computers
Sarah Hayward
Heinz W. Wiggeshoff
version of M$ Windows.
Peter da Silva
respect and you'll end up with all your spirit sucked out and your body
turned into a damp rag that your boss uses to shine his caddilac.
So what's new?
--
I've seen things you people can't imagine. Chimneysweeps on fire over the roofs
of London. I've watched kite-strings glitter in the sun at Hyde Park Gate. All
these things will be lost in time, like chalk-paintings in the rain. `-_-'
Time for your nap. | Peter da Silva | Har du kramat din varg, idag? 'U`
jrla...@shell.golden.net
Then find a computer that doesn't agree with you! Simple! Then the two of
you can argue to your hearts content and leave us alone! :-)
--
john R. Latala
jrla...@golden.net
Chris Hedley
> Computers are the work of the devil, that will drain your life and self
> respect and you'll end up with all your spirit sucked out and your body
> turned into a damp rag that your boss uses to shine his caddilac.
>
> So what's new?
I think all this technology is like just evil and puts out bummer vibes
bringing us all down. If we like dumped computers and cars and lived
in teepees life would just be like beautiful, man.
Chris.
--
"If the world was an orange it would be like much too small, y'know?" Neil, '84
Currently playing: Motorhead - "Another Perfect Day"
http://www.chrishedley.com My stuff, including genealogy, other things, etc
Douglas H. Quebbeman
news:e0mtra...@teabag.cbhnet...
> According to Peter da Silva <pe...@abbnm.com>:
> > Computers are the work of the devil, that will drain your life and self
> > respect and you'll end up with all your spirit sucked out and your body
> > turned into a damp rag that your boss uses to shine his caddilac.
> >
> > So what's new?
>
> I think all this technology is like just evil and puts out bummer vibes
> bringing us all down. If we like dumped computers and cars and lived
> in teepees life would just be like beautiful, man.
Concrete teepees... at least they support A/C units.
-dq
Chris Hedley
> Concrete teepees... at least they support A/C units.
Concrete teepees? Air-con?!
Mike Causer
> Concrete teepees... at least they support A/C units.
Ohmigod! I was taught at school in cgs, had to convert to MKS, needed
to learn the width of ancient English king's thumbs for my first job,
and now you want me to learn another units system?
OK, so A/C units are acres and centuries? What do you use for
force/weight? Perhaps Buffalos? 1B = 1500Kg?
Mike
Philo
...my 1939 l.c. smith & corona typewriter worked quite well
just a new ribbon every year and every five... a few drops of oil
one day i got a letter from a friend who explained how it took him two hours
to get his printer working
and i basically called him an idiot...as all i had to do was drop a piece of
paper
in the typer and go>>>>
as a matter of fact...not only did i hate computers...
there was one thing i hated even more...
and that was people who used computers!!!!!!
but then...my girlfriend asked me if i wanted her old computer...
being *free* of course i took it...
heck i'd probably take rat poison if it was *free*
ooh boy did i ever get hooked...
now i'm the biggest computer nerd there is...
i;ve built hundreds of them from scrap parts
and have supplied all my freinds with cheap or free computers
and of course they call constantly for technical advice...
which sort of gets me back to hating computers
and the people who use them :)
at least i don;t have a teevee !!!!
"Sarah Hayward" <hayw...@maths.tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:art25n$21pl$1...@synge.maths.tcd.ie...
Douglas H. Quebbeman
> According to Douglas H. Quebbeman <do...@iglou.com>:
> > Concrete teepees... at least they support A/C units.
>
> Concrete teepees? Air-con?!
Barstow, California; Holbrook, Arizona, and Cave City, Kentucky, remain
home to the last of what was once a small yet thriving chain of Motor Inns
spread
across the United States, known as the Wigwam Motel, or Wigwam Village.
You can see the one in Holbrook at:
http://www.arizonaroads.com/us/us66.htm
and the more complete one nearby in Kentucky at:
-dq
Hillebrandt
the people who make OS'es... ;-)
/Thomas
"Sarah Hayward" <hayw...@maths.tcd.ie> wrote in message
news:art25n$21pl$1...@synge.maths.tcd.ie...
Martin Taylor
>
> at least i don;t have a teevee !!!!
>
I think you misslept "teepee".
Martin Taylor
jmfb...@aol.com
c...@ieya.co.REMOVE_THIS.uk (Chris Hedley) wrote:
>According to Peter da Silva <pe...@abbnm.com>:
>> Computers are the work of the devil, that will drain your life and self
>> respect and you'll end up with all your spirit sucked out and your body
>> turned into a damp rag that your boss uses to shine his caddilac.
>>
>> So what's new?
>
>I think all this technology is like just evil and puts out bummer vibes
>bringing us all down. If we like dumped computers and cars and lived
>in teepees life would just be like beautiful, man.
Uh, huh. You'll get awful lonely because us squaws are going
to stay in houses with hot showers, flush toilets,
microwaves, refrigerators and central heating.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
Hillebrandt
/Thomas
"Martin Taylor" <Martin...@reedelsevier.co.uk> wrote in message
news:arvgr8$macah$1...@ID-105756.news.dfncis.de...
Chris Hedley
> Uh, huh. You'll get awful lonely because us squaws are going
> to stay in houses with hot showers, flush toilets,
> microwaves, refrigerators and central heating.
