GothicCode 2000
Shadow Walker
GothicCode (or GothiCode)?
Shadow
Fragile Creation
Shadow Walker <Shado...@DeathsDoor.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:881ut6$462$1...@nntp8.atl.mindspring.net...
> Why not just make up a new code and call it
> GothicCode (or GothiCode)?
>
> Shadow
Why not just put this topic to sleep?
-erica
Shadow Walker
Cuz goffs are jonesin' for their Gothic Codes. You know,
spontaneous human combustion, and all that? Could be an hazard,
you know?
Shadow
GothiCode Z934f88s8e44i@3w#4Q00x*y^2P2dC3PO(<8-)
BSyFuY1776Ph#1-608-784-9180Pe500cats...etc.etc...
David Gerard
:Why not just make up a new code and call it
:GothicCode (or GothiCode)?
A GNU GNothCode, obviously.
(The Free Culture Foundation?)
--
http://xenu.netizen.com.au/ http://www.caube.org.au/
"O, the lusingest thing about lusers/ Is: a luser's the lusingest thing/ Their
heads are made out of jelly/ And their brains made out of wet string/ They're
stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid/ Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb/ But the lusingest
thing about lusers:/ There's always more than one!" (henke)
The Steel Wolf
Gerard) scripsit:
>On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:28:50 -0700, Shadow Walker <Shado...@DeathsDoor.com.nospam> wrote:
>:Why not just make up a new code and call it
>:GothicCode (or GothiCode)?
>A GNU GNothCode, obviously.
Actually, when I made a proposal for the establishment of a new code
similar in nature to the Goth.Code at approximately the same time as
Shadow Walker, I had it firmly in my mind to make it Copyleft so that
something like this current fiasco would never be able to happen
again. If a new code is indeed made, I think that the GNU Public
License (or something very similar) is the most sensible way to go.
Unfortunately, I've not heard anything to indicate a public interest
at this point. It's obvious from the number of people who still have
their Goth.Codes on their Web pages and in their .sigs that the
original was popular, but whether a new code would see such popularity
I don't know.
--
"Because you can't cotton to evil. No sir. You have to smack evil
on the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of justice and say, 'Bad
evil. Bad, BAD evil.'"
- David Gerard <f...@thingy.apana.org.au>
Remove the anti-spam dongle to reply via e-mail.
The Lollipop Trollop
2000 00:02:34 GMT:
<snip>
>Unfortunately, I've not heard anything to indicate a public interest
>at this point. It's obvious from the number of people who still have
>their Goth.Codes on their Web pages and in their .sigs that the
>original was popular, but whether a new code would see such popularity
>I don't know.
I, for one, would be interested, but I just like playing with .sig
codes. (Yes, I know, I have no life.)
I recall discussing something similar with a friend some time ago, and
she seemed to think it would be a good idea. We were coming up with
lots of categories that we wanted added to the GothCode [1], but synic
had already declared GothCode 98 to be the last version. We considered
writing our own, but since the GothCode was still available online, we
decided we *really* didn't want to provoke a reaction of, "Who *are*
these people and *why* are they attempting to rewrite/rip off the
GothCode?"
Lurve and glitter,
*~*anathema*~* (labelling things for fun and profit)
[1] I feel bad for only remembering one of them now. :(
The Lollipop Trollop: Now with added pretension and a fun cherry-like flavor!
Miscellany- http://www.morethanmortal.com
Vanity- http://www.morethanmortal.com/anathema
(My webpages are in mid-redesign. Please excuse the mess.)
David Gerard
:--
:"Because you can't cotton to evil. No sir. You have to smack evil
: on the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of justice and say, 'Bad
: evil. Bad, BAD evil.'"
: - David Gerard <f...@thingy.apana.org.au>
That was a quote from The Tick, not me.
The Steel Wolf
Gerard) scripsit:
>On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 00:02:34 GMT, The Steel Wolf <stee...@mmcable.com> wrote:
>:"Because you can't cotton to evil. No sir. You have to smack evil
>: on the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of justice and say, 'Bad
>: evil. Bad, BAD evil.'"
>: - David Gerard <f...@thingy.apana.org.au>
>That was a quote from The Tick, not me.
Really? Thank you very much for pointing that out. I'll correct the
attribution immediately.
