, but Max has claimed at least two
>>> conversations with you re: a problem with IE which was solved by
>>> replacement of a video card. Since he originally claimed it was me,
>>> in spite of being corrected before (and since it is, after al, Max)
>>> I'm inclined to take his recent version of the fantasy with a huge
>>> grain of salt.
>>>
>>> Do you recall the threads he's babbling about?
>
>>I remember having a problem with a bad video driver causing screen freezes a
>>couple years ago, right about the time Win98SE came out. It was a problem
>>with a Viper V550 and WinSE which reared its ugly head most often while IE
>>was open. Changing the card out fixed the problem.
>
>As I thought: driver, not hardware, and not exclusively IE.
He replaced the card; claiming now that he did so merely to replace the
driver hardly supports his expertise, I'd say. And, yes, it was
exclusively an IE fault he described; my archives remind me that the
headers from newsgroups could not be seen, though frankly that doesn't
sound like a video problem to me. I decided it was best merely to point
out that replacing the video card because IE screwed up his system was
rather stupid. I can't vouch for whether anything he said was actually
true, or even consistent. Unfortunately my archives don't extend clear
back to the original discussion.
>Max was lying again.
Oh, yea. I do it all the time. You know what, Roger? This will freak
you out: Max is not my real name.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 22:17:29 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Interesting Article
Carl Banks wrote:
>
> Here's an interesting article I found about free softwore development.
> Pretty interesting. It talks about Linus a little further down. Sort
> of long, though.
>
> April 1, 2001
Hahaha! It actually had me going for a minute.
> Life as a Free Software developer
>
> by Tony Shurple
>
> Free software has become popular, but despite the glorified image, the
> life of a free software developer is not often so rosy.
>
> SILICON VALLEY, Ca. - Recently, free software has become very
> significant in the computing world. Free software is everywhere.
> More than half of the world's web servers are run by Apache, a free
> software program. Linux, the only operating system to pose a
> significant challenge to the dominance of Microsoft Windows in a
> decade, is free software. Many programming tools used today are free,
> including languages such as Perl and Python, and gcc, an advanced C
> compiler.
>
> The current craze in free software is attributed to Richard Stallman,
> founder of the Free Software Foundation. In his essay, the GNU
> Manfesto, he argues that software should be free as a matter of
> principle. Many have followed in his footsteps, "copylefting" their
> software so it is guaranteed to remain free.
>
> There are thousands of software developers who work on these projects
> in their free time (although a few are paid to work on free software).
> These developers often claim that they enjoy maintaining their
> software as a hobby.
>
> However, looking deeper, the world of free software development is not
> as rosy as it seems on the surface. Because most free software
> developers do not get paid to develop their software, they must hold
> jobs to make a living. Thus, the time they spend maintaining their
> free software comes from what little free time they have left. In
> some cases, demands on their time and resources become to much for
> them to handle. This can be especially true for software that
> suddenly becomes very popular.
>
> One person who has been hit hard by the popularity of his software is
> Jason Pavrithase. Pavrithase used to maintain a configuration tool
> called Javapache, which allows a web administrator to easily configure
> a web site that is running the Apache Web Server. He developed the
> program in Java for his own needs, but then decided to release his
> program as free software.
>
> "The reason I made it free," he said, "is because I wanted to give
> back to the free software community. I use free software every day,
> and making my little program free was, I felt, the least I could do.
>
> "Of course, I never imagined that it would become as popular as it is
> now."
>
> Its popularity, he says, is the reason why he no longer maintains it.
> "Every day I get dozens of email messages from people. Some are
> rather harmless, just dropping me a line saying they find it helpful.
> (I made the mistake of asking people to do this in some of my early
> releases.)
>
> "More often, I have people asking me to do stuff. 'Will you please
> add this feature for me?' 'Please hurry up with the next release, I
> need it bad!' 'Are you still working on this? You haven't released a
> new version in a long time, and I hope you're still working on it.'
> 'When are you going to fix that bug you had in your known-bugs list
> for several months?' 'Can you tell me how to use your software?'
> 'I'm having trouble getting this to work, what do you think is wrong?'
> 'I didn't understand your instructions. Can you tell me what a text
> editor is?' It just goes on and on.
>
> "And the thing that really bothers me is that very few of these
> people, maybe 30 percent, seem to understand that I do this for free,
> on my own time. Even less give me any indication at all that they
> have done any work on their own. They just expect me to do
> everything."
