Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Civilization, doomed?
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Nov 10, 2011, 10:57:40 AM11/10/11
to
Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
> news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>
>> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>
>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
news:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
> news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>
>> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>
>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
David Dyer-Bennet
Nov 10, 2011, 4:10:41 PM11/10/11
to
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> writes:
> Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
>
>> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
>> news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>>
>>> des...@verizon.net writes:
>>
>>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>>
>>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>
>> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
>> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>>
> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
I'm somewhat in favor of negative population growth over time, by
> Louann Miller <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
>
>> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
>> news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>>
>>> des...@verizon.net writes:
>>
>>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>>
>>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>
>> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
>> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>>
> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
reduced birthrate. And I have fathered no children, so I'm contributing
as much to that as possible (that's not in fact the primary reason, but
still).
But then, I'm pretty sure 2 billion is far too low a number, too. I'm
just doubtful about 10 billion.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nov 10, 2011, 4:42:17 PM11/10/11
to
--
Now available on Amazon or B&N: One-Eyed Jack.
Greg Kraft could see ghosts. That didn't mean he could stop them...
Quadibloc
Nov 10, 2011, 5:16:29 PM11/10/11
to
On Nov 10, 8:57 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost any
desired reduction in population can be achieved without killing
anyone.
Of course, a few infants today will live to be 100, but that isn't a
serious constraint to any reasonable population reduction goal.
Mind you, will the people advocating such a program picture themselves
or anyone they know among the 6/7ths not allowed to have children?
John Savard
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybT...@giganews.com:
> > Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>
> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
> > anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition. If
> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>
> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
> > anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost any
desired reduction in population can be achieved without killing
anyone.
Of course, a few infants today will live to be 100, but that isn't a
serious constraint to any reasonable population reduction goal.
Mind you, will the people advocating such a program picture themselves
or anyone they know among the 6/7ths not allowed to have children?
John Savard
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Nov 10, 2011, 4:24:01 PM11/10/11
to
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
news:663ca4e1-0cfe-49d3...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
com:
> On Nov 10, 8:57 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybTnZ2dnUVZ_
> rKd...@giganews.com:
admit it or not, you're actively killing people, as the working
segment of the population shrinks in relation to the segment that
simply can't contribute more than they consume any more.
This is, of course, beyond your understanding, and as predicted,
you view yourself as being so special you'd be among the priviliged
few who would continue to be taken care of.
Which is to say, I was correct.
news:663ca4e1-0cfe-49d3...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
com:
> On Nov 10, 8:57 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> rKd...@giganews.com:
>> > Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
>> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>>
>> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>
>> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>
>> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves
>> > or anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>>
>> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
>
> Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition.
> If people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost
> any desired reduction in population can be achieved without
> killing anyone.
Get very much below replacement rate, and whether you're willing to
>> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
>> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>>
>> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>
>> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>
>> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves
>> > or anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>>
>> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
>
> Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition.
> If people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost
> any desired reduction in population can be achieved without
> killing anyone.
admit it or not, you're actively killing people, as the working
segment of the population shrinks in relation to the segment that
simply can't contribute more than they consume any more.
This is, of course, beyond your understanding, and as predicted,
you view yourself as being so special you'd be among the priviliged
few who would continue to be taken care of.
Which is to say, I was correct.
Rod Speed
Nov 10, 2011, 7:24:38 PM11/10/11
to
Quadibloc wrote
Particularly the older ones that can be reasonable confident
that they are old enough so that there will be plenty still young
enough to man the nursing homes they will end up in etc.
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote
>> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> des...@verizon.net writes:
>>>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
>>> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
> Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition. If
> people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost any
> desired reduction in population can be achieved without killing anyone.
> Of course, a few infants today will live to be 100, but that isn't a
> serious constraint to any reasonable population reduction goal.
> Mind you, will the people advocating such a program picture themselves
> or anyone they know among the 6/7ths not allowed to have children?
Plenty will, most obviously those who choose not to have any now.
>>>>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>>>> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>>> Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves or
>>> anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
> Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition. If
> people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost any
> desired reduction in population can be achieved without killing anyone.
> Of course, a few infants today will live to be 100, but that isn't a
> serious constraint to any reasonable population reduction goal.
