Nice going to the fuckheads at cubcentral.com

72 views
Skip to first unread message

Threelullabyesi...@thecourtofthecrimsonking.com

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 8:52:09 PM4/6/01
to

You fuckers just do NOT learn, do you?

http://www.portalofevil.com/wc.dll?poe~showforum~000008040~0~PORTALOFEV


Thank you, Nicol FireFox!
Thank you Crassus!
Thank you Ben Raccoon!
Thank you Manawolf (posing as Fatalis)!
Thank you Blackwolf!

Thank you for making Furry such a GREAT place for everyone!

Fucking losers.

______________________________________________________________________
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

Kyle L. Webb

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 9:36:26 PM4/6/01
to

StukaFox wrote:

>http://www.portalofevil.com/wc.dll?poe~showforum~000008040~0~PORTALOFEV

And here I was betting it was either you or Random who submitted it to
POE. Probly Random. He's known to hang out there, and he's about that
much of a nihilist.
I'm surprised you're unhappy. From your posts after the VF article, you
seemed quite pleased about bad press for furry. In fact, didn't you post
the cubcentral URL here on AFF a month or so back? That's hardly the way
to have it not be trotted out for all to see. I'm surprised it took this
long to show up on POE after that. I think you're crying crocodile
tears, Stuka, and savoring the chance to make a post like this.
If the press doesn't find the naive fools to interview, or find the
worst sites imaginable, they'll always have the likes of you and Random
to help point the way.


Kyle L. Webb
Hartree Fox on yiffnet

regal

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 10:10:03 PM4/6/01
to
May I offer a suggestion? This isn't aimed specifically at you. It a
suggestion to the newsgroup at large. Stop giving Portal of Evil free
publicity.

The only times I have ever heard of Portal of Evil is when someone here
points them out. We might be a lot better off if furries stop
advertising for them.

--

regal at negia dot net

Kamatu

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 9:39:53 PM4/6/01
to

<Threelullabyesi...@thecourtofthecrimsonking.com> wrote in
message news:3ace6...@news.uncensored-news.com...

>
>
> You fuckers just do NOT learn, do you?
>
>
>
> http://www.portalofevil.com/wc.dll?poe~showforum~000008040~0~PORTALOFEV
>
>
> Thank you, Nicol FireFox!
> Thank you Crassus!
> Thank you Ben Raccoon!
> Thank you Manawolf (posing as Fatalis)!
> Thank you Blackwolf!
>
> Thank you for making Furry such a GREAT place for everyone!
>
> Fucking losers.
>

Whiner.


Christopher Bair

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 10:59:32 PM4/6/01
to
> May I offer a suggestion? This isn't aimed specifically at you. It a
> suggestion to the newsgroup at large. Stop giving Portal of Evil free
> publicity.

Plus, think about the people who post there... Do we care about them?
Besides being scary, probably unwashed, jerkoffs who just bash things
they don't understand, they're only making their words on computers.
Nearly all of them would probably back down to a serious debate or
even, since they threaten harm and death often, a fight in real life.

POE isn't worth it. In fact, if you want to visit it, do it for the laughs.
People with less of a life than most fanboys. (:


phurvert

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 12:54:00 AM4/7/01
to
Jeez. I wonder if the Trekkies and nerds of other genres whine this much about bad
press. Who really cares what some other geek seez about you over the internet. Its
not like they are standing right in front of you judging your character. People that
go to the Portal of Evil are probably nerdier than most of us! Although I have to
admit I find alot of the stuff there is pretty funny. Id laugh at the furry stuff
there to if I was looking at it for the first time.

Karl Xydexx Jorgensen

unread,
Apr 6, 2001, 11:57:52 PM4/6/01
to

*plonk*

--
_________________________________________________
Karl Xydexx Jorgensen / Xydexx Squeakypony, KSC
Anthrofurry Infocenter:
http://www.xydexx.com/anthrofurry

Baloo Ursidae

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 12:00:17 AM4/7/01
to
Threelullabyesi...@thecourtofthecrimsonking.com wrote:

> You fuckers just do NOT learn, do you?

OK, if you're going to be naming names, at least don't point fingers
anonymously, coward. Who are you?

--
Baloo

Crassus Destanion

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 12:51:02 AM4/7/01
to
> Thank you for making Furry such a GREAT place for everyone!

*grins* I could say the same. :)

Just to letcha know, I don't hold any ill regard to you, Stuka. You got your
own priorities in life. I got mine. As long as you don't mess with my
lifestyle, I won't mess with yours. We both want the same thing: We want the
furry fandom to succeed. All I can say is, while you're screaming out my
name to the world, trying to outcast me, you're drawing attention to the
'problem' waaaayy waaaayy more than I am. I'm the one keeping my business
where it belongs. As far as I'm concerned, the more you piss and moan about
bullshit like this, the more of a problem you're causing. You *and* all
those others that are doing this. My life is my life. I'm not causing harm.
I'm not doing anything illegal. I like myself. I have friends, I have people
that love me.

I'm happy. Maybe you should ask yourself the same question?

--Crassus D.