Yes, mine certainly would. The hippy ethos is all very nice until
the realisation sinks in that it'd essentially be a bunch of smelly
blokes; men might sometimes fantasise about a technology-free world
but women don't tend to be so keen to play silly buggers and leave
all the home-comforts behind!
Chris Hedley
> home to the last of what was once a small yet thriving chain of Motor Inns
> spread
> across the United States, known as the Wigwam Motel, or Wigwam Village.
All is explained...
> You can see the one in Holbrook at:
>
> http://www.arizonaroads.com/us/us66.htm
>
> and the more complete one nearby in Kentucky at:
>
> http://www.wigwamvillage.com/
They're _very_ strange. They do have a certain sense of something-
or-other, but I wouldn't like to say what. :)
Chris Hedley
> Nah, actually I think he was referring to a television...
But was it made of concrete?
Philo
"> >
> > at least i don;t have a teevee !!!!
> >
> I think you misslept "teepee".
>
>
yes i was referring to a television
but it think you misspelled "misspelled "
miss manners lept into her concrete teepee
just in time to catch some t.v.
then she slept...
Dave Daniels
Don't see why not. You can buy loudspeakers where the cabinet
is made out of concrete.
Dave Daniels
Chris Hedley
> Don't see why not. You can buy loudspeakers where the cabinet
> is made out of concrete.
The father-in-law has some speakers which consisted of the cone
mounted atop 3' long pieces of concrete pipe!
Steve Burton
wrote:
Top Post - and I claim my £5
Steve.
Stan Barr
<c...@ieya.co.REMOVE_THIS.uk> wrote:
>According to Dave Daniels <dave_d...@argonet.co.uk>:
>> Don't see why not. You can buy loudspeakers where the cabinet
>> is made out of concrete.
>
>The father-in-law has some speakers which consisted of the cone
>mounted atop 3' long pieces of concrete pipe!
Someone (Wharfedale??) used to make a kit for doing this! (Supply your own
pipe.)
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr st...@dial.pipex.com
The future was never like this!
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
*ack* !
You're not encouraging the use of an MS production in conjunction with
posting to &goof usenet, are you?
:)
hawk
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign
doc...@psu.edu Smeal 178 (814) 375-4700 \ / against HTML mail
These opinions will not be those of X and postings.
Penn State until it pays my retainer. / \
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
So like a woman. Here we are, putting AC in the teepee, and she wants
to turn on the central heat . . .
jmfb...@aol.com
ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>In article <arvmpa$j69$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <e0mtra...@teabag.cbhnet>,
>> c...@ieya.co.REMOVE_THIS.uk (Chris Hedley) wrote:
>
>>>I think all this technology is like just evil and puts out bummer vibes
>>>bringing us all down. If we like dumped computers and cars and lived
>>>in teepees life would just be like beautiful, man.
>
>>Uh, huh. You'll get awful lonely because us squaws are going
>>to stay in houses with hot showers, flush toilets,
>>microwaves, refrigerators and central heating.
>
>So like a woman. Here we are, putting AC in the teepee, and she wants
>to turn on the central heat . . .
>
>:)
ROTFL.
If you male dress designers wore them, you'ld be turning on
the heat, too. ;-)
John
I hate computers who agrees with you as well.
Ross Simpson
> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explaination
is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (there the people
responceable for the way your computer operates).
To hate computers your saying that every single computer made in
existance (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing your
question).
With Regards,
Ross.
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>In article <as2jcd$j...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>>In article <arvmpa$j69$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>Uh, huh. You'll get awful lonely because us squaws are going
>>>to stay in houses with hot showers, flush toilets,
>>>microwaves, refrigerators and central heating.
>>So like a woman. Here we are, putting AC in the teepee, and she wants
>>to turn on the central heat . . .
>>:)
>ROTFL.
glad to help; it keeps you warm :)
>If you male dress designers wore them, you'ld be turning on
>the heat, too. ;-)
Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
material?
Kelli Halliburton
My theory about posts that correct others' spelling and grammar holds true.
In fact, in order to avoid being a victim of the same theory, I shall
refrain from correcting any of Simpson's errors.
Ross Simpson
> My theory about posts that correct others' spelling and grammar holds
true.
> In fact, in order to avoid being a victim of the same theory, I shall
> refrain from correcting any of Simpson's errors.
Okay, So I'll correct it for those who didn't like version 1.0 to version
1.1. After all I did use Google Groups after all & the only thing it lacks
is a spell checker & since I was the original poster I can do pretty much
what I like with it (which includes Spelling & Grammer).
---- The Original Message Updated!!----
> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
responsible for the way your computer operates).
To hate computers your saying that every single computer made in
existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing your
question).
---- The Original Message Updated!!----
With Regards,
Ross.
jmfb...@aol.com
"Ross Simpson" <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>"Kelli Halliburton" <kell...@crosswinds.not> wrote in message ...
>
>> My theory about posts that correct others' spelling and grammar holds
>true.
>> In fact, in order to avoid being a victim of the same theory, I shall
>> refrain from correcting any of Simpson's errors.