> Mind you, will the people advocating such a program picture themselves
> or anyone they know among the 6/7ths not allowed to have children?
Particularly the older ones that can be reasonable confident
that they are old enough so that there will be plenty still young
enough to man the nursing homes they will end up in etc.
Robert Carnegie
Nov 10, 2011, 7:30:55 PM11/10/11
to
On Nov 10, 9:24 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote innews:663ca4e1-0cfe-49d3...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
Terry.
However - You will now reproduce.
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote innews:663ca4e1-0cfe-49d3...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
> com:
>
> > On Nov 10, 8:57 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> > <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> innews:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybTnZ2dnUVZ_
> > rKdn...@giganews.com:
>
> > On Nov 10, 8:57 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> > <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Louann Miller <louan...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> innews:9KOdnUyRGKXMgybTnZ2dnUVZ_
> >> > Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote in
> >> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
> >> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
> >> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>
> >> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> >> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves
> >> > or anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
> >> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
>
> > Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition.
> > If people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost
> > any desired reduction in population can be achieved without
> > killing anyone.
>
> Get very much below replacement rate, and whether you're willing to
> admit it or not, you're actively killing people, as the working
> segment of the population shrinks in relation to the segment that
> simply can't contribute more than they consume any more.
>
> This is, of course, beyond your understanding, and as predicted,
> you view yourself as being so special you'd be among the priviliged
> few who would continue to be taken care of.
>
> Which is to say, I was correct.
I think you're being Bad Terry now. I don't want to engage with Bad
> >> >news:861utij...@zipcon.net:
> >> >> des...@verizon.net writes:
>
> >> >>> Perhaps 1 or 2 billion.
>
> >> >> Half to 3/4 of a billion would be better.
>
> >> > Somehow, I don't think either of you is picturing yourselves
> >> > or anyone you know among the 6/7th dead.
>
> >> People who advocate negative population growth _never_ do.
>
> > Well, negative population growth _can_ be achieved by attrition.
> > If people have significantly fewer children, in 100 years almost
> > any desired reduction in population can be achieved without
> > killing anyone.
>
> Get very much below replacement rate, and whether you're willing to
> admit it or not, you're actively killing people, as the working
> segment of the population shrinks in relation to the segment that
> simply can't contribute more than they consume any more.
>
> This is, of course, beyond your understanding, and as predicted,
> you view yourself as being so special you'd be among the priviliged
> few who would continue to be taken care of.
>
> Which is to say, I was correct.
Terry.
However - You will now reproduce.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Nov 10, 2011, 6:38:32 PM11/10/11
to
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
news:498e2339-3cda-4aaa...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.c
om:
> On Nov 10, 9:24 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote
>> innews:663ca4e1-0cfe-49d3-9f89-a58c37
> 0ba...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
Look who I'm talking to. Do you *really* expect me to treat Quaddie
as anything other than a noisy child throwing food at the cat?
news:498e2339-3cda-4aaa...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.c
om:
> On Nov 10, 9:24 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote
> 0ba...@h31g2000prl.googlegroups.
as anything other than a noisy child throwing food at the cat?
>
> However - You will now reproduce.
>
Er, no.
> However - You will now reproduce.
>
Robert Carnegie
Nov 11, 2011, 2:57:11 PM11/11/11
to
On Nov 10, 11:38 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote innews:498e2339-3cda-4aaa...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.c
I prefer that you behave like a rational adult. But when you're in a
mischievous mood, talking to you is counter-productive.
I think your argument here is not fully valid, but I suspect you're in
mischief mode, so I'm minded to let it lie.
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote innews:498e2339-3cda-4aaa...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.c
mischievous mood, talking to you is counter-productive.
I think your argument here is not fully valid, but I suspect you're in
mischief mode, so I'm minded to let it lie.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Nov 11, 2011, 3:40:45 PM11/11/11
to
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in
news:4139a3cc-f2c0-417b...@q16g2000yqn.googlegroups.
com:
> On Nov 10, 11:38 pm, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> <tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote
>> innews:498e2339-3cda-4aaa
> But when you're
> in a mischievous mood, talking to you is counter-productive.
>
> I think your argument here is not fully valid, but I suspect
> you're in mischief mode, so I'm minded to let it lie.