>
> Pavrithase says he would get, on average, 30 emails a day from users
> of his software. Most of these messages are requests for new
> features, or requests for help using the software.
>
> "Having being inundulated with these messages for over a year," said
> Pavrithase, "I regret to say that the people using my software are
> complete idiots. Not just idiots, but lazy, selfish, idiots. I don't
> know what that says about my software.
>
> "I mean, there was once a time when I was optimistic about the human
> plight. No more. I am no longer amazed by these subhuman leeches
> that have no capability of perform any quasi-challenging task on their
> own. I often wonder exactly what twisted process occurs within these
> so-called people that they manage pass off as rational thought. I
> would understand if all the apespeak I get comes from AOL or WebTV,
> but how do people who work for Sun Microsystems and Symmantec
> effectively renounce their claim to a soul by sending me such
> Nyquist-challenged crap?"
>
> Pavrithase originally tried to deal with the problem by responding to
> people with polite form letters, as well as putting a notice in the
> documentation about what kind of email he is able to answer. It
> didn't work; in fact, it made matters worse.
>
> He said, "So I figured I'd send someone a polite 'thank you for your
> interest, but since I maintain the software on my free time, I cannot
> guarantee when the next release will be.' What do these ungrateful
> pigmen respond with? Sorrow? No, hostility. 'What do you mean you
> can't give me a release date?' or 'You suck,' or 'Why should I use
> your software, you incompetent fool!' And after I released my new
> guidelines for emailing me, people started sendimg me messages like,
> 'Ok, Mr. Jerk, I won't ask you how to use a program YOU wrote.' If
> they even read the guidelines.
>
> "These people are ungrateful little turds. I do this for free, out of
> the kindness of my heart, and this is the thanks I get. Well guess
> what? I don't care about them any more. Let them configure Apache by
> hand."
>
> Pavrithase says he has only one regret about no longer maintaining
> Javapache. "There's a lot of intelligent people using this program.
> They're the ones I hate to let down. But, thanks to the parade of
> incarnate vomit I was drowning in, I had to."
>
> Many developers of open source projects are faced with the same
> problems Pavrithase faced. Rather than face the overbearing users,
> many have instead avoided them by working behind the scenes in
> relative obscurity as part of a team. By leaving the spotlight and
> glory to others, they feel they can still contribute to free software
> without facing the hordes. Yet this path can also be wrought with
> unwarranted demands on their time, as Roscow Flimbost can attest to.
>
> Rocsow Flimbost is a software engineer who now works for Microsoft.
> Formerly, he was a key member of the Linux development team, but says
> he left the project because he was spending too much time working on
> the Linux kernel, and not enough time with his family. He accepted
> his current position shortly after leaving the Linux team.
>
> Flimbost got his first taste of the free software world when he
> released a small memory debugging library called ezmalloc he had
> developed for his own use. "It was an instant success," he said.
> "Many people were attracted to it's simplicity." But soon, its
> success became a perpetual nightmare for Flimbost. "I didn't really
> want to continue developing it," he said. "It was quite a boring
> project. But I got mounds of email from people who would telling me
> how much they loved the simplicity of the design, and then request
> for new features. Seeing that it was much loved, I decided to
> continue working on it. I was naive: I tried to please everyone, and
> soon my simple ezmalloc became a twisted, bug-filled, complex monster.
> The mounds praise soon turned into mountains of hostile flames, and
> more feature requests.
>
> "Soon it was too much for me to handle. I gave up the project. Yet,
> at the time, I still believed in Richard Stallman's free software
> ideal. I'm not much of a people person, so I figured I'd work more
> behind the scenes from now on."
>
> About a year later, Flimbost encountered Linus Torvalds. "Linus swept
> me away," Flimbost said. "He was dyanamic, forceful. He spoke with
> the passion and charisma of a Baptist gospel minister. And most of
> all, he was hellbent on overtaking Microsoft Windows as the world's
> most popular operating system. He promised a land flowing with milk
> and honey, a land of free software, and I bought it.
>
> "I was soon a high-ranking member of the Linux development family.
> Linus was like a god on the Linux development list, always making a
> joke or funny remark to keep the spirits up, and always pushing us on.
> He was always prodding us to work just a little harder, to put that
> extra minute in, so that sooner would we overthrow the Satan called
> Microsoft.