>
>Okay, So I'll correct it for those who didn't like version 1.0 to version
>1.1. After all I did use Google Groups after all & the only thing it lacks
>is a spell checker & since I was the original poster I can do pretty much
>what I like with it (which includes Spelling & Grammer).
>
>---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>
>If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
>is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
>responsible for the way your computer operates).
As long as we're talking about proper punctuation, you should
have used a semi-colon, not a comma.
<snip>
jmfb...@aol.com
ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>In article <asb3ig$gt2$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <as2jcd$j...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
>> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>>>In article <arvmpa$j69$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Uh, huh. You'll get awful lonely because us squaws are going
>>>>to stay in houses with hot showers, flush toilets,
>>>>microwaves, refrigerators and central heating.
>
>>>So like a woman. Here we are, putting AC in the teepee, and she wants
>>>to turn on the central heat . . .
>
>>>:)
>
>>ROTFL.
>
>glad to help; it keeps you warm :)
Nothing is helping today ;-); it's cold out there!
>
>>If you male dress designers wore them, you'ld be turning on
>>the heat, too. ;-)
>
>Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
>material?
>
>:)
CYA?
Chris Hedley
> >If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> >is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> >responsible for the way your computer operates).
>
> As long as we're talking about proper punctuation, you should
> have used a semi-colon, not a comma.
And the "your" should be "you're".
John Varela
wrote:
>
> According to <jmfb...@aol.com>:
> > >If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> > >is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> > >responsible for the way your computer operates).
> >
> > As long as we're talking about proper punctuation, you should
> > have used a semi-colon, not a comma.
>
> And the "your" should be "you're".
And the "their" should be "they're".
--
John Varela
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>In article <asimbq$m...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>>glad to help; it keeps you warm :)
>Nothing is helping today ;-); it's cold out there!
Yeah, I *really* want to mvoe back home this time of year.
>>>If you male dress designers wore them, you'ld be turning on
>>>the heat, too. ;-)
>>Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
>>material?
>CYA?
ours, yes, but probably not yours :)
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>> My theory about posts that correct others' spelling and grammar holds
>>true.
>> In fact, in order to avoid being a victim of the same theory, I shall
>> refrain from correcting any of Simpson's errors.
>Okay, So I'll correct it for those who didn't like version 1.0 to version
>1.1. After all I did use Google Groups after all & the only thing it lacks
>is a spell checker & since I was the original poster I can do pretty much
>what I like with it (which includes Spelling & Grammer).
>---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
/me bites his tongue.
/me bleeds profusely.
Charles Shannon Hendrix
> As long as we're talking about proper punctuation, you should
> have used a semi-colon, not a comma.
Actually, I thought things like using their instead of "they are"
and other snafus were much worse... :)
CBFalconer
>
... snip ...
>
> Okay, So I'll correct it for those who didn't like version 1.0 to version
> 1.1. After all I did use Google Groups after all & the only thing it lacks
> is a spell checker & since I was the original poster I can do pretty much
> what I like with it (which includes Spelling & Grammer).
>
> ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
> > i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>
> If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> responsible for the way your computer operates).
s/they're/their/g :-)
--
Chuck F (cbfal...@yahoo.com) (cbfal...@worldnet.att.net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> USE worldnet address!
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet" writes:
> ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
> > i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>
> If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> responsible for the way your computer operates).
>
> To hate computers your saying that every single computer made in
> existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
> machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing your
> question).
> ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
[Hints:
you're != your
they're != their (!= there for completeness)
known != know
you'd != you
]
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} b...@dsl.co.uk
"We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are
untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them".
George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919
Ross Simpson
<Big Snip!>
> As long as we're talking about proper punctuation, you should
> have used a semi-colon, not a comma.
The way things are going, it's going to take 100 attempts to get my messages
correct.
Ross Simpson
> And the "your" should be "you're".
It's the same thing isn't it? 'you're' seems to be much uglier way of saying
it.
Ross Simpson
> > > >If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> > > >is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> > > >responsible for the way your computer operates).
> And the "their" should be "they're".
I used 'their' because Micro$loth is a thing & those people do something for
it. Rather then being there for someone.
Ross Simpson
> >If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
>
> /me bites his tongue.
> /me bleeds profusely.
Ay.
Ross Simpson
> s/they're/their/g :-)
So it's true that real programmers cannot write (it may not always ring
true - in the case of a genius).
Ross Simpson
"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" <b...@dsl.co.uk> wrote in message...
> Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>
> [Hints:
> you're != your
> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
> known != know
> you'd != you
> ]
Haven't touched 'C' in a while, so I'm persuming you mean '!=' as not equal
to, or '<>' in Pascal or BASIC. 'Their' is defently not the same as 'There'
(which was why I used it!) :-)
Chris Hedley
> I used 'their' because Micro$loth is a thing & those people do something for
> it. Rather then being there for someone.
In that case, you should have used "it's the company/thing" rather than
"their the people". :P
Chris.
--
"If the world was an orange it would be like much too small, y'know?" Neil, '84
Currently playing: Lush - "Gala"
jmfb...@aol.com
ROTFL. Yup. Welcome to the world of doc review. It reminds
me of countless go-arounds when I was working.
jmfb...@aol.com
Nope. You're is a contraction of 'you are'; 'your' indicates
ownership. A rule of thumb I was taught in grade school was
to substitute the words "you are" for the word; if it doesn't
sound correct, you're spelling it wrong.
jmfb...@aol.com
ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>In article <askr1i$lpc$8...@bob.news.rcn.net>, <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <asimbq$m...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
>> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>
>>>glad to help; it keeps you warm :)
>
>>Nothing is helping today ;-); it's cold out there!