My argument here is that Quaddie is a retard. Nothing more.
> I think your argument here is not fully valid, but I suspect
> you're in mischief mode, so I'm minded to let it lie.
Wayne Throop
Nov 11, 2011, 5:13:02 PM11/11/11
to
: Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com>
: My argument here is that Quaddie is a retard. Nothing more.
I would argue he's not retarded, or at least not noticeably. Retarded
people are slower than usual along pathways of thought, or at least that's
the stereotype. Quaddy hares off in several directions exuberently,
jumping to conclusions left and right; almost the opposite of retarded.
When jumping conclusions he is not slow, it's hip, hip, hip, and away
he goes.
Well, maybe not a polar opposite.
"My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
--- Hedley Lamarr
"Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, but it expressed
a courage that is little seen in this day and age."
--- Olson Johnson
"I can do it, I can run, I can hunt you down.
You can try but you can't stop me 'cause I'm gaining ground."
--- "I'm Me", Vanessa Doofenshmirtz,
from "Vanessary Roughness"
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Nov 11, 2011, 4:42:37 PM11/11/11
to
thr...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote in
news:13210...@sheol.org:
>: Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com>
>: My argument here is that Quaddie is a retard. Nothing more.
>
> I would argue he's not retarded, or at least not noticeably.
> Retarded people are slower than usual along pathways of thought,
> or at least that's the stereotype. Quaddy hares off in several
> directions exuberently, jumping to conclusions left and right;
> almost the opposite of retarded. When jumping conclusions he is
> not slow, it's hip, hip, hip, and away he goes.
Retarded can't really be used to refer to mentally deficient people
any more; that'd be insulting. It's more a matter of, he's not living
in the same reality as we are. I'm giving him the benefit of the
doubt on actual clinical mental illness, but I could be wrong to do
so.
news:13210...@sheol.org:
>: Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com>
>: My argument here is that Quaddie is a retard. Nothing more.
>
> I would argue he's not retarded, or at least not noticeably.
> Retarded people are slower than usual along pathways of thought,
> or at least that's the stereotype. Quaddy hares off in several
> directions exuberently, jumping to conclusions left and right;
> almost the opposite of retarded. When jumping conclusions he is
> not slow, it's hip, hip, hip, and away he goes.
any more; that'd be insulting. It's more a matter of, he's not living
in the same reality as we are. I'm giving him the benefit of the
doubt on actual clinical mental illness, but I could be wrong to do
so.
David DeLaney
Nov 11, 2011, 9:33:06 PM11/11/11
to
Wayne Throop <thr...@sheol.org> wrote:
> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> --- Hedley Lamarr
Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> --- Hedley Lamarr
Dave "you mean he's a..." "uh-huh!" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Robert Carnegie
Nov 12, 2011, 9:09:29 AM11/12/11
to
On Nov 12, 2:33 am, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
A "Girl Genius"?!?
Um...
> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
> > "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
>
> Dave "you mean he's a..." "uh-huh!" DeLaney
A Heterodyne?!
> > "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
>
> Dave "you mean he's a..." "uh-huh!" DeLaney
A "Girl Genius"?!?
Um...
Carl Dershem
Nov 12, 2011, 12:09:04 PM11/12/11
to
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> typed in news:j9hgfp$ubr$1@dont-
email.me:
> On 2011-11-10 16:10:41 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet said:
>
>> But then, I'm pretty sure 2 billion is far too low a number, too.
I'm
>> just doubtful about 10 billion.
>
> I'd say somewhere around four billion would probably be
> comfortable.
That's one of those figures that depend a lot on the reader. Steve
Stirling, I'm sure, would cite a MUCH lower number.
I'm not entirely certain what number I'd pick, but it would be much
lower than the current 7B.
cd
email.me:
> On 2011-11-10 16:10:41 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet said:
>
>> But then, I'm pretty sure 2 billion is far too low a number, too.
I'm
>> just doubtful about 10 billion.
>
> I'd say somewhere around four billion would probably be
> comfortable.
Stirling, I'm sure, would cite a MUCH lower number.
I'm not entirely certain what number I'd pick, but it would be much
lower than the current 7B.
cd
Quadibloc
Nov 12, 2011, 12:17:39 PM11/12/11
to
On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> --- Hedley Lamarr
Hedy. Originally Hedwige Kiesler.
> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> --- Hedley Lamarr
John Savard
Quadibloc
Nov 12, 2011, 12:19:10 PM11/12/11
to
On Nov 11, 7:33 pm, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
she was...
John Savard
> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
> > "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
With George Antheil, of course, Hedy Lamarr invented spread
> > "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
she was...
John Savard
Wayne Throop
Nov 12, 2011, 12:29:05 PM11/12/11
to
:: "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
:: cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
:: --- Hedley Lamarr
: Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
:: cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
:: --- Hedley Lamarr
: Hedy.
No, I mean Hedley.
: Originally Hedwige Kiesler.
No, originally Hedley. Eventually assistant to Governor Le Petomane.
Juho Julkunen
Nov 12, 2011, 2:11:47 PM11/12/11
to
In article <8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>
> On Nov 11, 3:13ï¿œpm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>
> > ￜ ￜ"My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > ￜ ￜ cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Hedy.
Hedley!
--
Juho Julkunen
@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>
> On Nov 11, 3:13ï¿œpm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>
> > ￜ ￜ"My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> > ￜ ￜ cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> > ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ --- Hedley Lamarr
>
> Hedy.
Hedley!
--
Juho Julkunen
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nov 12, 2011, 2:13:05 PM11/12/11
to
of popular culture that you've never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 12, 2011, 4:04:16 PM11/12/11
to
On 11/12/11 2:13 PM, Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
> On 2011-11-12 12:19:10 -0500, Quadibloc said:
>
>> On Nov 11, 7:33 pm, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
>>> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>
>>> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies
>>> simultaneously!!
>>
>> With George Antheil, of course, Hedy Lamarr invented spread
>> spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
>> she was...
>
> The quote is from HEDLEY Lamarr, not Hedy. Are you really so ignorant of
> popular culture that you've never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>
>
>
I saw it once, found it mildly funny, never saw it again, thus I
> On 2011-11-12 12:19:10 -0500, Quadibloc said:
>
>> On Nov 11, 7:33 pm, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
>>> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>
>>> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies
>>> simultaneously!!
>>
>> With George Antheil, of course, Hedy Lamarr invented spread
>> spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
>> she was...
>
> The quote is from HEDLEY Lamarr, not Hedy. Are you really so ignorant of
> popular culture that you've never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>
>
>
certainly didn't get the reference. I wouldn't remember any of the
character names after all this time. I remember about three lines from
Mel Brooks films. No, about six -- three or four from Spaceballs and two
or three from Young Frankenstein.. Blazing Saddles isn't really in the
running (though I remember the hostage scene fondly, I don't remember
the exact lines).
The concept that Quaddy would be *expected* to know that particular
piece of trivia from a movie from that particular fandom is ... amusing.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Juho Julkunen
Nov 12, 2011, 4:11:30 PM11/12/11
to
In article <j9mn0i$d19$1...@dont-email.me>, sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com
says...
> The concept that Quaddy would be *expected* to know that particular
> piece of trivia from a movie from that particular fandom is ... amusing.
Granted. Expecting him to not incorrectly correct people in ignorance
when two-second google search would have revealed the source of the
quote shows, I think, refreshing optimism about one's fellow man.
--
Juho Julkunen
says...
> The concept that Quaddy would be *expected* to know that particular
> piece of trivia from a movie from that particular fandom is ... amusing.
when two-second google search would have revealed the source of the
quote shows, I think, refreshing optimism about one's fellow man.
--
Juho Julkunen
Wayne Throop
Nov 12, 2011, 5:08:15 PM11/12/11
to
: "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
: The concept that Quaddy would be *expected* to know that particular
doesn't sound like something Hedy or one of her characters would say), a
prudent person might avoid jumping in with a correction before identifying
the source of the quote. (Not that I'm claiming Quaddy is a particularly
prudent person, mind you.)
A simple cut-and-paste into google finds it quick and easy.
"God darnit, Mr. Lamarr, you use your tongue
prettier than a twenty dollar whore."
--- Taggert, in response to the upthread quote
"My mind is aglow with whirling, transient nodes of thought
careening through a cosmic vapor of invention."
"Ditto!"
