> Graydon wrote: > > Caldera is closer to a forehead install,
> A what?
Insert CD ROM into drive; collapse forward from the strain, striking one's forehead into the keyboard. The install then proceeds flawlessly with no futher input from you, establishing a TCP/IP link to a distant tech support person employed by the software company, who will purchasing black market Russian X-ray reconnaisance satellite photos of your computer's innards if these prove necessary to accomplish this feat.
More generally, an install that's designed to run without trouble and is almost impossible to configure as a result. -- graydon@ |The Human Dress is forged Iron, The Human Form a fiery Forge, lara. |The Human Face a Furnace seal'd, The Human Heart its on.ca |hungry Gorge. -- from Wllm. Blake, "A Divine Image", 1794
> "My brother and I drove all the way out to Calgary and back last summer." > "Really? That's quite a stretch of pavement. How long did it take you?" > "19 hours, 17 minutes and 35 seconds, one way. I rigged up a big > auxiliary tank in the trunk so we didn't have to stop for gas the whole > way. A cooler in the front seat provided drinks and sandwiches so we > never had to stop to eat or drink, and to relieve ourselves we pissed out > the window. We'd turn on the cruise control and use bungee cords to lash > the steering in place whenever we needed to switch drivers. That worked > especially well out on the prairies." > "I guess it must have been the weather that slowed you down then, eh? > Because my grandmother did that same trip last week in just under 17 > hours."
that would be dreas' grandmother.
-piranha
------------------------------------------------------------------------ please help fight spam -- http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <7ndc2n$jm...@excalibur.gooroos.com> de...@gooroos.com "Dean Edmonds" writes:
<snip>
> Toronto to Tierra del Fuego can safely be referred to as a "long car trip".
OK, you try London-Athens overland (with one brief ferry crossing) sometime. The other way, via Brindisi, is only two and a half days, the entirely overland route is three and a half, non-stop.
That's a "long car trip", especially the time I did it in a coach with no onboard - well, no onboard anything but especially not a loo, er, bathroom (thought of a bath on a coach...) and which made ten minute rest-stops once every eight hours except in Yugoslavia where there's a severe shortage of stopping places with bathrooms. (We ended up stopping in a field of sunflowers, which got unexpected additional watering that day. :) The drivers pop uppers all the way, and once coming home, lost looking for Dunkirk I overheard one of the Greek drivers asking another if that "D" sign on a signpost could really be a delta...
But, as to your assertions - it's not just the mileage. Any road trip with anyone under eighteen immediately counts as triple in length, surely? Shirley was telling me nightmare stories about how her parents drove with three young daughters all the way from Missisauga to the Maritimes. Despite having gone Toronto-Calgary in both directions, she hadn't realised until making that brief jaunt to Ottawa and back with Sasha, how impressive a feat this was.
-- Jo - - I kissed a kif at Kefk - - J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk - Interstichia; Poetry; RASFW FAQ; etc.
Janet Kegg <j...@his.com> wrote: >In article <37981...@dnews.tpgi.com.au> Caspian Maclean wrote: >><wave> >>I've just set up my computer for usenet here (I'm now in Sydney) and >>was pleasantly surprised that it was relatively easy. >Hey! Welcome back, Caspian. Where were you before Sydney (I forget)? Do you >like living in Sydney?
I used to be in Perth. I like Sydney pretty well. I've met a lot of friendly people. Winter's *cold* though. *Australia's* not supposed to get *cold*!
>-- Janet (someone who's lived in the same city for almost 30 years)
> >But, as to your assertions - it's not just the mileage. Any road trip with >anyone under eighteen immediately counts as triple in length, surely?
That would depend upon the pre-adult involved.
As a child, I was a delight to have in the car. Well mannered and quiet when necessary, but a witty and engaging conversationalist when the hours began to drag. A trip with me as a child companion would most assuredly fly by faster than a trip on the Concorde.
At least, that's how _I_ remember it.
=========================================================================== - deane Gooroos Software: Plugging you into Maya
piranha <pira...@pobox.com> wrote: > give a fuck for usenet. what OS you run isn't so > very important. if somebody has a windows speci- > fic question, you can always shove it off onto the > other backup moderator.
Well, sort of. I don't do Windows at all either. I might be able to pawn someone off on my wife though, since she has had to deal with the evil empire at work for years now and has gone so far as to bring the thing into our house.
Lorre <ls...@cnsvax.albany.edu> wrote: >You guys make me nervous. Did everyone see where I wrote "might seem >like idiots"? This implies that the idiocy is in the eyes of the >beholder, and in no way is a schmeer on the reputation of any Panix >administrator, past or present, living or deceased.