Al Goldman

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 8:47:34 AM4/7/01
to
In article <3ace6...@news.uncensored-news.com>,
Threelullabyesi...@thecourtofthecrimsonking.com writes:

>
>You fuckers just do NOT learn, do you?
>

Remember folks, this is Stukafox - The single most destructive troll this
newsgroup has ever seen. This is a common tactic of his - finding the worst
thing he can about the fandom and presenting it as typical fanish activity. The
extent to which we overreact to his trolling will have a far worse impact on us
than the site he's talking about.

I guess he's just bored of rehashing the Treehouse.


Al Goldman


Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 9:02:38 AM4/7/01
to
Al Goldman <allan...@aol.comNARF> wrote in message
news:20010407084734...@nso-fe.aol.com...

Oh, I see. Call Stuka, Random, Hangdog, or anyone else who has a voice to
bitch about the content of 'furry' sites. I'm sorry but that place holds
about as much interest and social gratifcation to me as going into a morgue
looking for a hot date, okay?

I DON"T want a site like CubCentral associated with what I consider
furry.Sure go and cry a river of purple piss saying that im just as bad as
the burned furs or stuka or random.

Damn skippy!

Its because of the LACK of forfront effort of people either politely or
aggressivly to curb such tasteless shit being associated with furry.

Now I CLEARLY see why many a good artists have left, and with due haste.


--
--
Alan Kennedy [TriGem Olandarinse] One fucking pissed off wolf!!

EMAIL : trigem@_REMOVEGIBBERISH_portalofevil.com
YAHOO : goldanthrowolf & trigem_olandarinse
WWW : http://www.furnation.com/trigem/rant.htm
ICQ : 8781052

Anthropomorphics : The best goddamned mind fuck I've ever had!


Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 9:05:58 AM4/7/01
to

phurvert <"phurvert"@(removethis)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tct3pam...@corp.supernews.com...

> Jeez. I wonder if the Trekkies and nerds of other genres whine this much
about bad
> press. Who really cares what some other geek seez about you over the
internet. Its
> not like they are standing right in front of you judging your character.
People that
> go to the Portal of Evil are probably nerdier than most of us! Although I
have to
> admit I find alot of the stuff there is pretty funny. Id laugh at the
furry stuff
> there to if I was looking at it for the first time.

The problem is that EVERYONE here that looks at that stuff IS furry! Imagine
the abject horror to those who are NOT furry nor are even remotely
interested in the concept of anthropomorphics! Shit, don't you realize that
crap to a non-fur is about as horrible as being sat down, made to watch
reruns of the vietnam war with NO fancy edits or scene cutaways when
someone's brain gets fragged all over the next convient wall? That type
of content is VERY graphic and socially unaceptable by MANY of people,
including some furries.

Its thise type of ' they are nerdier then we' attitude that's got furry by
the nuts recently, and the mainstream and general populace are gonna squeeze
harder by the day.

Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 9:12:05 AM4/7/01
to
Crassus Destanion <cra...@lionking.org> wrote in message
news:9am68f$db2$1...@raccoon.fur.com...

Gah! WTF? I even tried to give you credit once, what the fuck was I
thinking??

You call putting shit up on cubcentral or even saying that you are keeping
your business where it belongs on a PUBLIC website? What the seven winds of
the goddamed planet is going through your brain???

This is the type of 'you dont' have to read it or look at it' mentallity
that has nearly all of the tactless and needing to be hydrochlorically acid
removed from the face of the planet websites that has me ready to fume!!!

And yes, you ARE causing harm, just as nearly all the goddamed fuckign
wankers out there that think that all these other twisted ass sexual
artwork, fetishes, and various random culinary arts are all part of
furry????

WTF!

Arrgg.. I hope you and several other people get their nuts chewed off by a
hoarde of rabid viagra snorting beavers!!!

Agggggghhh!!

Where is the god of common sense and tactfulness when you need them????

Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 9:17:22 AM4/7/01
to
regal <re...@negia.net> wrote in message news:3ACE76...@negia.net...

Yo, can I like buy you a clue?

PoE is ADVERTISING FURRY! Yes, theya re GIVING us the publicity of the
cream of da' crap of furry!

Some of these people apparenly work in areas where they can pass more
information on to others, soon were gonna see some shitheads with an agenda
knocking on furries door with a AK-47 and a pair of garden shears!

Arrrggg!!

Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 9:20:39 AM4/7/01
to
Kyle L. Webb <kyle...@n.o.s.p.a.m.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:3ACE6F1A...@n.o.s.p.a.m.uiuc.edu...

> And here I was betting it was either you or Random who submitted it to
> POE. Probly Random. He's known to hang out there, and he's about that
> much of a nihilist.
> I'm surprised you're unhappy. From your posts after the VF article, you
> seemed quite pleased about bad press for furry. In fact, didn't you post
> the cubcentral URL here on AFF a month or so back? That's hardly the way
> to have it not be trotted out for all to see. I'm surprised it took this
> long to show up on POE after that. I think you're crying crocodile
> tears, Stuka, and savoring the chance to make a post like this.
> If the press doesn't find the naive fools to interview, or find the
> worst sites imaginable, they'll always have the likes of you and Random
> to help point the way.
>
>
> Kyle L. Webb
> Hartree Fox on yiffnet

Gah!