--- another exchange between Hedley and Taggert
"I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados,
mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con
men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers,
bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train
robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists."
"Could you repeat that, sir?"
--- Hedley dictating a job posting
too fast for Taggert to write down
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers.
These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West.
You know... morons."
--- Jim to Bart
"Mongo only pawn in game of life."
--- Mongo
: The concept that Quaddy would be *expected* to know that particular
: piece of trivia from a movie from that particular fandom is ...
: amusing.
True enough. However, since it was a specific quote (and to my ears
: amusing.
doesn't sound like something Hedy or one of her characters would say), a
prudent person might avoid jumping in with a correction before identifying
the source of the quote. (Not that I'm claiming Quaddy is a particularly
prudent person, mind you.)
A simple cut-and-paste into google finds it quick and easy.
"God darnit, Mr. Lamarr, you use your tongue
prettier than a twenty dollar whore."
--- Taggert, in response to the upthread quote
"My mind is aglow with whirling, transient nodes of thought
careening through a cosmic vapor of invention."
"Ditto!"
--- another exchange between Hedley and Taggert
"I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados,
mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con
men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers,
bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train
robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists."
"Could you repeat that, sir?"
--- Hedley dictating a job posting
too fast for Taggert to write down
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers.
These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West.
You know... morons."
--- Jim to Bart
"Mongo only pawn in game of life."
--- Mongo
Brian M. Scott
Nov 12, 2011, 6:59:03 PM11/12/11
to
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:13:05 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
<l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
Some of us haven't, you know.
Brian
<l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
[...]
> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
Brian
Bill Snyder
Nov 12, 2011, 7:04:51 PM11/12/11
to
Dorothy.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Brian M. Scott
Nov 12, 2011, 7:10:14 PM11/12/11
to
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:04:51 -0600, Bill Snyder
<bsn...@airmail.net> wrote in
<news:0c2ub7ppj3o9o6avj...@4ax.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:59:03 -0500, "Brian M. Scott"
> <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:13:05 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
>><l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
>>rec.arts.sf.written:
>>[...]
>>> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
>>> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>>Some of us haven't, you know.
> You're not fooling anyone by posting under someone else's
> name, Dorothy.
Dorothy's probably a little more likely to have seen it than
I: not counting educational films shown in school, I've
probably averaged no more than about one film a year over my
entire life.
Brian
<bsn...@airmail.net> wrote in
<news:0c2ub7ppj3o9o6avj...@4ax.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:59:03 -0500, "Brian M. Scott"
> <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>>On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:13:05 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
>><l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
>>rec.arts.sf.written:
>>[...]
>>> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
>>> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>>Some of us haven't, you know.
> You're not fooling anyone by posting under someone else's
> name, Dorothy.
I: not counting educational films shown in school, I've
probably averaged no more than about one film a year over my
entire life.
Brian
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nov 13, 2011, 1:07:29 AM11/13/11
to
Answers, a la John Savard.
Honestly, I don't mind if any given individual hasn't seen it -- it's
not my own favorite Mel Brooks film (though I thought it was better
than "Spaceballs") -- but given that the thread had already included
half a dozen references to Hedley Lamarr, not all from the same person,
and even a previous correction that no, we did NOT mean Hedy, I would
think that anyone with any wits would google "Hedley Lamarr" before
assuming yet again that Hedy was meant.
Robert Carnegie
Nov 13, 2011, 6:59:09 AM11/13/11
to
On Nov 13, 6:07 am, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
> On 2011-11-12 18:59:03 -0500, Brian M. Scott said:
>
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:13:05 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
> > <l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
> > rec.arts.sf.written:
>
> > [...]
>
> >> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
> >> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>
> > Some of us haven't, you know.
>
> But you aren't displaying that ignorance while claiming to have All The
> Answers, a la John Savard.
>
> Honestly, I don't mind if any given individual hasn't seen it -- it's
> not my own favorite Mel Brooks film (though I thought it was better
> than "Spaceballs") -- but given that the thread had already included
> half a dozen references to Hedley Lamarr, not all from the same person,
> and even a previous correction that no, we did NOT mean Hedy, I would
> think that anyone with any wits would google "Hedley Lamarr" before
> assuming yet again that Hedy was meant.