>
>Yeah, I *really* want to mvoe back home this time of year.
>
>>>>If you male dress designers wore them, you'ld be turning on
>>>>the heat, too. ;-)
>
>>>Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
>>>material?
>
>>CYA?
>
>ours, yes,
That's my point. Whenever I'm sitting in the cunt doctor's
examining room wearing nothing but a piece of paper and he
walks in wearing a suit, I think bad thoughts. Especially
when the A/C is set to 65.
> .. but probably not yours :)
You might think that, but the most effective bait is allure
not reality. :-)
jmfb...@aol.com
Well, of course. If they could write, they wouldn't be programmers.
I often said that I wouldn't write even if DEC paid me a million
dollars/day.
jmfb...@aol.com
b...@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:
>In article <3ded6c2b$0$7948$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>
> rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet"
writes:
>
>> ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>> > i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>>
>> If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
>> is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
>> responsible for the way your computer operates).
>>
>> To hate computers your saying that every single computer made in
>> existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>> machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing your
>> question).
>> ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>
>Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>
>[Hints:
> you're != your
> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
> known != know
> you'd != you
>]
>
Neat! The rule stills holds (if you're correction somebody, you
make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
Ross Simpson
> >> And the "your" should be "you're".
> >
> >It's the same thing isn't it? 'you're' seems to be
> >much uglier way of saying it.
>
> Nope. You're is a contraction of 'you are'; 'your' indicates
> ownership. A rule of thumb I was taught in grade school was
> to substitute the words "you are" for the word; if it doesn't
> sound correct, you're spelling it wrong.
So my message should look like this.
---- The Original Message Updated!!----
> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
If you're trying to say it like this, then the most likely
explanation is that you hate the world of Micro$loth
(those people are responsible for the way your computer
operates).
To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
your question).
---- The Original Message Updated!!----
With Regards,
Ross.
John Varela
<rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
> The way things are going, it's going to take 100 attempts to get my messages
> correct.
You're a good sport.
--
John Varela
Steve Burton
Do you remember, back in the old days, when Ross Simpson used to post
to this group?
;-)
Steve.
Steve Burton
in PRO-IV it's '#' or '<>'
Steve.
Charles Richmond
>
> In article <3ded6c2b$0$7948$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>
> rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet" writes:
>
> > ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
> > > i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
> >
> > If your trying to say it like this, then the most likely explanation
> > is that you hate the world of Micro$loth (their the people
> > responsible for the way your computer operates).
> >
> > To hate computers your saying that every single computer made in
> > existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
> > machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing your
> > question).
> > ---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>
> Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>
> [Hints:
> you're != your
> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
> known != know
> you'd != you
> ]
to != too != two
then != than
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond <rich...@plano.net> |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet" writes:
But it was still the wrong homophone. "Their" is the possessive form for
the third person plural: "their coats" are the coats belonging to them.
It is pronounced the same as "there", which is a positional adverb,
indicating a place. The word you wanted, in the context, was "they're",
which is a colloquial contraction of "they are".
Similarly, you wrote "your", which is the possessive for the second
person; "your coat" is the coat belonging to you. In the context, you
wanted the identically pronounced "you're", which is again a contraction,
for "you are".
As I implied above, education appears to have been wasted on you: after
all, in a different response, you actually stated your belief that "your"
and "you're" are the same. They are most decidedly not.
Next I suppose you'll be saying that you "should of" written something
else. I look forward to seeing the chorus of corrections.
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
> In article <103904...@dsl.co.uk>,
> b...@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:
> >[Hints:
> > you're != your
> > they're != their (!= there for completeness)
> > known != know
> > you'd != you
> >]
> >
>
> Neat! The rule stills holds (if you're correction somebody, you
ing
??? QED!
> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other). I admit that it
fails to distinguish "you had" from "you would", but the context provides
the correct word (just as it does to the hearer).
Steve O'Hara-Smith
jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
JC> In article <asl8c9$g...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
JC> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
JC> > .. but probably not yours :)
JC>
JC> You might think that, but the most effective bait is allure
JC> not reality. :-)
Hence male dress designers (knowing this) design them to reveal
the reality as a defence against alluring baiters. Also as a source of
amusement in some cases, such as the atomic school of dress design
usually seen in 'society' circles (very small with high probability of
fallout).
--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirrors
The computer obeys and wins. |A Better Way To Focus The Sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licenses available - see:
| http://www.sohara.org/
Taki Kogoma
to alt.folklore.computers decree...
>Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
>> Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>>
>> [Hints:
>> you're != your
>> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
>> known != know
>> you'd != you
>> ]
>And:
> to != too != two
> then != than
Recently added:
site != sight (!= cite)
Gym "Bemused at pointers to 'websights'..." Quirk
--
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
-- Gene "spaf" Spafford (1992)
Brian Inglis
>On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 22:53:57 GMT, did rich...@ev1.net,
>to alt.folklore.computers decree...