I hope the stains on furry get the bad press they deserve and get ripped two
shades of personal hell up one side of their ass cheek and down the other!

Gahh!!

regal

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 1:17:00 PM4/7/01
to
Alan Kennedy wrote:

> Yo, can I like buy you a clue?
>
> PoE is ADVERTISING FURRY! Yes, theya re GIVING us the publicity of the
> cream of da' crap of furry!

And they are about as credible as a guy with a dirty beard
and a tinfoil hat standing on the street corner saying the aliens
are coming.

You're giving them far more legitimacy than they actually have.
They bash furries, but they bash everything. That's what they do.
They still aren't worth getting worked up into a sweat over.

Bahumat

unread,
Apr 7, 2001, 3:48:17 PM4/7/01
to
Alan Kennedy posted:
>
> Where is the god of common sense and tactfulness when you need them????

Oh, that's just -fucking- rich, coming from you, TriGem. :D

Either way though, that website is the last fucking thing I ever wanted
to know existed. Granted; it deserves to be on POE... I'd have submitted
it if I'd seen it first.

My life could have been a lot better without the knowledge that
cubcentral existed. >_<

To the creators: Have a nice, ambiguous 'Fuck you.', straight from the
bottom of my heart.

Bahumat,
ashamed to even be in this 'fandom' now.

Christopher Beilby

unread,
Apr 8, 2001, 5:24:07 AM4/8/01
to
<Typical StukaFox ranting thrown in the recycle bin where it belongs>

And nice going to you, Stupidfox. How in the hell can you post this sort of
trash when one of the most beloved artists in Furrydom has passed away. You
would do well to take a page from McMoo's life. try treating people with
respect rather than like shit, and you might actually be a happy person...

Christopher Beilby

unread,
Apr 8, 2001, 4:33:14 PM4/8/01
to

> Oh, I see. Call Stuka, Random, Hangdog, or anyone else who has a voice to
> bitch about the content of 'furry' sites. I'm sorry but that place holds
> about as much interest and social gratifcation to me as going into a
morgue
> looking for a hot date, okay?
>
> I DON"T want a site like CubCentral associated with what I consider
> furry.Sure go and cry a river of purple piss saying that im just as bad as
> the burned furs or stuka or random.

Listen. It's not that they are condemming sites like Cubcentral. I never
even heard of Cubcentral before reading this thread. It's that they are
intentionally trying to start flamewars...

You'd do well to realize that the reason that people don't like StupidFox or
Random... or you for that matter, Tri-Gem... is because of the inflammitory
tones that they take.

Trigem=*Plonk*
Stukafox=*plonk*
Random (if he ever dares show his face here again)=*plonk*


Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 8, 2001, 7:36:40 PM4/8/01
to

Christopher Beilby <cbe...@hroads.net> wrote in message
news:R64A6.169$pH.1...@sydney.visi.net...

> Listen. It's not that they are condemming sites like Cubcentral. I never
> even heard of Cubcentral before reading this thread. It's that they are
> intentionally trying to start flamewars...
>
> You'd do well to realize that the reason that people don't like StupidFox
or
> Random... or you for that matter, Tri-Gem... is because of the
inflammitory
> tones that they take.
>
> Trigem=*Plonk*
> Stukafox=*plonk*
> Random (if he ever dares show his face here again)=*plonk*

Well I'd hope to some degree of realism that it TAKES the goddamed
inflamatory remarks to make people get their heads out of their asses.
Furry has and will always need a serious amount of flame spitters to help
encourage those who would see fit to ignore all the bad press and the shit
slung at furry to wise up and try to combat the problem one way or another.

The whole 'lets ignore them because they are bitchy' routine gets old, there
are already too much of the finger in ear antics as it is.

And as far as ignoring me, who cares? Apparently you are of the 'stick ma
fingers in ma ears' type anyway.


--
-- Alan Kennedy [TriGem Olandarinse] One cynical wolf.

Alan Kennedy

unread,
Apr 8, 2001, 7:41:29 PM4/8/01
to

Christopher Beilby <cbe...@hroads.net> wrote in message
news:Q51A6.168$pH.1...@sydney.visi.net...

Woo.. my head swoons..

Yah, this McMoo was a very good guy apparently, but if YOU and people LIKE
YOU who don't give two shits about what is said about furry, this person's
memory will only be remembered by a few as being a 'furry', and nothing
more. Would you stand by and let McMoo's name be sloshed about like some
rag doll becuase someone though he was a dirty, child molesting, sexual
freak, because all furries are sexual freaks? No.. you know you wouldn't.
Yet, you are the type of person who, as I said in my other post, seems fit
to just poke your fingers in your ears and go LALALALAL all day.

Arrgg.. you people piss me off with no amount or way to show it!!