Although I'd assumed that Hedley Lamarr was named specifically to be
> On 2011-11-12 18:59:03 -0500, Brian M. Scott said:
>
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:13:05 -0500, Lawrence Watt-Evans
> > <l...@sff.net> wrote in <news:j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me> in
> > rec.arts.sf.written:
>
> > [...]
>
> >> Are you really so ignorant of popular culture that you've
> >> never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
>
> > Some of us haven't, you know.
>
> But you aren't displaying that ignorance while claiming to have All The
> Answers, a la John Savard.
>
> Honestly, I don't mind if any given individual hasn't seen it -- it's
> not my own favorite Mel Brooks film (though I thought it was better
> than "Spaceballs") -- but given that the thread had already included
> half a dozen references to Hedley Lamarr, not all from the same person,
> and even a previous correction that no, we did NOT mean Hedy, I would
> think that anyone with any wits would google "Hedley Lamarr" before
> assuming yet again that Hedy was meant.
confused with Hedy Lamarr.
"Hedley" separately exists as a surname; "Hedy" evidently is short for
Hedwig.
Paul
Nov 13, 2011, 2:07:23 PM11/13/11
to
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in news:8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-
0d49bd...@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
HEDLEY!
--
Paul
0d49bd...@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com:
--
Paul
David Hatunen
Nov 13, 2011, 8:31:36 PM11/13/11
to
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 21:11:47 +0200, Juho Julkunen wrote:
> In article <8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>>
> In article <8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>>
>> > "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>> > cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>> > --- Hedley Lamarr
>>
>> Hedy.
>
> Hedley!
See. Even the Finns get it.
>>
>> Hedy.
>
> Hedley!
--
Dave Hatunen, Tucson, Baja Arizona
David Hatunen
Nov 13, 2011, 8:31:10 PM11/13/11
to
not be aware of the reference, but it appears quaddy is a Canadian so he
ought to know.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 13, 2011, 9:42:35 PM11/13/11
to
the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same correction as
Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
Wayne Throop
Nov 13, 2011, 10:26:34 PM11/13/11
to
: "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com>
: This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references
: to the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same
: correction as Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't
: have to.
The puzzlement to me is, did that sound like something Hedy
: correction as Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't
: have to.
or one of her characters would have said?
Eh. I suppose it's not in the same league with missing a Python reference.
And I do even that now and again. On the other hand, I wouldn't correct
an attribution unless I knew who had said it (and usually, confirmed
with google or whatnot).
R H Draney
Nov 14, 2011, 3:33:15 AM11/14/11
to
Wayne Throop filted:
that? Kee Lo Nee, the great teacher."
Student: "Yeah? Well, the best defense is a good offense! Do you know who
said that? Mel, the cook on 'Alice'!"
....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>The puzzlement to me is, did that sound like something Hedy
>or one of her characters would have said?
>
>Eh. I suppose it's not in the same league with missing a Python reference.
>And I do even that now and again. On the other hand, I wouldn't correct
>an attribution unless I knew who had said it (and usually, confirmed
>with google or whatnot).
Teacher: "The only use of Ti Kwan Leep is self-defense. Do you know who said
>The puzzlement to me is, did that sound like something Hedy
>or one of her characters would have said?
>
>Eh. I suppose it's not in the same league with missing a Python reference.
>And I do even that now and again. On the other hand, I wouldn't correct
>an attribution unless I knew who had said it (and usually, confirmed
>with google or whatnot).
that? Kee Lo Nee, the great teacher."
Student: "Yeah? Well, the best defense is a good offense! Do you know who
said that? Mel, the cook on 'Alice'!"
....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Michael Stemper
Nov 14, 2011, 8:57:06 AM11/14/11
to
In article <j9mgg1$3hl$1...@dont-email.me>, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> writes:
>On 2011-11-12 12:19:10 -0500, Quadibloc said:
>> On Nov 11, 7:33 pm, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
>>> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>
>>> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
>>
>> With George Antheil, of course, Hedy Lamarr invented spread
>> spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
>> she was...
>
>The quote is from HEDLEY Lamarr, not Hedy.
Huh. I thought that it was just a typo.