>>Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
>>> Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>>>
>>> [Hints:
>>> you're != your
>>> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
>>> known != know
>>> you'd != you
>>> ]
>>And:
>> to != too != two
>> then != than
>
>Recently added:
>
> site != sight (!= cite)
and my pet journalistic peeve:
doyen != dean
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
--
Brian....@CSi.com (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
fake address use address above to reply
ab...@aol.com tos...@aol.com ab...@att.com ab...@earthlink.com
ab...@hotmail.com ab...@mci.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com
ab...@yahoo.com ab...@cadvision.com ab...@shaw.ca ab...@telus.com
ab...@ibsystems.com u...@ftc.gov spam traps
Charlie Gibbs
writes:
>On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 22:53:57 GMT, did rich...@ev1.net,
>to alt.folklore.computers decree...
>
>>Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
>>
>>> Sigh! Why DO our taxes get spent upon inadequate education?
>>>
>>> [Hints:
>>> you're != your
!= yore
>>> they're != their (!= there for completeness)
>>> known != know
>>> you'd != you
>>> ]
>>And:
>> to != too != two
>> then != than
>
>Recently added:
>
> site != sight (!= cite)
>Gym "Bemused at pointers to 'websights'..." Quirk
it's != its
loose != lose
effect != affect
Many things can affect people. The only thing that can
effect them is sex (which usually affects people a lot too).
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at moc.subyks if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
arargh...@not.at.enteract.com
<snip>
>That's my point. Whenever I'm sitting in the cunt doctor's
>examining room wearing nothing but a piece of paper and he
>walks in wearing a suit, I think bad thoughts. Especially
>when the A/C is set to 65.
You could always start to shiver, and sorta kick the wrong place. :-)
--
Arargh (at arargh dot com) http://www.arargh.com
To reply by email, change the domain name, and remove the garbage.
(Enteract can keep the spam, they are gone anyway)
Ross Simpson
> As I implied above, education appears to have been wasted on you: after
> all, in a different response, you actually stated your belief that "your"
> and "you're" are the same. They are most decidedly not.
English was never one of my strong points. But then I suppose it exists in
any language. It's never too ('am I right here?) late to learn it.
> Next I suppose you'll be saying that you "should of" written something
> else. I look forward to seeing the chorus of corrections.
You better just check that last line for me! :-) According to the ol'
Macquarie Dictionary, it sounds right.
While you're at it, you might as well check my updated text (it's there &
waiting for you).
With Regards,
Ross.
Ross Simpson
> >The way things are going, it's going to take 100 attempts to get my
messages
> >correct.
> >
> Do you remember, back in the old days, when Ross Simpson used to post
> to this group?
Um, how long ago are we talking about here?
I probably don't respond to this group as much as the others I go to &
looking over it to see what's going on is very tricky (but I seriously don't
think you would have noticed those things, unlike myself who knows when I'm
writing my own messages in groups).
But getting back to your question, back in the good old days I wouldn't have
left any messages in this group, so this other chap who shares the same name
as me would all we would have in common :-)
With Regards,
Ross.
Ross Simpson
> >So it's true that real programmers cannot write (it may not always ring
> >true - in the case of a genius).
>
> Well, of course. If they could write, they wouldn't be programmers.
> I often said that I wouldn't write even if DEC paid me a million
> dollars/day.
But that would work both ways. DEC could either pay you to write the manual
(for the software), or the program itself! :-)
With Regards,
Ross.
jmfb...@aol.com
arargh...@NOT.AT.enteract.com wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Dec 02 12:28:21 GMT, jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
>
><snip>
>>That's my point. Whenever I'm sitting in the cunt doctor's
>>examining room wearing nothing but a piece of paper and he
>>walks in wearing a suit, I think bad thoughts. Especially
>>when the A/C is set to 65.
>You could always start to shiver, and sorta kick the wrong place. :-)
Nah. He's a nice guy. When it gets really cold, I'm attached
to the examining table with a vise.
jmfb...@aol.com
Ship it! ;-) Now you see why we hired writers to do this
for us.
jmfb...@aol.com
Oh, heavens, no! Computers are easier to communicate with than
people. If there are any bits on hard, all I had to do is
call field service.
jmfb...@aol.com
b...@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:
>In article <asnimc$l83$7...@bob.news.rcn.net> jmfb...@aol.com writes:
>
>> In article <103904...@dsl.co.uk>,
>> b...@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly}) wrote:
>> >[Hints:
>> > you're != your
>> > they're != their (!= there for completeness)
>> > known != know
>> > you'd != you
>> >]
>> >
>>
>> Neat! The rule stills holds (if you're correction somebody, you
> ing
> ??? QED!
Oh, ratzatfratz. And I read it over five times just because
of the rule!
>> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
>> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
>
>BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
>recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
>something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other). I admit that it
>fails to distinguish "you had" from "you would", but the context provides
>the correct word (just as it does to the hearer).
Ooooohhh!!! [bright lightbulb just lit above emoticon's head] That
explain an oddity I've noticed. Thanks!
See, Ross? Even spelling flames teach old dogs.
jmfb...@aol.com
<NKQS2gVdCOMx-p...@dialup-64.157.61.222.Dial1.Washington1.Level
3.net>,
Yup. Isn't it nice to have fun with an oops. It was so nice
to be dealing with somebody who has a sense of humor and
willingness to learn from mistakes.