(goes and bites a tree, just to release some tension)

Kitty Cat

unread,
Apr 11, 2001, 5:39:45 PM4/11/01
to
i am a clueless gentlefur.
i do not know 'portalofevil.'
i did not know 'cub central,' although it seems nothing different from some
things i have seen online. i can understand why people would not want it
publicized, but i don't know who they are cursing at for doing the
publicizing.
try to pull back a little bit. furry is better than most of the bad porn
crap they are selling out there, and not nearly as 'sick.' but people who
don't understand will always make fun. and they will always look for
cub-central or whatever to do it with, too. they are not going to go look
for the best anthro artist sites so they can write it up on poe.
i am angry that so many people are letting themselves get angry at this. i
have seen this many times .... we got bad press, so now people will know i
am weird because i am a bisexual/witch/furry/trekkie.... oh god, we always
survive it. the gestapo hasn't shown up yet. you can be sure if they do i
will be sniping from the trees, but in the meantime, can we just keep it
down to a dull roar?
and on the other hand, angry furs...
i am a survivor of abuse, a depressive, a fur. all around me, whether they
are g-rated toon-furs or age-players or BDSMers, i see furs who find love
and acceptance and a way of coping on their muck(s). i don't see 'perverts'
on cub central, but people who are learning to laugh at the things that hurt
them. if people with no compassion like to look at it and go, 'hey lookit
the weirdos,' well, i will take care if it endangers people in rl, but i
will not stand here and say, 'i am not THOSE furs.' i had those feelings
after the VF article... it managed to finally get through to me, i AM
strange. i don't have to have ped-sex drawings published on line to turn
people off to me.
and i can't make myself acceptable by only being 'just so weird.' i am a fur
who is mated to someone online... expecting their first 'child.' good lord,
that's completely normal by many furs standards, but what mundane is going
to think i'm anything but a crazy person?
we all take care of each other or we splinter and die, ok?
katerina

<Threelullabyesi...@thecourtofthecrimsonking.com> wrote in
message news:3ace6...@news.uncensored-news.com...
>
>

Christopher Beilby

unread,
Apr 11, 2001, 5:35:40 PM4/11/01
to

<<SNIP>>

Katerina, I suspect that you're new to this newsgroup.

You have just had your first encounter with StukaFox, the worst troll on the
group (at least when Random isn't around). With him, most of us generally
don't bother, since he won't listen. All that he's trying to do is start a
flamewar. You're better off simply adding him to your killfile.


Felyne32k

unread,
Apr 12, 2001, 2:47:38 PM4/12/01
to
In article <Qi4B6.229$pH.1...@sydney.visi.net>, cbe...@hroads.net
says...

>
> <<SNIP>>
>
> Katerina, I suspect that you're new to this newsgroup.

It's interesting to me that anyone who responds in-depth to Stuka/et al
are instantly branded 'newbies'. Recently, I made a comment about how one
of Furplay's threats against Sibe did not cause the outrage that
Blumrich's threats against FWG, Ostrich, etc did, because the target was
more acceptably 'bad'.
I got quite a few emails over me being a newbie.
Interesting, for a guy who has been posting actively for a year,
posting sporadically for a year before that, and lurking for three months
before *that*.
No, I'm not one of the Grand Old Men of the group, but I *know* that
Furplay isn't terribly respected/paid attention to. But that doesn't mean
that I can't raise valid points because of him.
It's entirely too easy just to ignore someone and brand them
'newbie', valid points or no.


>
> You have just had your first encounter with StukaFox, the worst troll on the
> group (at least when Random isn't around). With him, most of us generally
> don't bother, since he won't listen. All that he's trying to do is start a
> flamewar. You're better off simply adding him to your killfile.
>

I think, personally, that it's better for newbies to read (but,
perhaps, refrain from responding) to Stuka & Co. In their own way, they
often have valid points, however poorly expressed (And then there's
Blumrich, who has valid points, eloquently expressed, but flies off the
handle a little too easily), and it's a good idea to at least be exposed
to those ideas.
The world would be a very dull place if it were conflict-free.
More significantly, though, we should be open to at least
considering all sides of an argument before passing judgement. Telling
newbies to killfile Stuka/Random/Blumrich/etc is parallel to
brainwashing. If they don't know the other side exists, pretty soon,
they'll think the present side is unanimous, and thus anyone else is a
nut. They may actually *be* nuts, but that's a conclusion that should be
reached independently, not by the Grand Old Men of the group saying so.
The best way to learn is through mistakes.
That which does not kill us... makes us stronger (but hurts really
bad in the process)
Let them learn their own way.

--
-Felyne32k, supposed "English Major"
DISCLAIMER: The poster is known to experience judgement
lapses brought by sleep deprivation. Take note of posting
time: anything beyond 11:30 PM, Pacific Standard Time is
likely to be influenced by this condition.

Christopher Beilby

unread,
Apr 12, 2001, 2:57:56 PM4/12/01
to

Listen, don't preach to me about Stukafox having valid points. Before I
came here, I was all too familiar with what Stukafox and his buddy Random
had to say from their conduct of FurryMUCK. Random got toaded there for a
good reason. Stuka has bordered on that as well... Stupidfox has proven
time and again that he had nothing to contribute but venom and ill will...