>
> "Being a high ranking member of the family, I was also on speaking
> terms with Linus. As development of the 2.1 kernel dragged on, Linus
> began calling more frequently, asking me how things were, and how much
> time I was spending on memory management. He would never condemn me,
> but always reminded me of the importance of free software and that we
> must make sacrifices.
>
> "I began to notice that I was indeed spending more and more time
> working on the kernel. At the same time, I began to perceive Linus'
> jokes as less and less funny, and his inspirational messages seemed
> more hostile. Yet I continued. I suppose I figured that once the
> 2.2 kernel was finally released, everything would be better again.
>
> "In fact, when we released 2.2, it did get better, for awhile. But
> soon, it got worse than ever. Yet I still believed in the Free
> Software Ideal, and so I carried on. Despite straining relations with
> my wife and young daughter, I carried on."
>
> He looked down and sighed heavily. "It was the most difficult time in
> my life," he said. "I missed my daugter's first T-ball game because
> we needed a 'quick' fix for a virtual memory bug." Again he sighed
> heavily and shook his head.
>
> "One day, my wife suggested we go on a two-week vacation, something we
> hadn't done in years. I protested that Linus wouldn't approve, but
> she said we needed to spend more time together, and I knew she was
> right. I resolved to beg Linus for leave to go on this vacation.
>
> "To my surprise, Linus had no problems with with it. 'Have fun,' he
> said. So my family and I left for Florida and had a very nice and
> refreshing vacation; and thanks to Linus' blessing, it was guilt-free.
>
> "No sooner had we arrived home when the phone rang. It was Linus. He
> furiously asked me what was taking so long with the new disk caching
> algorithm I was supposed to be working on.
>
> "I reminded him that I had been on vacation for the last two weeks.
> He just said, 'Don't you know what a laptop is? That disk caching
> algorithm is an important part of the next release--you're abandoning
> your duties to your family!'"
>
> He sighed again. "That was the last straw. I suddenly and forcefully
> realized how much I had allowed Linus to control my life. I began to
> cry," he said, also shedding a tear as he spoke to me. "I told Linus
> I was done with the family, and I no longer belived in free software.
> He just grumbled and hung up."
>
> He suddenly smiled and beamed, "Soon, I quit my old job and joined the
> staff at Microsoft. I now devote my time to destroying the free
> software movement, and the mind-control tactics employed by those in
> charge." He went on to explain how he plans to start a support group
> for recovering free-software developers.
>
> Although his life has been much better, Flimbost says he has not fully
> escaped from the shadow of his free software days. "I still get
> several emails a day about ezmalloc," he says.
>
> While Flimbost describes an almost cultish culture in the free
> software community, others in the community disagree. I spoke to none
> other than Linus Torvalds about it. Naturally, Torvalds had a very
> different version of the story.
>
> "Roscow Flimbost simply didn't have what it takes to be one of the big
> boys in the Linux kernel," he said. "Yet he made many vain attempts.
> He would read the mailing list, and when a difficult task was assigned
> to someone, he would try to finish the task first. We thought this
> was cute, if pathetic, at first, but then it began to really annoy us.
> Finally, after many rejections of his code, he got fed up and left.
>
> "Everything he said about me he made up. He's simply bitter. I hope
> he's happy in current job drawing toolbar icons for Microsoft. We're
> certainly happier." (Indeed, according to Microsoft, Flimbost's job
> is to draw icons.)
>
> Even if developing free software is not as time-consuming as Flimbost
> makes it out to be, many do spend quite a lot of their free time on
> it.
>
> "Free software development is tough," Pavrithase said. "It seems on
> the outside to be a fun, glory-filled adventure. But in reality, it
> is a thankless, cold, unforgiving pasttime. It takes much fortude to
> be able to handle it.
>
> Pavrithase finished with a word of advice for the user: "The next time
> you use free software, take a moment to consider the sacrifice these
> people made for you, and appreciate it."
>
> --
> CARL BANKS
>
> "What is life but a series of inspired follies?"
> -- Henry Higgins in _Pygmalion_, by George Bernard Shaw
--
Egotism is the anesthetic given by a kindly nature to relieve the pain
of being a damned fool.
-- Bellamy Brooks
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 05:24:17 GMT
Said Stephen S. Edwards II in alt.destroy.microsoft on 2 Apr 2001
>Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>: GreyCloud wrote:
>: >
>: > "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>: > >
>: > > Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: > >
>: > > : "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>: > > : >
>: > > : > Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: > > : >
>: > > : > : Or try this. Open up more than 260 programs all at once and run them
>: > > : > : and work on them at the same time on an ordinary PC system. U think
>: > > : > : Win-anything can do this?