>On 2011-11-12 12:19:10 -0500, Quadibloc said:
>> On Nov 11, 7:33 pm, d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
>>> Wayne Throop <thro...@sheol.org> wrote:
>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>
>>> Almost as though he were ... thinking on multiple frequencies simultaneously!!
>>
>> With George Antheil, of course, Hedy Lamarr invented spread
>> spectrum... So, while I will make no claims on my own behalf, perhaps
>> she was...
>
>The quote is from HEDLEY Lamarr, not Hedy.
> Are you really so ignorant
>of popular culture that you've never seen "Blazing Saddles"?
I've never seen it, and can tell you who made it without resorting to
the IMDB.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Visualize whirled peas!
Juho Julkunen
Nov 14, 2011, 5:09:38 PM11/14/11
to
In article <j9pv6r$o2h$3...@dont-email.me>, sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com
says...
Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is
warranted? Searching for either the name or the quote on Google points
you to Blazing Saddles in two seconds.
--
Juho Julkunen
says...
>
> On 11/13/11 8:31 PM, David Hatunen wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 21:11:47 +0200, Juho Julkunen wrote:
> >
> >> In article<8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
> >> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> >>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> >>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
> >>>
> >>> Hedy.
> >>
> >> Hedley!
> >
> > See. Even the Finns get it.
> >
>
> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to
> the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same correction as
> Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
"I assume someone is wrong on the Internet!"
> On 11/13/11 8:31 PM, David Hatunen wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 21:11:47 +0200, Juho Julkunen wrote:
> >
> >> In article<8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
> >> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
> >>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
> >>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
> >>>
> >>> Hedy.
> >>
> >> Hedley!
> >
> > See. Even the Finns get it.
> >
>
> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to
> the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same correction as
> Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is
warranted? Searching for either the name or the quote on Google points
you to Blazing Saddles in two seconds.
--
Juho Julkunen
R H Draney
Nov 14, 2011, 6:09:04 PM11/14/11
to
Juho Julkunen filted:
I'm suddenly reminded of the time that someone on alt.movies.silent mentioned
Spike Jonze as a modern-day director as good as some of those in the days before
talkies, and was asked if he meant Spike Lee, and "anyway you spelled Jones
wrong"....r
Spike Jonze as a modern-day director as good as some of those in the days before
talkies, and was asked if he meant Spike Lee, and "anyway you spelled Jones
wrong"....r
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 14, 2011, 6:53:56 PM11/14/11
to
On 11/14/11 5:09 PM, Juho Julkunen wrote:
> In article<j9pv6r$o2h$3...@dont-email.me>, sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com
to check. If you checked every thing that you THINK is true, as well as
those you don't, you'd never finish anything.
Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
> In article<j9pv6r$o2h$3...@dont-email.me>, sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com
> says...
>>
>> On 11/13/11 8:31 PM, David Hatunen wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 21:11:47 +0200, Juho Julkunen wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
>>>> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>>>
>>>>> Hedy.
>>>>
>>>> Hedley!
>>>
>>> See. Even the Finns get it.
>>>
>>
>> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to
>> the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same correction as
>> Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
>
> "I assume someone is wrong on the Internet!"
>
> Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is
> warranted?
No. If you think you know the answer, you're not going to be searching
>>
>> On 11/13/11 8:31 PM, David Hatunen wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 21:11:47 +0200, Juho Julkunen wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<8bcad6e5-f237-490b-99e2-0d49bd904652
>>>> @u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, jsa...@ecn.ab.ca says...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 11, 3:13 pm, thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought
>>>>>> cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives."
>>>>>> --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>>>
>>>>> Hedy.
>>>>
>>>> Hedley!
>>>
>>> See. Even the Finns get it.
>>>
>>
>> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to
>> the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly made the same correction as
>> Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
>
> "I assume someone is wrong on the Internet!"
>
> Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is
> warranted?
to check. If you checked every thing that you THINK is true, as well as
those you don't, you'd never finish anything.
Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
Rod Speed
Nov 14, 2011, 9:07:58 PM11/14/11
to
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote
> Juho Julkunen wrote
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote
>>> David Hatunen wrote
>>>> Juho Julkunen wrote
>>>>> jsa...@ecn.ab.ca wrote
> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet.
Even sillier.
> We had our arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's eye,
And many had enough of a clue to check stuff even then.
> we can have them perfectly well now without it.