Also, what if someone is a total and complete newbie? What if they take at
face value everything that StupidFox or Furplay have to say? What if they
believe it? By what you're saying, you want us to let them learn for
themselves? Ok, valid point. But, what if they are coming in with
preconcieved notions thanks to the Vanity Fair article? They'll be
vunerable to StupidFox's brand of brainwashing, which really is
brainwashing, as opposed to me telling them to just *plonk* the jerks.
Usually, when you killfile, enough of their idiocy still gets through thanks
to quotes (witness my talking about my killfiling Furplay in another
thread...) that you still see a bit of their side of the story, and also see
what a bunch of twits that they are...


And I'm hardly a grand old man of Furrydom either. But I'm intelligent
enough to know that all someone like Furplay, or StukaFox is going to do is
twist the words of the people who DO respond to them unless people know them
for what they are...

Felyne32k

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 12:53:21 PM4/13/01
to
In article <45nB6.241$pH.1...@sydney.visi.net>, cbe...@hroads.net
says...

>
> Listen, don't preach to me about Stukafox having valid points. Before I
> came here, I was all too familiar with what Stukafox and his buddy Random

So acknowledge that once in a blue moon, he has one. And don't preach
about ignoring people when someone has the ability to come to a real
decision *after* looking at both sides.

> had to say from their conduct of FurryMUCK. Random got toaded there for a
> good reason. Stuka has bordered on that as well... Stupidfox has proven

I suppose you're one up on me for this issue. It predates me (or at least
my MUCK presence)

> time and again that he had nothing to contribute but venom and ill will...

And amusement. Don't forget amusement.
And really, changing his ID to "StupidFox" doesn't put you up too many
slots on the maturity scale.

>
> Also, what if someone is a total and complete newbie? What if they take at
> face value everything that StupidFox or Furplay have to say? What if they

Then they deserve what's coming to them. Or they leant in that direction
beforehand. Everyone has an agenda somewhere. And if you don't remember
that,

> believe it? By what you're saying, you want us to let them learn for
> themselves? Ok, valid point. But, what if they are coming in with
> preconcieved notions thanks to the Vanity Fair article? They'll be
> vunerable to StupidFox's brand of brainwashing, which really is

Well... think about this. I came on here a Total Newbie (Not *totally*
clueless... Van Der Leun is a great newbie-coach), and thought that
StukaFox/Random/etc had some very valid points. I still do, from time to
time. What makes you think that VFair has any difference? Or are you just
throwing buzzwords around so people will agree with you?

"See, when the other guy is doing it, it's called 'brainwashing'. When
you're doing it, it's called 'lessons in right and wrong'."
-Scott Adams

> brainwashing, as opposed to me telling them to just *plonk* the jerks.

No doubt George III would have been much happier if he could have told
the colonists to just *plonk* Madison, Jefferson, and Paine.
I'm sorry if I seem unpatriotic by comparing these three to
Stuka/Random/Etc, but the parallel is pretty true. Just because someone
disagrees with you and says it in an inflammatory way doesn't necessarily
mean he's wrong.

> Usually, when you killfile, enough of their idiocy still gets through thanks
> to quotes (witness my talking about my killfiling Furplay in another
> thread...) that you still see a bit of their side of the story, and also see
> what a bunch of twits that they are...
>

"No, Comrade Stalin, the ideas of those capitalist pig Americans will
still get through the censors, no thanks to their ideas spreading to
other writers. But then we will be able to see what twits they are."

You can't make really informed decisions without seeing the entirety (or
at the very least, a very healthy chunk) of both sides. You can't say
"Oh, everyone who agrees with me... you should read entirely. Anyone who
doesn't... you just get to read snips in replies."

>
> And I'm hardly a grand old man of Furrydom either. But I'm intelligent
> enough to know that all someone like Furplay, or StukaFox is going to do is
> twist the words of the people who DO respond to them unless people know them
> for what they are...

Unless you're a Rhodes Scholar or a Harvard man or something like that,
what makes you think that other people won't be able to do the same?
Put some faith in humanity.

Felyne32k

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 8:25:29 PM4/13/01
to
In article <8ek7b9...@ursine.dyndns.org>, ba...@ursine.dyndns.org
says...

> Felyne32k <Fely...@softhome.net> wrote:
>
> > So acknowledge that once in a blue moon, he has one. And don't preach
> > about ignoring people when someone has the ability to come to a real
> > decision *after* looking at both sides.
>
> However, his signal to noise ratio is something around 1:100 or
> so. Random's is low enough I'm willing to put the number as
> undefined! (no signal, all noise)
>

Eh... I'm probably just willing to put up with more noise. This is what
you get for a guy who will even read L. Ron Hubbard.

In any case, you're entitled to ignore Random (though I think Stuka is
the one that was being discussed) or anyone else you like, with or
without a reason. You could ignore me on grounds that I have a number-
designation at the end of my nick, if you wanted. Just so long as you
didn't try to shove that decision on others without letting them judge
for themselves, I would have no problem with it.

> > No doubt George III would have been much happier if he could have told
> > the colonists to just *plonk* Madison, Jefferson, and Paine.
>

> In the long run, the US probably would have as well.