I was going to say in response, that from what I've seen of panix admins, charlie would have to be somewhat clueless, in addition to being arrogant and obnoxious, for Panix staff to seem like idiots. I'm glad neither Dean nor I have run into the exception that proves the rule.
It is news admins on other systems who will often seem like idiots, primarily because they are. It's unfortunately more satisfying than helpful to explain that to them.
> someone off on my wife though, since she has had to deal with the evil
Wife?
-- "The state never has any use for the truth as such, but only for truth that is useful to it." -- Bruce Cumings Charles R Martin * Superior, CO * 80027
>> give a fuck for usenet. what OS you run isn't so >> very important. if somebody has a windows speci- >> fic question, you can always shove it off onto the >> other backup moderator.
>Well, sort of. I don't do Windows at all either. I might be able to pawn >someone off on my wife though[....]
Am I the only one struck with an immediate and burning desire to devise detailed and intricate Windows-specific questions?
The longer I live the more I see that I am never wrong about anything, and that all the pains that I have so humbly taken to verify my notions have only wasted my time.
> >But, as to your assertions - it's not just the mileage. Any road trip with > >anyone under eighteen immediately counts as triple in length, surely?
>That would depend upon the pre-adult involved.
>As a child, I was a delight to have in the car. Well mannered and quiet >when necessary, but a witty and engaging conversationalist when the hours >began to drag. A trip with me as a child companion would most assuredly fly >by faster than a trip on the Concorde.
oh, you mean just like mel!
>At least, that's how _I_ remember it.
and you, of course, also have perfect recall.
-piranha
------------------------------------------------------------------------ please help fight spam -- http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <379d02b7.92486...@news.frontiernet.net>,
Matthew Daly <mwd...@pobox.com> wrote: >I'll never forget the time that m...@panix.com (Michael Sullivan) said: >>In article <7n0768$20...@excalibur.gooroos.com>, >>piranha <pira...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> give a fuck for usenet. what OS you run isn't so >>> very important. if somebody has a windows speci- >>> fic question, you can always shove it off onto the >>> other backup moderator.
>>Well, sort of. I don't do Windows at all either. I might be able to pawn >>someone off on my wife though[....]
>Am I the only one struck with an immediate and burning desire to devise >detailed and intricate Windows-specific questions?
no. line. over there. no, farther away. step back a little more.
cliff? what cliff.
-piranha
------------------------------------------------------------------------ please help fight spam -- http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> give a fuck for usenet. what OS you run isn't so > >> very important. if somebody has a windows speci- > >> fic question, you can always shove it off onto the > >> other backup moderator.
> >Well, sort of. I don't do Windows at all either. I might be able to pawn > >someone off on my wife though[....]
> Am I the only one struck with an immediate and burning desire to devise > detailed and intricate Windows-specific questions?
You mean like "After all this time and all that money, why does the mutha still not work"?
-- "The state never has any use for the truth as such, but only for truth that is useful to it." -- Bruce Cumings Charles R Martin * Superior, CO * 80027
>> >But, as to your assertions - it's not just the mileage. Any road trip with >> >anyone under eighteen immediately counts as triple in length, surely?
Hey. Car trips are prime sig production material.
I only wish I had a better memory. Or a tape recorder. I think I remember a fraction of the useable ones.
>>That would depend upon the pre-adult involved.
>>As a child, I was a delight to have in the car. Well mannered and quiet >>when necessary,
YM "when securely duct taped."
>>but a witty and engaging conversationalist when the hours >>began to drag. A trip with me as a child companion would most assuredly fly >>by faster than a trip on the Concorde.
> oh, you mean just like mel!
[Mel smirks]
"At least piranha still likes me."
>>At least, that's how _I_ remember it.
> and you, of course, also have perfect recall.
"Mel, did you want to say something to Dean?"
[Her eyebrows raise in that you-think-I-want-to-let- HIM-have-the-satisfaction-of-a-reply look]
She's definitely sliding into adolescence.
-----Warren (at least Dean's not in the same category as Brad Pitt :)
"Brad Pitt. He's such a *dork*. He *is!* He's so aDORKable!" Melanie, venting
>>> give a fuck for usenet. what OS you run isn't so >>> very important. if somebody has a windows speci- >>> fic question, you can always shove it off onto the >>> other backup moderator.
>>Well, sort of. I don't do Windows at all either. I might be able to pawn >>someone off on my wife though[....]
>Am I the only one struck with an immediate and burning desire to devise >detailed and intricate Windows-specific questions?