When its so much easier to check now, only a fool wouldnt do that if they arent absolutely certain.
> Juho Julkunen wrote
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote
>>> David Hatunen wrote
>>>> Juho Julkunen wrote
>>>>> jsa...@ecn.ab.ca wrote
>>>>>> thro...@sheol.org (Wayne Throop) wrote
>>>>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of
>>>>>>> thought cascading into a waterfall of creative
>>>>>>> alternatives." --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>>>> Hedy.
>>>>> Hedley!
>>>> See. Even the Finns get it.
>>> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly
>>> made the same correction as Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
>> "I assume someone is wrong on the Internet!"
>> Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is warranted?
> No. If you think you know the answer, you're not going to be searching to check. If you checked every thing that you
> THINK is true, as well as those you don't, you'd never finish anything.
Plenty do check if they arent absolutely certain about something.
>>>>>>> "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of
>>>>>>> thought cascading into a waterfall of creative
>>>>>>> alternatives." --- Hedley Lamarr
>>>>>> Hedy.
>>>>> Hedley!
>>>> See. Even the Finns get it.
>>> This American didn't, nor did I connect it with the prior references to the movie. And, in point of fact, I nearly
>>> made the same correction as Quaddy, then I saw he'd done it so I figured I didn't have to.
>> "I assume someone is wrong on the Internet!"
>> Did it really not occur to anyone to confirm that correction is warranted?
> No. If you think you know the answer, you're not going to be searching to check. If you checked every thing that you
> THINK is true, as well as those you don't, you'd never finish anything.
> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet.
> We had our arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's eye,
> we can have them perfectly well now without it.
Peter Flass
Nov 15, 2011, 8:18:43 AM11/15/11
to
On 11/14/2011 6:53 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>
> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
> arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
> eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
>
Why spoil a good argument with facts?
>
> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
> arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
> eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
>
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nov 15, 2011, 11:37:13 AM11/15/11
to
> "Hedley" separately exists as a surname; "Hedy" evidently is short for
> Hedwig.
Kip Williams
Nov 15, 2011, 11:47:25 AM11/15/11
to
Kip W
Seebs
Nov 15, 2011, 11:59:18 AM11/15/11
to
"Check your facts carefully before posting nonsense on Usenet. I know I
always do."
-s
--
Copyright 2011, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet...@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Nov 15, 2011, 12:36:32 PM11/15/11
to
On 15 Nov 2011 16:59:18 GMT
kibologists perhaps ?
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Seebs <usenet...@seebs.net> wrote:
> On 2011-11-15, Peter Flass <Peter...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On 11/14/2011 6:53 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> >> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
> >> arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
> >> eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
>
> > Why spoil a good argument with facts?
>
> As the saying goes:
>
> "Check your facts carefully before posting nonsense on Usenet. I know I
> always do."
I remember someone using that line (well close to it), one of the
> On 2011-11-15, Peter Flass <Peter...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On 11/14/2011 6:53 PM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> >> Besides, googling is cheating, especially on Usenet. We had our
> >> arguments on Usenet long before the Web was a gleam in Berners-Lee's
> >> eye, we can have them perfectly well now without it.
>
> > Why spoil a good argument with facts?
>
> As the saying goes:
>
> "Check your facts carefully before posting nonsense on Usenet. I know I
> always do."
kibologists perhaps ?
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
David DeLaney
Nov 16, 2011, 12:24:27 AM11/16/11
to
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
>Seebs <usenet...@seebs.net> wrote:
>> On 2011-11-15, Peter Flass <Peter...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Why spoil a good argument with facts?
>>
>> As the saying goes:
>>
>> "Check your facts carefully before posting nonsense on Usenet. I know I
>> always do."
>
> I remember someone using that line (well close to it), one of the
>kibologists perhaps ?
_Several_ of us. Usually not all at once though, the echoey effect gets rather
>Seebs <usenet...@seebs.net> wrote:
>> On 2011-11-15, Peter Flass <Peter...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Why spoil a good argument with facts?
>>
>> As the saying goes:
>>
>> "Check your facts carefully before posting nonsense on Usenet. I know I
>> always do."
>
> I remember someone using that line (well close to it), one of the
>kibologists perhaps ?
eerie.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
0 new messages