Ross Simpson
> >> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
> >> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
> >
> >BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
> >recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
> >something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other). I admit that it
> >fails to distinguish "you had" from "you would", but the context provides
> >the correct word (just as it does to the hearer).
>
> Ooooohhh!!! [bright lightbulb just lit above emoticon's head] That
> explain an oddity I've noticed. Thanks!
>
> See, Ross? Even spelling flames teach old dogs.
Yes Well, where I come from (Australia), I've never seen anyone say or write
'you'ld' & I wouldn't have understood it if you didn't include it's meaning.
If there was a case of saying 'You Would' here, you would say it as it
(notice how I even wrote it without too much thought involved).
Regards,
Ross.
Ross Simpson
> Oh, heavens, no! Computers are easier to communicate with than
> people. If there are any bits on hard, all I had to do is
> call field service.
Ah? Don't you mean "bits on hand?" (or is this a deliberate attempt to pull
in further discussion?!) :-)
With Regards,
Ross.
Elliott Roper
Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
> "Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" <b...@dsl.co.uk> wrote in message...
>
>
> English was never one of my strong points. But then I suppose it exists in
> any language. It's never too ('am I right here?) late to learn it.
>
> > Next I suppose you'll be saying that you "should of" written something
> > else. I look forward to seeing the chorus of corrections.
>
> You better just check that last line for me! :-) According to the ol'
> Macquarie Dictionary, it sounds right.
Ah, the Macquarie. One of my homesickness books. I checked. It does not
condone 'should of'. Perhaps they should have pointed out it was wrong?
But on the next page is the definition of 'Shouse'. Strewth! what a
fine dictionary it is.
(for those not in on the joke, the Macquarie is a highly respected
Australian Dictionary. There is gentle wit in its definitions and
selections that sounds just right to an Australian)
Thanks Ross. That took an hour out of my day. It took that long to put
the damn thing back on the shelf. Now if I could get a tin of real
Foster's instead of the revolting pommy muck with the same name, I'd be
in heaven.
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>So my message should look like this.
>---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>your question).
"etc" needs a period as an abreviation.
"latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
You have a complete sentence inside your last parentheses, and it should
be terminated with punctuation.
:)
hawk
--
Richard E. Hawkins, Asst. Prof. of Economics /"\ ASCII ribbon campaign
doc...@psu.edu Smeal 178 (814) 375-4700 \ / against HTML mail
These opinions will not be those of X and postings.
Penn State until it pays my retainer. / \
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <b...@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <3def0ba5$0$12761$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>
> rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet" writes:
>But it was still the wrong homophone. "Their" is the possessive form for
>the third person plural: "their coats" are the coats belonging to them.
>It is pronounced the same as "there",
Maybe on your side of the pond :)
"their" has an "ur" kind of saound; "there" rhymes with "air."
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
>> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
>
>BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
>recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
>something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other).
Nope, I've never seen that over here--at least not from a literate
person :)
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
>> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
>BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
>recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
>something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other).
Nope, I've never seen that over here--at least not from a literate
person :)
hawk, just now noting it was barb's spelling :)
[Maybe it's one of those Massacheusetts things . . .]
Ross Simpson
"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote in message...
> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
> >existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
> >your question).
>
> "etc" needs a period as an abreviation.
I thought it did!
> "latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
Well I don't know about that. I'm referning to the same machine, if I start
putting more commas in it people will start thinking I talking about more
than one machine. Here's the changes though:
> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
> >existence (from the brain, abacus to the latest, fastest, biggest
> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
> >your question).
> You have a complete sentence inside your last parentheses, and it should
> be terminated with punctuation.
What like this?: (you better think about rephrasing your question.)
I've always found it to be better to close off the bracket then hit in with
a full stop.
Ross Simpson
> > English was never one of my strong points. But then I suppose it exists
in
> > any language. It's never too ('am I right here?) late to learn it.
> >
> > > Next I suppose you'll be saying that you "should of" written something
> > > else. I look forward to seeing the chorus of corrections.
> >
> > You better just check that last line for me! :-) According to the ol'
> > Macquarie Dictionary, it sounds right.
>
> Ah, the Macquarie. One of my homesickness books. I checked. It does not
> condone 'should of'. Perhaps they should have pointed out it was wrong?
> But on the next page is the definition of 'Shouse'. Strewth! what a
> fine dictionary it is.
Ah, Not quite I was just checking to make sure the correct 'too' was being
used.
> (for those not in on the joke, the Macquarie is a highly respected
> Australian Dictionary. There is gentle wit in its definitions and
> selections that sounds just right to an Australian)
Presumably, it's still the dictionary being used currently in Australian
Schools today.
> Thanks Ross. That took an hour out of my day. It took that long to put
> the damn thing back on the shelf. Now if I could get a tin of real
> Foster's instead of the revolting pommy muck with the same name, I'd be
> in heaven.
I'm sorry about the time wasting involved :-( I've got the pocket size
Macquarie, so it's more portable.
With Regards,
Ross.