I was struck with an immediate and burning desire to read the sentence over again after I got this image of trying to persuade She Who Is With Michael to go behind the glass displays at a pawn shop.
"I doan theeenk so," would most likely be an understatement.
-----Warren (think I missed the "someone" in the above phrase)
"Brad Pitt. He's such a *dork*. He *is!* He's so aDORKable!" Melanie, venting
> In article <3794A1D4.B300C...@iglobal.net>, > Charles R Martin <crmar...@iglobal.net> wrote:
> >"Charlotte L. Blackmer" wrote:
> >> In article <7mvmhi$1t...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dr. brat <dr_b...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> >FWIW, I don't think that Charlie has displayed any more temper around > >> >here than I've seen any of the current moderators display. > >..... > >> And no, I'm not still smarting. I Got Over It. But I'm really rather > >> surprised to see you do a 180 on it. Why is it OK for Charlie to be pissy > >> and out the fish and not OK for me? I can accept that you have different > >> standards of behaviour for different people but I *am* asking you to look > >> at it.
I find it hard to believe that you got over it. I didn't even remember the context in which I did it. Had to go look it up.
> >Just to fair to Elizabeth -- and knowing some of our e-mail conversation > >on the topic -- I think her point was "understandable" not "OK".
> Was that before or after you did it?
Our email had no effect on my response. It didn't hit my radar as it might have under other circumstances.
> I share with you the Big What's The Deal question (not that I plan to let > anything like that slip thru the edit process again). But the reason I > brought it up was that it was Elizabeth's standard, not mine. And she hit > fairly hard.
Perception is everything, I guess. I didn't think I was hitting hard at the time and I don't think so now. And in fact the jist of my post was that outing the fish seemed out of line with the intensity of the argument. I felt and still feel that you had been rude first. People chose to ignore your request to change subject lines and you enforced it. It's kind of like telling people to killfile threads when you don't like their posting style. Doesn't sit well.
In this case, I don't think that Charlie meant to be rude when he made his offer but he got a rude response. That doesn't excuse his outing the fish, but in the context, the outing didn't strike me as hard, it wasn't as uncalled for, so it slipped past my radar.
>FWIW, I thought the fish was hitting me below the belt at > the time (we had the obemailexchange and it got worked out, *bow*).
> As I say, I was genuinely curious to find out what was different.
Were you? What difference would it make?
> Mebbe if you were working the backchannel before, she might have known > more of the context. Wasn't happening in my case. Of course my > communications center got fried by having one of my buttons pushed, HARD, > so I wasn't good about communicating just why I was reacting in the way I > was. This caused a lot of misunderstanding - I think a lot of people > still think that I didn't like being told I was being pissy, which > wasn't the problem. I had THAT coming fair and square. > Clear as mud, I suppose, but I can tell you more in email if you like.
Even after our email exchange, I still don't get what was going on with you then. I do think, after our most recent exchange, that you tend to read intentions into posts that weren't intended by the author, but welcome to the club.
Elizabeth -- *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate and expand her sense of actual possibilities. -Adrienne Rich *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~the best revenge is living well~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Dean Edmonds <de...@gooroos.com> wrote: >In article <7n25tr$vm...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Eugenia <horne...@isu.edu> wrote: > > The discussion has already gotten to the "people > > skills" issue. I tend to find that one totally > > bogus >What is it that you find bogus? Do not believe that there is no skill >involved in dealing patiently and kindly with other people? Or do you >believe that everyone has these skills in equal measure?
I certainly believe there are such things as people skills. OTOH, when I've heard someone say that X doesn't have people skills, it's pretty likely to mean "I don't like him" or "she won't play ball and lie to the customers" or some other such negative that is either too vague, too irrelevant, or too embarrassing to say in the open.
OTOH, unlike Eugenia, I don't really see that happening here. I suspect even Charlie would agree that he can be a hothead. That's been expressed by some in less complimentary terms than he might have a right to expect.
It's quite a change from the creeping insipid niceness that's made the newsgroup less of a draw for me than in the past.
In article <7n2ldn$75...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dr. brat <dr_b...@my-deja.com> wrote: >In article <7n20qt$s7...@samba.rahul.net>, > "Charlotte L. Blackmer" <c...@rahul.net> wrote: >> In article <7n1uag$s2...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dr. brat ><dr_b...@my-deja.com> wrote: >> >In article <7n0li9$jr...@samba.rahul.net>, >> > "Charlotte L. Blackmer" <c...@rahul.net> wrote: >> >> In article <7mvmhi$1t...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dr. brat >> ><dr_b...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> >> >(nor given the fact that some of the same people >> >> >have been jumping on him just as hostiley in a different thread).