>: > > : >
>: > > : > : Yet there are OS's that do this all the time, and easily. And u can
>: > > : > : buy and run them right now.
>: > > : >
>: > > : > Really? Please enlighten us, what OS would this be exactly?
>: > >
>: > > : OS/2 can run 250-300 programs at once without a lot of problems. I
>: > > : know a guy who did it. And he did not have a lot of memory or a very
>: > > : fast chip. Can Win-anything do that? No. And I know the Amiga can
>: > >
>: > > "I heard" usually means "it's bullshit".
>
>: He's my friend you moron. That is more than "I heard". The guy told
>: me. Did I see it? No. I don't have to.
>
>* Stephen takes out his UltimateClueStickOfDeath(tm)...
>
>*THWACK!*
>
>He "told" you. Hence, you "heard" it.
How revoltingly rude. You called it bullshit. THWACK, hence you
ultimately are clueless, as he has more information than you do over
whether it is true.
>: > > : run 110 programs at once on 50 MHZ and 16 MB, without even slowing
>: > > : much. Can Win-anything do that? No.
>: > >
>: > > Again, prove it. Show me a resepctable
>: > > source that has actually done this, and
>: > > I mean something other than your own
>: > > anecdotal supposition.
>
>: One of my Amiga-using friends told me he did this.
>
>You did the exact opposite of what I requested.
>Can't you read? I asked for a "source" other
>than some "friend" of yours.
Go do it yourself. Is he on your payroll? Give us a single reason why
it wouldn't be so, how about that, maybe?
>: > > : BeOS can multitask better than Win-anything.
>: > >
>: > > Really? How exactly? Please explain exactly
>: > > how well tasks are threaded in BeOS, and why
>: > > they are better than threads under WindowsNT.
>
>: Anyone knows Be can thread better than NT, anyone. BeOS is massively
>: multithreaded. NT is not at all. Some friends of mine run a business
>
>8<SNIP>8
>
>*sigh* None of that stuff had an explanation in
>it whatsoever.
No, it was not meant to explain why NT is so relatively pathetic at
multi-threading. It did, however, show it.
>I didn't ask for more anecdotal
>citations.
No, you asked for evidence. These anecdotal citations are the evidence.
Thus, you got what you asked for. What more would you like, before you
have to start showing some reasonable doubt? If you can't even get to
reasonable doubt on anecdotes, except to point out they're anecdotes,
your position is about as stable as a Windows 3.1 box running Lotus
1-2-3.
>I asked for a technical explaination
>as to why BeOS's multitasking is better than
>WindowsNT's. It's clear to me that you have
>no idea why, so please, drop the pretense.
Of course not. How could anyone have any idea, when the source code is
secret and its so badly designed you couldn't guess what's in there?
MS's explanations certainly don't describe the problem, or give
sufficient information so that experts might be able to guess what the
problem might be. I presume that you may have asked for an explanation
for how we know it is pathetic, when what you really wanted is an
explanation of technical information you know full well nobody who hates
Microsoft has. Which would make it seem that this is why you asked.
Perhaps you're just trying to run people around in circles, Stephen?
>[snipped more worthless crap]
Yes, that does seem more and more likely.
>: Need any more examples?
>
>None at all. It's perfectly clear to me now
>that you are a clueless PC monkey.
>
>[snipped rest of moronic crap]
>
>You're like a wannabe biologist who claims
>that he knows everything about sharks simply
>because he saw them on television.
>
>"Sharks are better than orca, because their
>teeth are sharper... my friend said so!"
>
>Bob, you are nothing but a lusing PC-monkey.
"A test was conducted by a German magazine called "c't" last August.
The report is in German. They tested a number of OS's on
multitasking. They started an MP3 and started slowly adding other
tasks to see where the MP3 would start breaking up. Same HW on all
boxen. Win 9x was horrible, the worst. Win NT was better, but also
started breaking up. Linux was significantly better than NT but after
a bit it started breaking up too. Warp was the only one left alive.
Not only did it win but after it won, they kept adding more many more
apps to OS/2!"
Just so we know what "lusing PC-monkey" Bob thought worth mentioning,
and Stephen the Second thinks is moronic crap.