Granted.
But my point was that just because you doesn't approve of something
someone's saying doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to speak, or
that other people shouldn't be allowed to form independant opinions,
whether with or against the person in question.

> How is a killfile censorship? In what form? You're intentionally
> choosing to ignore what you put in there.
>

The killfile is not censorship. Telling a newbie to automatically
killfile someone before they've had time to actually form an informed
opinion is, because you're stepping in as someone who has more
authority/knows better/whatever.

"A censor is anyone who thinks they know more than you ought to."
- Anonymous

> > Put some faith in humanity.
>

> Every time I do, it breaks my trust.
>
You're probably looking in the wrong places, or your goals are set too
high. Go poking around in that OpenSource Revolution you keep preaching
about; I'm sure some people there will restore it. And then take a look
at what you want. Not everyone is going to break away from Microsoft, for
the same reasons we haven't broken away from QWERTY. The system is there,
and it's a bitch to try and break out of it.

Martin Skunk

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 10:04:24 PM4/13/01
to

Baloo Ursidae wrote:
> No, we haven't broken away from QWERTY because it was a good product
> design that's stood the test of time, whereas the same can only be said
> about Microsoft's advertising.


Uh, Baloo... Did you know that the QWERTY keyboard was designed to slow
the typists DOWN?

Back in the 1860s, Christopher Sholes, the inventor of the typewriter,
arranged the keys in that odd fashion to prevent jamming on mechanical
typewriters by separating commonly used letter combinations. :)


--- Martin Skunk

Nebulous

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 10:25:54 PM4/13/01
to

Martin Skunk wrote
And back then it wasn't as simple as reaching up and pulling the type heads
back away from the paper. The type heads struck the paper from
*underneath*. You couldn't watch what you were typing, and you couldn't
see that a keyjam had occurred.

At one point, a race was held to demonstrate the superiority of touch
typing on the QWERTY keyboard to two-fingered typing. They cheated! If
the 2-fingered typist had been allowed to use his own typewriter instead of
a QWERTY one, *he* would have won.

ObFurry: CAT can be typed with the left hand, LION with the right. ;)

--
Nebulous Rikulau
My furcode
FFCs4a A- C* D H+ M- P++ R+ T+++ W Z+ Sm RLRB/AT a+ cn++ d-- e+ f h+ i+ j+
p+ sm-

Ben_Raccoon

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 10:35:43 AM4/14/01
to
"Baloo Ursidae" <ba...@ursine.dyndns.org> wrote in message

> No, we haven't broken away from QWERTY because it was a good product
> design that's stood the test of time, whereas the same can only be said
> about Microsoft's advertising.

Not true.

http://www.nmt.edu/~shipman/ergo/dsk-hist.html

We haven't broken away from Qwerty the same way we haven't broken away from
calling letters 'uppercase' and 'lowercase' or adopted a sizing unit besides
points and picas. Tradition my friend, and the unwillingness to try anything
different, even when it's better.

I seriously doubt we have to worry about typewriter jams on a PC. ;)


--


For a brief time I was here; and for a brief time I mattered. - Harlan
Ellison.

Shameless website plug. :) http://www.furnation.com/ben_raccoon/


Martin Skunk

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 10:57:24 PM4/13/01
to

Ben_Raccoon wrote:

> I seriously doubt we have to worry about typewriter jams on a PC. ;)

Besides, we also count with the inappreciable help of the Backspace key
on our computers. That's probably the greatest improvement to any kind
of keyboard, as I'd dare to say it's one of the most widely used keys
around the world. :)

--- Martin Skunk

magnwa

unread,
Apr 13, 2001, 11:50:16 PM4/13/01
to
Baloo Ursidae <ba...@ursine.dyndns.org> wrote:
>No, we haven't broken away from QWERTY because it was a good product
>design that's stood the test of time, whereas the same can only be said
>about Microsoft's advertising.

No.. Qwerty is a BAD product that was intentionally designed bad. It hasn't
stood the test of time, our military uses Dvorak.. some businesses use
Dvorak. I know people with near 150 wpm typing on a bad day on a dvorak that
have around 80 on a qwerty.

Magnwa

Kyle L. Webb

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 12:06:21 AM4/14/01
to

"magnwa" <mag...@magnwa.roarmail.net> wrote in message
news:slrn9dff0v...@magnwa.roarmail.net...

>
> No.. Qwerty is a BAD product that was intentionally designed bad. It
hasn't
> stood the test of time, our military uses Dvorak..

Really? They were still using QWERTY as of the last time I was in (1991).
This must be a pretty new development. It would make sense though. They were
moving away from the mechanical speed limited Baudot teletype systems like
the AN/TTY-76 to electronic ones like the AN/UGC-74 as early as 1984, and
they could just easily be Dvorak programmed as QWERTY.