>> >> That rarely matters, Elizabeth, and you know that.
>> >No I don't know that, Charlotte.
>> >It would be wrong of me to assume that >> >everyone functions this way, but it is wrong of you and piranha to >> >assume that noone does.
>> Maybe *that's* why I said it *rarely* matters.
>> I have seen exceptions. You seem to be one of them.
>> If you can't continue this without making WAGs of this sort, please >> consider plonking the thread. I really don't appreciate having my >>words misrepresented like that. Yes, I'm used to it, but I also expect >>better from most of the people here.
>*huh*? You say that something rarely matters and that I know it and >*I'm* the one making WAGs?
Because you said that I assumed noone functioned that way. That was incorrect.
It is now blatantly obvious to me that you don't know it. You fooled me. It's a fair cop. I should have written the sentence as "that rarely matters here, and you should know that".
>It's ok for you to tell me what I know but >when I respond that you are incorrect, I have misrepresented you?
If you had merely responded that I was incorrect without embroidering, I would not have called you on it.
>But I left it in and responded to >what I understood you to have said. The "rarely" struck me as >insignificant, partially because I think that it is a false qualifier >and particularly since in this case I think it *did* matter.
Rarely still ain't all. Your view that it is a false qualifier does seem IMO to be a wee bit idiosyncratic.
>As for plonking, I don't think Deja news has such a function and that's >one of *my* buttons. If I chose to disregard a thread, it'll be because >I've decided to, not because someone tells me that I should or that they >don't like the way I express myself.
*laugh* Did you think *I* didn't know *that*?
> If you don't like reading me, you >know what to do.
Maybe it's not that I don't like reading you. Maybe it's that I have a problem with something in particular you said. I take it as it comes.
>Indeed, you are welcome to continue to try to get me >to mend my ways, but telling me step out won't produce the results you >seem to be looking for.
Elizabeth, if I stopped reading or responding to you at this point (or a future one), it might very well be because I think you've fallen down the rabbit hole again and I don't want to be caught up in that.
Not to mention that I'm getting called Nazi, control freak, cunt, etc., for the Horrrrrrible Criiiiimeeeee of giving a shit about trying to keep personals out of soc.singles and your efforts are rather pale in comparision ;-).
Toodles,
CLB ------------------------------------------------------ Charlotte L. Blackmer http://www.rahul.net/clb Berkeley Farm and Pleasure Palace (under construction) Junk (esp. commercial) email review rates: $250 US ea
> In article <7n3ggl$ef...@excalibur.gooroos.com>, piranha > <pira...@gooroos.com> writes > >In article <37950E28.E8088...@ericsson.com>, > >sunbird <patrick.tay...@ericsson.com> wrote: > >>there is quite a subculture of people who use it for gender inspecific > >>purposes. i think "they" is the most common one; very odd.
> > what's odd, the "they"? not so odd. it's actually a > > re-acquisition. it used to _be_ a gender-neutral sin- > > gular pronoun. i don't use it for that purpose because
> Do you have a cite for that statement? It's the second time > I've read something like that in the last few weeks, and to > the best of my knowledge, it's wrong.
It's cited in OED, but I can't quote chapter and verse. However, it's (obviously) post William the Bastard -- I vaguely recall the OED cite as being from the 1300's but the mental image is a little fuzzy.
(If I remembered *everything* perfectly I'd be a freak.)
-- "The state never has any use for the truth as such, but only for truth that is useful to it." -- Bruce Cumings Charles R Martin * Superior, CO * 80027
>gwyddwr wrote: >> In article <7n3ggl$ef...@excalibur.gooroos.com>, piranha >> <pira...@gooroos.com> writes >> >In article <37950E28.E8088...@ericsson.com>, >> >sunbird <patrick.tay...@ericsson.com> wrote: >> >>there is quite a subculture of people who use it for gender inspecific >> >>purposes. i think "they" is the most common one; very odd. >> > what's odd, the "they"? not so odd. it's actually a >> > re-acquisition. it used to _be_ a gender-neutral sin- >> > gular pronoun. i don't use it for that purpose because >> Do you have a cite for that statement? It's the second time >> I've read something like that in the last few weeks, and to >> the best of my knowledge, it's wrong. >It's cited in OED, but I can't quote chapter and verse. However, it's >(obviously) post William the Bastard -- I vaguely recall the OED cite as >being from the 1300's but the mental image is a little fuzzy.
I think gwyddwr is pretty up on the OED. As I read it, the question was about *used to be* vs. *was used as*. Origin vs. established usage. 'They' didn't start out in life as a gender-neutral singular pronoun, it started in life as a gender-neutral plural pronoun, and has been applied to the singular case when necessary for a *rilly* long time.
