- Original Message -
From: Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 9:17 PM
Subject: Re: Sara Cox - was Re: FHM Top 100 Sexiest Women
At 20:50 20/05/2001, Mike Jarvis wrote:
Sunday, May 20, 2001, 3:19:47 AM, Dave Cross wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 05:26:51PM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
At 10:52 20/05/2001, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
On Sun, 20 May 2001, Dave Cross wrote:
I'm sure I'm really in the minority here, but I can't be the only one who
finds all this discussion of the FHM list distasteful. I've never
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 05:05:20PM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
At 13:27 20/05/2001, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
You can't expect to steal music and then bitch about how someone is
stealing copies of your book on line.
True. But just so as we know where we all stand. I have only ever used
On Monday, May 21, 2001, at 10:39 AM, Simon Wistow wrote:
.. get some sleep boy, you're making the rest of us look bad :)
Doctor Someone forgot to terminate my program. Hello. Hello? /Doctor
As I was on all weekend as well, expect some more attribute stuff rsn.
Marcel
--
my int ($x, $y,
Robin Szemeti wrote:
I suspect the current 'Lad's' magazines phase is a backlash against the
crazy political correctness of the 80's .. hopefully the whole thing will
settle down eventually.
If you see it lying around the reading 'Getting away with it - the story
of Loaded' by Tim Southwell
From: robert shiels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
According to a recent survey, men say the first thing they notice about
a women are their eyes. And women say the first thing they notice about
men are: they're a bunch of liars.
That's not quite true. Women initial assume that all men are automatically
From: Barbie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 9:58 AM
From: robert shiels [EMAIL PROTECTED]
According to a recent survey, men say the first thing they notice about
a women are their eyes. And women say the first thing they notice about
men are: they're a bunch of liars.
Dave Cross:
And besides, since when could you work out how sexy a
woman (or man) was simply by looking at a photo.
Its in the eyes, Dave, its in the eyes.
See, I find it's in the personality. Which doesn't come
across too well in glossy magazine.
Hmmm. I wonder how you'd go about
I seem to recall some comic giving a rant to the effect of Used to be
just the magazines on the top shelf, everyone knew where they were,
everyone knew what they were for. Then these FHM, Loaded, etc though -
huh? What are they, for blokes who aren't sure if they want to
masturbate?
Not
On Mon, 21 May 2001, James Powell wrote:
So you don't fancy organizing a LPM Top 100 (well, maybe 25) then?
thinks .. err .. well theres ... ugh . and .. arr ... and we could
always get .. shudder/thinks
nope .. don't reckon that ones a winner. I know some Womens Institute in
Yorkshire made
At 11:06 21/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
Dave Cross:
See, I find it's in the personality. Which doesn't come
across too well in glossy magazine.
Hmmm. I wonder how you'd go about making personality pr0n?
Mills and Boon.
--
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL
See, I find it's in the personality. Which doesn't come
across too well in glossy magazine.
Hmmm. I wonder how you'd go about making personality pr0n?
Mills and Boon.
Well, no, I just had this conversation offlist. I'd say that personality
pr0n is an oxymoron. YMMV.
--
matt
so how
I object to paying 3.99 gbp (for a single), or 12.99gbp (for an album
track) to just get one song. However, if I hear another track from those
artists, and like it, I will probably get the full album.
Then exercise your right not to buy it - then don't steal it.
You don't have a divine right
On Thu, 17 May 2001, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 03:20:08PM +0100, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
I still remember an article about C++ templating being a turing complete
language in it's own right or something weird. This isn't it, but is
entertaining anyway:
On 20 May 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
Neil Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just picked up the latest FHM to check out the above mentioned list...
The interesting bits are as follows;
The really interesting bit was Mr Ford dancing around in his living
room crowing because Sara Cox had read
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
From: Jonathan Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 21 May 2001 13:28
Subject: Long shot
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
3. Actually Works
4. Is free or cheap
Define works?
I use
Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
3. Actually Works
4. Is free or cheap
Pc-Pine?
http://www.washington.edu/pine/pc-pine/
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 02:15:28PM +0100, Mike Wyer wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
From: Jonathan Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 21 May 2001 13:28
Subject: Long shot
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 01:26:43PM +0100, Lucy McWilliam wrote:
On 20 May 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
Neil Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just picked up the latest FHM to check out the above mentioned list...
The interesting bits are as follows;
The really interesting bit was Mr Ford
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 02:30:27PM +0100, Paul Mison wrote:
On 21/05/2001 at 14:15 +0100, Mike Wyer wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Robert Shiels wrote:
I use Outlook Express, I like it a lot. It works for me.
Much badness. We are withdrawing Outlook and associates from all our
Windows
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
3. Actually Works
4. Is free or cheap
PC Pine.
/J\
Outlook express is evil.
It actually appears to work correctly for IMAP, and is reasonably fast,
but...
1. For some unknown reason it doesn't let you use mail filters on IMAP
messages, thereby rendering it completely unsuited to my needs
2. And this is the really evil one. If you use plain
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
3. Actually Works
4. Is free or cheap
Sigh...