Kyle L. Webb
Hartree Fox on yiffnet

(Former Army RAdioTeleType operator.
And just where did you think the band name RATT came from? Just look at the
dog tags in the band picture. ;)


magnwa

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 2:10:41 AM4/14/01
to
On 14 Apr 2001 04:06:21 GMT, Kyle L. Webb <hart...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>
>Really? They were still using QWERTY as of the last time I was in (1991).
>This must be a pretty new development. It would make sense though. They were
>moving away from the mechanical speed limited Baudot teletype systems like
>the AN/TTY-76 to electronic ones like the AN/UGC-74 as early as 1984, and
>they could just easily be Dvorak programmed as QWERTY.

Rather.. SOME parts of our military are, that should read :)

Magnwa

David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 11:18:14 AM4/14/01
to
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 00:44:09 -0700, Baloo Ursidae
<ba...@ursine.dyndns.org> wrote:

[...]

> My manual typewriter has a backspace key. Though I think one character
> that should be obsoleted is ASCII/ISO 009 (memonic is TAB). Just use
> spaces, people...or set your editor to untabify...

But then I couldn't go

print "$value1\t$value2\t$value3\n";

And have it come out in nice columns.


--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

cust...@webtv.net

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 12:40:22 PM4/14/01
to
The original typewriter key arrangement was similar to what now is
called "dvorak". Problem was over a hundred years ago the early manual
typewriters could not handle a fast typist - so they keys were scrambled
around to slow them down.

By 1900 typewriters were good enough that it was no longer needed - but
the standard was set. Standards are very hard to change - that's why I
can plug my 1890 telephone into the wall (I did have to add the modular
plug) and it still works.

Gabriel Gentile

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 6:37:17 PM4/14/01
to
Flameloop; n. 1. A thread that has degenerated into a back-and-forth flame
war between two (sometimes three) people, often when the original subject
has been lost in the annals of time.

Chacal

unread,
Apr 14, 2001, 11:28:30 PM4/14/01
to
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 09:40:22 -0700 (PDT), cust...@webtv.net wrote:

>The original typewriter key arrangement was similar to what now is
>called "dvorak". Problem was over a hundred years ago the early manual
>typewriters could not handle a fast typist - so they keys were scrambled
>around to slow them down.

Dvorak keyboards are great. Everyone should own AT LEAST one!

- Chacal
----\-Charles Calthrop-\-----------------------------------------------
"Xi was beginning to think he would never find the end of the earth.
Then one day, suddenly, there it was." - The Gods Must be Crazy
----------------------------------------\-winte...@hotmail.com-\----

Jim Doolittle

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 12:09:06 AM4/15/01
to
In article <B6FE3B5C.6525%spook...@earthlink.net>, Gabriel Gentile
<spook...@earthlink.net> wrote:


This defines much of alt.fan.furry.


-Jim

--
Jim Doolittle CornWuff Press
dool...@speakeasy.org http://www.cornwuff.com
Art Show Director, Midwest FurFest
http://www.furfest.org

Dave Farrance

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 9:39:10 AM4/15/01
to
On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 09:40:22 -0700 (PDT), cust...@webtv.net wrote:

>The original typewriter key arrangement was similar to what now is
>called "dvorak". Problem was over a hundred years ago the early manual
>typewriters could not handle a fast typist - so they keys were scrambled
>around to slow them down.
>
>By 1900 typewriters were good enough that it was no longer needed - but

>the standard was set. ...

Not quite...

Even the most recent purely-mechanical typewriters tended to jam if
letters next to each other on the keyboard were pressed too quickly in
succession. Qwerty is arranged so that subsequent key presses are
widely spaced, thus INCREASING the speed at which a mechanical
typewriter can be used without jamming.

And, surprise, there's dvorak debunkers out there:

http://www.reason.com/9606/Fe.QWERTY.html

--
|\ /|
| \'_| Farry
___.-' @ `--o
/// / ____,' fa...@earthling.net
/ / ///~~/ ICQ 8277359

Martin Skunk

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 3:33:39 PM4/15/01
to
Dave Farrance wrote:
>
> http://www.reason.com/9606/Fe.QWERTY.html

Wow. The way they debunked the "Macs were superior than PCs" sounds
very reasonable and well written. I'm going to use this URL as a
reference for that issue, too. :)

--- Martin Skunk

magnwa

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 4:00:21 PM4/15/01
to
Dave Farrance <fa...@earthling.net> wrote:
>
>http://www.reason.com/9606/Fe.QWERTY.html
>

This article contains a fatal flaw. Dos was not replaced by windows.
Even to this day, DOS remains an integral part of windows. Sure, they
now call it "Windows OS" instead of DOS when you type VER, but the fact
remains, you can seperate the windowing aspects from it cleanly and
safely. As such, DOS wasn't replaced by windows as much as Windows
is a superset of DOS. (Much like C++ hasn't replaced C, but sits
on top of the C language as an extension.)

Magnwa

Robert Alley

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 5:09:38 PM4/15/01
to

cust...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> Standards are very hard to change - that's why I
> can plug my 1890 telephone into the wall (I did have to add the modular
> plug) and it still works.

Reminds me of a story; I don't know if it's true or not. It's about the
width of American railroad tracks. I think the rails must have
something like 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches between them. (Insert proper number
here if you know it.)

Why is this? Well, the story is that a lot of the early railroad
builders in America were railroad folks from Britain, & they simply
built the tracks the same as they did in the old country.