Someone please smack me if I'm wrong. -- Piglet "But male conditioning, nonetheless. You pig...@piglet.org were not treated like a woman." [to Julie H.] 1. Pardon me, my plurals are slipping. 2. Piglet Needs (full-time, nyc-area) Programmers!! Apply Within.
In article <7n5tjr$p4...@samba.rahul.net>, "Charlotte L. Blackmer" <c...@rahul.net> wrote:
> Elizabeth, if I stopped reading or responding to you at this point (or a > future one), it might very well be because I think you've fallen down > the rabbit hole again and I don't want to be caught up in that.
Better by far to have fallen down the rabbit hole again, than to have not gotten out of it in the first place, I'm sure.
> Not to mention that I'm getting called Nazi, control freak, cunt, etc., > for the Horrrrrrible Criiiiimeeeee of giving a shit about trying to keep > personals out of soc.singles and your efforts are rather pale in > comparision ;-).
My efforts at what? I don't recall calling you any names lately, or at all, for that matter. Now who's down the rabbit hole?
Elizabeth -- *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ The most important thing one woman can do for another is to illuminate and expand her sense of actual possibilities. -Adrienne Rich *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~the best revenge is living well~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>>> > what's odd, the "they"? not so odd. it's actually a >>> > re-acquisition. it used to _be_ a gender-neutral sin- >>> > gular pronoun.
>[...] I interpreted "used to be" as referring to some >hypothetical original state, on the basis of the further >comment that it had "long since changed to plural". There's >no doubt that the generic singular use has been around for >quite a while; I may drum up the energy to find out what >our current earliest example is.
your interpretation is fine, it's my expression that's less so in this case. i didn't mean to imply that it started out as singular, only that it used to be used as singular at times. i have no evidence that it actu- ally started out that way, and from what i have read, i doubt it. but this is definitely not my area of ex- pertise.
heck, if i needed a cite, i'd ask _you_. :-)
-piranha
------------------------------------------------------------------------ please help fight spam -- http://www.cauce.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [Mel smirks] > > "At least piranha still likes me."
That's because you never slipped up and let your true self show while piranha was looking. Zie never saw the demon red glow in your eyes!
> "Mel, did you want to say something to Dean?" > > [Her eyebrows raise in that you-think-I-want-to-let- >HIM-have-the-satisfaction-of-a-reply look]
Oh boy. Am I ever hurt.
You know, it would really hurt a whole lot if Mel never, _ever_ gave me the satisfaction of a reply, ever again.
Yessiree, indeedy!
>-----Warren (at least Dean's not in the same category as Brad Pitt :) > >"Brad Pitt. He's such a *dork*. He *is!* He's so aDORKable!" >Melanie, venting
Um, thanx. I think.
=========================================================================== - deane Gooroos Software: Plugging you into Maya
>That's because you never slipped up and let your true self show while >piranha was looking. Zie never saw the demon red glow in your eyes!
It's useful for target acquisition.
> > "Mel, did you want to say something to Dean?"
> > [Her eyebrows raise in that you-think-I-want-to-let- > >HIM-have-the-satisfaction-of-a-reply look]
>Oh boy. Am I ever hurt.
>You know, it would really hurt a whole lot if Mel never, _ever_ gave me the >satisfaction of a reply, ever again.
>Yessiree, indeedy!
10 pm: Tell girls it's bedtime.
10:05 pm: Cori brushes teeth, Mel still working computer game.
10:10 pm: Cori just *has* to see Brian Williams report on heat wave, Mel forced off video game to brush teeth.
10:15 pm: Mel's computer off, Cori taking off black light ond replacing regular bulb, Mel's complaining that she's not tired. (Miss Early Riser has discovered the joys of sleeping till noon. Ah, adolescence!)
10:20 pm: Request for fan adjustment so that both get equal amounts of moving air. Don't ask how I can do this.
10:30 pm: The Usual Drink Of Water.
10:55 pm: Mel wanders out and peers around corner. Says, "Dad, I got an answer for Dean. Say, 'Wait until NEXT time. Hee hee.'"
> >-----Warren (at least Dean's not in the same category as Brad Pitt :)
> >"Brad Pitt. He's such a *dork*. He *is!* He's so aDORKable!" > >Melanie, venting
>Um, thanx. I think.
Considering that beneath the brash exterior, she sometimes wonders if she was responsible for you moving away in the first place...
-----Warren (told her she's good, but not *that* good)
"Brad Pitt. He's such a *dork*. He *is!* He's so aDORKable!" Melanie, venting
|