Another vote for PC-Pine. When our University NFS + 'We support Outlook
Express, support for Pine is frozen' network
Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Netscape - works, can filter mail, poor interface, dreadfully slow
Hmm, I like Netscape's Interface - does everything I want it to, no
unessecarily wasted screen territory, excellent configuartion system.
The only thing that narks me off is the fact that, unlike the
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
Anyone know a windows IMAP client that:
1. Isn't Netscape
2. Isn't Eudora
3. Actually Works
4. Is free or cheap
Mulberry? .. amongst others
http://www.ncsu.edu/imap/readers.html
http://www.imap.org/products/database.msql
thats a choice of
Neil Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 01:26:43PM +0100, Lucy McWilliam wrote:
On 20 May 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
Neil Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just picked up the latest FHM to check out the above mentioned list...
The interesting bits are as
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 10:52:46AM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 09:19:08PM -0400, David H. Adler wrote:
[Cordelia]
And how, exactly, is this off topic?
It's not about Willow.
But it's about Cordelia, who graduated from Willow's High School, as she
appears on
appears on Angel, a show named after someone in the resorataion of whose
^^^
Ah, an excellent typo consisting of one additional character, one omitted character,
and a transposed pair. I shall put it in my collection. I should say by
On or about Mon, May 21, 2001 at 05:09:50PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson typed:
Ah, an excellent typo consisting of one additional character, one omitted character,
and a transposed pair. I shall put it in my collection. I should say by the look of
it, this one was speed induced.
Goes off to
On Fri May 18 07:27:10 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
This is the sort of thing that happens in the country i grew up in
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/northern_ireland/newsid_1336000/1336347.stm
But Greg, it's not what you think. It's part of a secret trans-atlantic
conspiricy to
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 05:09:50PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
appears on Angel, a show named after someone in the resorataion of whose
^^^
Ah, an excellent typo consisting of one additional character, one
omitted
Seeing as TPC slides for talks are supposed to be in at the end of the
month, I've got a quick technical meeting together. The idea is that
we'd practice our talks (make sure the timing / level is right etc.)
and get constructive criticism from people before handing them
in. YAPC talks also
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:17:11PM +0100, Barbie wrote:
Bugger! Brain thinking faster than my hands!
Your hands *think*???
dha, sees a sci-fi movie in here somewhere...
--
David H. Adler - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.panix.com/~dha/
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:19:20PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
1. For some unknown reason it doesn't let you use mail filters on IMAP
messages, thereby rendering it completely unsuited to my needs
The Mac version does :)
But yeah, that's a pain.
2. And this is the really evil one. If
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 12:49:48PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 03:19:20PM +0100, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
1. For some unknown reason it doesn't let you use mail filters on IMAP
messages, thereby rendering it completely unsuited to my needs
The Mac version does
if that's okay...?
i'm going to replace the old disk with the shiny new 40Gb one.
we wound up reinstalling from scratch on the new disk.
the outage should hopefully be quite short.
i plan to do this in about quarter of an hour's time.
please wibble at me soon if this will cause you problems, or
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 09:50:07PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
...but lacks the ability to filter POP messages by headers before
downloading. Why the hell can't they get their act together on the same
bloody bit of software? And they accuse *us* of forking.
Not only that the Outlook and Outlook
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 07:12:51PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
[stuff about TPC/YAPC talk practice, all snipped]
Will you be requiring a projector for this?
Neil.
--
Neil C. Ford
Managing Director, Yet Another Computer Solutions Company Limited
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.yacsc.com
Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seeing as TPC slides for talks are supposed to be in at the end of the
month, I've got a quick technical meeting together. The idea is that
we'd practice our talks (make sure the timing / level is right etc.)
and get constructive criticism from people
Leon Brocard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
in. YAPC talks also welcome.
I haven't thought of mine yet!
--
Dave Hodgkinson, http://www.hodgkinson.org
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://www.deep-purple.com
Interim CTO, web server farms,
I have just uploaded v1.1.1 of Tie::Scalar::Decay which fixes a minor bug
in v1.1.
It was actually a bug in the test suite :-) which was assuming that the
machine running the tests was a RTOS (or at least capable of responding
in near real-time). Therefore, the final test, which gave sub-second
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 08:28:24AM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
Don't think anyone writes technical books for money. If they do, then
they're in for a big shock.
...and you can just imagine how much more true that is for editing
technical books... :-)
dha, used some of his editing money to buy
Neil Ford sent the following bits through the ether:
Will you be requiring a projector for this?
Yes please! Will you be coming down or can we send someone to borrow
your projector for the day? ;-)
ps looks like Simon Cozens will be coming down and giving a few talks
too
Cheers, Leon
--
On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 11:34:21PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
Neil Ford sent the following bits through the ether:
Will you be requiring a projector for this?
Yes please! Will you be coming down or can we send someone to borrow
your projector for the day? ;-)
DAMNIT, will you lot PLEASE
At 23:30 21/05/2001, David H. Adler wrote:
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 08:28:24AM +0100, Dave Cross wrote:
Don't think anyone writes technical books for money. If they do, then
they're in for a big shock.
...and you can just imagine how much more true that is for editing
technical books... :-)
45 matches
Mail list logo