Why did they settle on that width in Britain? Well, apparently the
early rail cars & locomotives were built by stagecoach makers, & their
jigs & setups were already designed to make an axle width of 4' 8.5" on
stagecoaches, so they simply continued their tradition.

Why were stagecoach wheels set precisely that far apart? Well, Many
British roads were first laid out by the Romans, & if they were first
paved, they had long since degenerated into dirt roads, with
well-defined ruts in them. If you made a stage that had an axle width
anything other than the spacing of the ruts, the coach didn't last long.

Why were the ruts set that far apart? Well, in Roman times (the folks
who made the roads, remember?) chariots had to be wide enough to allow 2
horses to draw them in tandem.

In other words, the standard American railroad is built to match twice
the width of a horse's ass.

And that's where standards come from.

Al Goldman

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 5:34:40 PM4/15/01
to
In article <3ADA0F41...@earthlink.net>, Robert Alley
<rober...@earthlink.net> writes:


>
>Reminds me of a story; I don't know if it's true or not. It's about the
>width of American railroad tracks. I think the rails must have
>something like 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches between them. (Insert proper number
>here if you know it.)
>

<snip> rest of story


This story has been around for awhile - I've always wondered if it was true.

The version I heard starts with the space shuttle solid rocket boosters. The're
built out west and sent to Florida by train, so their maximum size is set by
the rail tunnels they must travel through.

The size of the tunnels is set by the width of the railcars. . .

The size of the railcars is set by the spacing of the rails. . .

That's were this version of the story picks up.

Al Goldman


Al Goldman

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 7:09:02 PM4/15/01
to

>cust...@webtv.net wrote:
>>
>> Standards are very hard to change - that's why I
>> can plug my 1890 telephone into the wall (I did have to add the modular
>> plug) and it still works.
>

Standards can be a real disaster if you pick the wrong one.

11 Years ago I worked at a dealership that sold Data Terminal Systems (DTS)
brand cash registers. Around 1970 DTS was the leader in electronic cash
registers - first company to sell a machine that actually computed the tax for
you (wow!) and stuff like that.

DTS decided to sell memory in records, each record being a group of eight
bytes. The rest of the industry did not accept this standard.

This turned out to be a disaster to the sales department, who had to constantly
explain why our 2k (record) memory boards cost as much as the competitions 16k
(byte) memory boards. Our memory seemed 8 times as expensive!

Our sales manager, who sold national accounts like Toys R Us and K-Mart, (at up
to $10,000 a lane or more) once speculated that this memory issue cost DTS
_millions_ of dollars in sales from customers who looked at several different
brands of cash registers and simply decided to go with a cheaper memory model
without bothering to contact him for an explanation.

Al Goldman

Austin Dern

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 8:33:38 PM4/15/01
to
Robert Alley <rober...@earthlink.net> writes:

>Reminds me of a story; I don't know if it's true or not. It's about the
>width of American railroad tracks. I think the rails must have
>something like 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches between them. (Insert proper number
>here if you know it.)

It's not. For the full story, read
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000218.html

However: for the 19th century there was a lot of fiddling around
and not a lot of organization in picking railroad gauges. Those alert
to U.S. history will recall one of the great problems the Confederacy
had in supplies, apart from not having enough railroad track at all and
having no good trunk lines, was that much of it was in incompatible
gauges. (Political disputes among railroad owners didn't help matters
any.)

Indeed, it was so bad that at the outbreak of the U.S. Civil War,
one company was building a line across a valley -- at 4 foot, 8 1/2 inch
gauge from the west side, at five foot gauge from the east side. The
war stopped trackage before they could meet up. (Source: Railroads of
The Confederacy, Robert Black, 1951.)

Many standards are chosen arbitrarily and survive well past
the limitations that set their specifications in the first place, but
railroad track lines don't date back to Roman times.

Austin Dern
muck.spindizzy.org 7072
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gary Akins

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 9:15:28 PM4/15/01
to
mag...@magnwa.roarmail.net (magnwa) wrote:

>This article contains a fatal flaw. Dos was not replaced by windows.
>Even to this day, DOS remains an integral part of windows. Sure, they
>now call it "Windows OS" instead of DOS when you type VER, but the fact
>remains, you can seperate the windowing aspects from it cleanly and
>safely. As such, DOS wasn't replaced by windows as much as Windows
>is a superset of DOS. (Much like C++ hasn't replaced C, but sits
>on top of the C language as an extension.)

By that logic, color TV broadcasts never "replaced" B&W transmission,
since the color subcarrier was simply added on top of the existing B&W
system, and can be cleanly separated from it. However, I doubt you'll get
the average person to agree with you if you try to tell them that
black-and-white TV _hasn't_ been replaced by color TV...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is no virtue in suffering fools gladly, for it only encourages them to
persist in their foolishness." --Kehlog Albran
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
solarfox@DON'TMESSWITHtexas.net (Gary Akins jr.)
http://lonestar.texas.net/~solarfox
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

magnwa

unread,
Apr 15, 2001, 9:51:48 PM4/15/01