Are you a sock puppet, Stephen? Who's your employer, and do you have
any Microsoft stock?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT multitasking: some humiliating defeats! :)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 05:25:44 GMT
Said Stephen S. Edwards II in alt.destroy.microsoft on 2 Apr 2001
>Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>BTW, for a person who hates Microsoft software
>so much, you sure don't seem to have much of
>a problem using Windows98 and Netscape. Don't
>try to deny it... the info's in your headers.
Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You still don't get it, do you Stephen?
Or maybe you do. Just what do you do for a living, Stephen?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Gunner� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 22:26:33 -0700
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Gunner� in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 09:43:20
>>Mathew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
>>>> Actually, brainwashing is much easier to accomplish than you
>>>> might think.
>>>
>>>The military is quite good at it.
>>>
>>Evidently.. so is the DNC....
>
>That's the DNRC, but now we're going to have to kill you, and everyone
>who reads this message.
bring a lunch.
Gunner
=========================================================
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write
a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort
the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone,
solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program
a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die
gallantly. Specialization is for insects." Robert Heinlein
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 05:34:11 GMT
Said Paul 'Z' Ewande� in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 2 Apr 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
><SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
>
>> >Those who agree with you
>> >because you sh*t on and waste time hating a corporation because it's trendy?
>>
>> Its got nothing to do with trendy. So apparently, you are the one
>> wasting time here.
>
>I am fully aware that I am wasting time here. I'm just wondering if you
>aware that you too are wasting time here.
No, I'm not wasting time. I'm just spending it a little loosely.
>> >> tell you that my reputation is far and away superior to either of
>yours.
>> >
>> >It's oh so true. You're known for throwing blanket statements without
>> >substantitaion.
>>
>> I'm known for expecting people to respond to my statements reasonably,
>> and provide rational argument wherever possible. Why do *you* post?
>
>For entertainment purposes. Why do you post ? What do you believe to be
>accomplishing ?
I'm refining my intellect, and hopefully helping other's refine theirs.
>> Just wasting time?
>
>Of course. What do you really believe people do in *.advocacy forums ? Do
>you really believe that people are accomplishing anything worthwhile here ?
I do not believe people act irrationally, most of the time. It is
problematic that most people don't spend any time at all on Usenet.
Still, enough of them do that there is, inherently, a point in it.
I think a large part of it is enabling people who are still learning how
to refine their intellect get a glimpse of the horrors of ignorance,
evidenced so well by the trolls and flamers.
>> >How do you think that various people, including me are aware
>> >of:
>> >
>> ><MAX> Because I Said So </MAX> ? :)
>> >
>> >You're not probably as infamous as Dave Tholen, but with a little more
>> >work...
>>
>> Bwah-ha-ha-ha. Find me one person who would call me a net.kook, who
>> isn't a net.kook!
>
>Don't you just love recursive definitions.
As a matter of fact, its my theory that all definitions are naturally
recursive. But I'm afraid what you're pointing out isn't recursion.
>net kook: noun. Someone calling T Max Devlin a net kook.
No, you forget, I'm relying on somebody *else's* definition of a net
kook. Take a consensus. If there are more unreasonable people in the
world than reasonable, I'm fucked anyway, so I'll merely let consensus
decide.
>You hacked an Open Source Webopedia ? :)
I haven't a clue what you're talking about. Does this refer to that
Dave Tholen person?
[...]
>> >Then again you still haven't enlightened me on how putting forth
>> >unsubstanciated claims laced with deprecation and creative naming of the
>> >object of contention is stating one's case moderately and accurately.
>>
>> Nor will I. Your mistake.
>
>But. But. But. Weren't you the one lamenting the fact that no one was smart
>enough on usenet to understand your sig, you're given the chance to remedy
>to the situation and you play coy ?
And perhaps you are smart enough to see that my inability or lack of
desire to explain your pathetic rhetoric (vis a vis, "unsubstantiated
claims laced with deprecation and creative naming of the object..."
yada, yada, yada") and its relationship to Mr. Franklin's sentiments is
not relevant to your sputtering. You're again left feeling clueless,
and will no doubt again accuse me of my "wily tricks".
>> >Be nice, now Max, share what you know, I'm willing to learn what I don't.
>>
>> Oh, yeah, that's accurate and reasonable. Guffaw!
>
>It's not my sig that reads:
>
>" *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***"
>
>and who then complain when someone points out at the irony of it.
You have it backwards. You were the one complaining, and I'm the one
pointing out the irony of that.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