Steve Burton
Errm. what I was *trying* to imply was way back before you'd been
driven away by grammarians trying forcibly to re-educate you ;-)
Stevve.
jmfb...@aol.com
Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Dec 02 12:28:21 GMT
>jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
>
>JC> In article <asl8c9$g...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
>JC> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>JC> > .. but probably not yours :)
>JC>
>JC> You might think that, but the most effective bait is allure
>JC> not reality. :-)
>
> Hence male dress designers (knowing this) design them to reveal
>the reality as a defence against alluring baiters. Also as a source of
>amusement in some cases, such as the atomic school of dress design
>usually seen in 'society' circles (very small with high probability of
>fallout).
That flavor of dress designer is targeting snobbery which mainly
deals with territorial imperative, not reproduction. The two
have relationships.
jmfb...@aol.com
"Ross Simpson" <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
><jmfb...@aol.com> wrote in message...
>
>> Oh, heavens, no! Computers are easier to communicate with than
>> people. If there are any bits on hard, all I had to do is
>> call field service.
>
>Ah? Don't you mean "bits on hand?"
Nope. Hard. I think the hardware types sometimes call it
a latched bit.
> ..(or is this a deliberate attempt to pull
>in further discussion?!) :-)
<grin> Drift on! One of the reasons we laughed at work
was all of the connotations that can be derived from computing.
We (JMF, TW, and I) used to have vigorous debates about
the gender classification of a PDP-10...and the OS it ran.
jmfb...@aol.com
>Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>
>>So my message should look like this.
>
>>---- The Original Message Updated!!----
>>> i hate computers[,] who agrees with me?
>
>>To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>>existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>>machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>>your question).
>
>"etc" needs a period as an abreviation.
<snip>
And my style of writing would also put a comma after abacus;
but then my style was a bane of one of our writers. ;-)
jmfb...@aol.com
"Ross Simpson" <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>
>"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote in message...
>
>> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>> >existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>> >your question).
>>
>> "etc" needs a period as an abreviation.
>
>I thought it did!
>
>> "latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
>
>Well I don't know about that. I'm referning to the
>same machine, if I start
>putting more commas in it people will start thinking I talking about more
>than one machine.
That's not the "rule" I was taught. If you have more than
one adjective describing a noun, commas are required. If
there are no commas, then the first adjective is modifying
the second adjective which is modifying the next word (
whether it be another adjective or noun).
All of this knowledge came from three months of diagramming
sentences. I guess schools don't do that anymore.
<snip>
jmfb...@aol.com
>Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <b...@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <3def0ba5$0$12761$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>
>> rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au "optusnet"
writes:
>
>>But it was still the wrong homophone. "Their" is the possessive form for
>>the third person plural: "their coats" are the coats belonging to them.
>>It is pronounced the same as "there",
>
>Maybe on your side of the pond :)
>
>"their" has an "ur" kind of saound; "there" rhymes with "air."
That way of speaking comes from the other side of the River ;-).
jmfb...@aol.com
>Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <b...@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
>>In article <asnimc$l83$7...@bob.news.rcn.net> jmfb...@aol.com writes:
>
>>> make a similar mistake). I spell the contraction of 'you would'
>>> as you'ld. ....or are we having a pondian moment here?
>
>>BrEnglish usually writes just the 'd (although I've noticed that more
>>recently educated youngsters seem to write 'ld --- but perhaps that's
>>something picked up from AmEnglish somehow or other).
>
>Nope, I've never seen that over here--at least not from a literate
>person :)
>
>hawk, just now noting it was barb's spelling :)
Which one don't you see? you'ld or you'd.
>
>[Maybe it's one of those Massacheusetts things . . .]
Nah. If it's me, it's Michigander of the Holland variety.
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote in message...
>> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>> >existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>> >your question).
>> "latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
>Well I don't know about that. I'm referning to the same machine, if I start
>putting more commas in it people will start thinking I talking about more
>than one machine.
(See fuller response to barb's response.)
Here's the changes though:
>> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>> >existence (from the brain, abacus to the latest, fastest, biggest
>> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>> >your question).
>
>> You have a complete sentence inside your last parentheses, and it should
>> be terminated with punctuation.
>What like this?: (you better think about rephrasing your question.)
>I've always found it to be better to close off the bracket then hit in with
>a full stop.
In most cases, that is correct--generally, the parenthetical remark is
used as a part of speech, such as an adjective or object complement.
Assorted sentence fragements are used in this manner. When it is an
entire sentence, though, it should be properly punctuated.
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>In article <3df12f0d$0$4893$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> "Ross Simpson" <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>>"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote in message...
>>> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
>>> >existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
>>> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
>>> >your question).
>>> "latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
>>Well I don't know about that. I'm referning to the
>>same machine, if I start
>>putting more commas in it people will start thinking I talking about more
>>than one machine.
>That's not the "rule" I was taught. If you have more than
>one adjective describing a noun, commas are required. If
>there are no commas, then the first adjective is modifying
>the second adjective which is modifying the next word (
>whether it be another adjective or noun).
There's two possibilities. As most people would mean the sentence,
"latest," "fastest," and "biggest" are all modifying "machine," which
is what you and I are trying to do. If instead, "latest" is modifying
"fastest," which in turn is modifying "biggest," there would be no
commas--but this would be an awkwared construction anyway :)
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
Steve Burton <st...@sliderule.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:19:55 +1100, "Ross Simpson"
><rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>>> Do you remember, back in the old days, when Ross Simpson used to post
>>> to this group?
<snip>
>Errm. what I was *trying* to imply was way back before you'd been
>driven away by grammarians trying forcibly to re-educate you ;-)
But he's *learning*. He's not only fixing the errors, but seems to be
coming to understand *why* they're errors.
I'd love to have a classroom full of him!
Steve O'Hara-Smith
jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
JC> In article <20021205234237....@eircom.net>,
JC> Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
JC> >On Thu, 05 Dec 02 12:28:21 GMT
JC> >jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
JC> >of amusement in some cases, such as the atomic school of dress design
JC> >usually seen in 'society' circles (very small with high probability
JC> >of fallout).
JC>
JC> That flavor of dress designer is targeting snobbery which mainly
JC> deals with territorial imperative, not reproduction. The two
JC> have relationships.
Oh sure - but I can't help feeling that they are deliberately
taking the piss. I certainly find it funny (rather than enticing) watching
the starlets try and wear these things.
--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirrors
The computer obeys and wins. |A Better Way To Focus The Sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licenses available - see:
| http://www.sohara.org/
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>In article <asr8h6$p...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>>Nope, I've never seen that over here--at least not from a literate
>>person :)
>Which one don't you see? you'ld or you'd.
The 'ld. I've really never seen that before.
hawk
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
I had a new england philosophy professor. It took us a long time to
figure out what he meant by "ideer". Turns out it was "idea" pronounced
to rhyme with "deer" . . .
hawk, who was not only born on the right side of the Mississippi, but on
the right side of the Pecos . . .
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>JC> That flavor of dress designer is targeting snobbery which mainly
>JC> deals with territorial imperative, not reproduction. The two
>JC> have relationships.
> Oh sure - but I can't help feeling that they are deliberately
>taking the piss. I certainly find it funny (rather than enticing) watching
>the starlets try and wear these things.
"I missed the awards program--what wasn't <starlet> wearing?"
hawk
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
>In article <asl8c9$g...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
> ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>>>>Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
>>>>material?
>>>CYA?
>>ours, yes,
>> .. but probably not yours :)
>You might think that, but the most effective bait is allure
>not reality. :-)
Ahh, but when the fabric is used to suggest either that something
*might* be revealed, whether by failing to stay in place, or by
feasible catastrophic fabric failure . . .
You see, if *we* designed them, those system failures would be a bit
more common :)
hawk, who is also fascinated by the physics of a skirt
Kenneth Casselman
>
> In article <3df12f0d$0$4893$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>
> >"Dr. Richard E. Hawkins" <ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu> wrote in message...
>
> >> >To hate computers you're saying that every single computer made in
> >> >existence (from the brain, abacus etc to the latest fastest biggest
> >> >machine know to man) is stupid (you better think about rephrasing
> >> >your question).
>
> >> "latest fastest biggest" should have one or more commas.
>
> >Well I don't know about that. I'm referning to the same machine, if I start
> >putting more commas in it people will start thinking I talking about more
> >than one machine.
>
> (See fuller response to barb's response.)
>
> Here's the changes though:
Ooo, here's another no-no - mixing singular with plural!
Ken
Kenneth Casselman
>
> >In article <asl8c9$g...@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,
> > ha...@slytherin.ds.psu.edu (Dr. Richard E. Hawkins) wrote:
>
> >>>>Oh, come on. If we designed dresses, do you think they's use that much
> >>>>material?
>
> >>>CYA?
>
> >>ours, yes,
>
> >> .. but probably not yours :)
>
> >You might think that, but the most effective bait is allure
> >not reality. :-)
>
> Ahh, but when the fabric is used to suggest either that something
> *might* be revealed, whether by failing to stay in place, or by
> feasible catastrophic fabric failure . . .
>
> You see, if *we* designed them, those system failures would be a bit
> more common :)
>
> hawk, who is also fascinated by the physics of a skirt
> --
Stress analysis of a strapless evening gown?
Ken
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins
You scared me for a moment; I didn't believe I coulld have done such a
thing. But checking, I find that I simply forgot to add the ">" when I
broke a line to respond . . .
Kenneth Casselman
>
> In article <3DF226...@home.com>,
> Kenneth Casselman <ken.casselman!@home.com> wrote:
> >Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
>
> >> In article <3df12f0d$0$4893$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>,
> >> Ross Simpson <rosssimpson@my_spammers_address(optusnet).com.au> wrote:
>
> >> (See fuller response to barb's response.)
>
> >> Here's the changes though:
> > ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
>
> >Ooo, here's another no-no - mixing singular with plural!
>
> You scared me for a moment; I didn't believe I coulld have done such a
> thing. But checking, I find that I simply forgot to add the ">" when I
> broke a line to respond . . .
>
Ah, so it's dump on poor Ross Simpson again is it?
Sorry about that.
Ken
Helmut P. Einfalt
>more common :)
Yep -- but then, who would want to watch the event, knowing that
*when* the system failure occurs at long last, he's just going to see
either a blue screen with a cryptic message, or a line telling him
"kernel panic"...? *g*
Helmut