Curgoth (Matt Andrews)
>On Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:28:50 -0700, Shadow Walker
<Shado...@DeathsDoor.com.nospam> wrote:
>
>:Why not just make up a new code and call it
>:GothicCode (or GothiCode)?
>
>
>A GNU GNothCode, obviously.
GINGoC
GINGoC Is Not the GOth Code
--
Dream Well...
Curgoth
exil...@my-deja.com
stee...@mmcable.com (The Steel Wolf) wrote:
> Actually, when I made a proposal for the establishment of a new code
> similar in nature to the Goth.Code at approximately the same time as
> Shadow Walker, I had it firmly in my mind to make it Copyleft so that
> something like this current fiasco would never be able to happen
> again. If a new code is indeed made, I think that the GNU Public
> License (or something very similar) is the most sensible way to go.
>
> Unfortunately, I've not heard anything to indicate a public interest
> at this point. It's obvious from the number of people who still have
> their Goth.Codes on their Web pages and in their .sigs that the
> original was popular, but whether a new code would see such popularity
> I don't know.
A new code prolly would see popularity, but you will not find many
people endorsing it right now because [let's face it] it'll be a bitch
to make. I believe that Narnia [bless her neo-Scottish soul] expressed
interest.
I, for one, have very little else to do with my time right now. I'll do
it. I'll make a webpage for it. I'll post it to Usenet even. I will
even give it a silly name, like "Codex Gothica", or some such.
Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
Rawk.
Regards,
The Exiled, Version 2.0
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
Miss Danii
toxic green crayon :
>A new code prolly would see popularity, but you will not find many
>people endorsing it right now because [let's face it] it'll be a bitch
>to make. I believe that Narnia [bless her neo-Scottish soul] expressed
>interest.
>
>I, for one, have very little else to do with my time right now. I'll do
>it. I'll make a webpage for it. I'll post it to Usenet even. I will
>even give it a silly name, like "Codex Gothica", or some such.
>
>Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
>something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
I gave a similar reply before but anyway
Well I've been thinking.
I never looked at the old gothcode as I thought it was kinda silly
But if a list of what questions and what possible permutations the
answers could have
eg. a multiple choice Q like
What color is your hair
a. brown
b. black.
c. blonde
Or some thing where there is a grade on it
like what is your sexuality on the (whatsist called?) kinsey scale)
etc etc
Was put together I'd be quite happy to code a decoder/encoder for java
and C versions to get my brain into gear for the the start of the
first semester...
>
>Rawk.
>
>Regards,
>The Exiled, Version 2.0
daniel - Who has some neat compression ideas already
--
http://yallara.cs.rmit.edu.au/~dhthomas/ <-- Under Construction
http://linuxguiden.linpro.no/protesteng.php <--- Sign this dammit
Damned corporations.....
http://www.mp3.com/gdm/ <--Various Musical Offcuts and tracks I never Plan to
release any other way
Giolla Decair
<Pine.GSO.4.10.100021...@ux8.cso.uiuc.edu> saying:
>On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 exil...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
>> something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
>original "author" is throwing a tempertantrum....
Or just steal ideas from all the other .sig codes there are out there,
and there are a surprising number of them.
[snip]
> Doesn't anyone just have a copy of the criteria for the old one
>somewhere? It'd just be one hell of a lot less.... painful.
Or just someone make up a bare bones type thing, and then get feed
back. And adjust it if they can be arsed.
Which reminds me I really need to update the bob and tove codes? If
anyone want's to steal from those feel free, I can't recall where I
stole half of them from.
--
Giolla Decair
"Just bring me something real/Something to make me feel
more truth is what I need/Never mind if it makes me bleed"
- On the edge / Oyster Band
The Steel Wolf
scripsit:
>I, for one, have very little else to do with my time right now. I'll do
>it. I'll make a webpage for it. I'll post it to Usenet even. I will
>even give it a silly name, like "Codex Gothica", or some such.
>Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
>something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
Actually, I've already started on a new code. I have introductory
remarks, global modifiers, and the vocation/education sections
completed. Personally, I think it would be an excellent idea for this
to be a collaborative project, much like the development of Linux.
I'll copy the file over to my hard drive and e-mail it to you this
afternoon.
As far as the style that I've been pursuing so far, I decided to scrap
the Goth.Code 98 style due to the number of complaints people seemed
to have about it not providing easily visually-decodable information.
For inspiration, I've been working from a copy of the Goth.Code v3.1
that I had archived and the most recent Geek Code, so you can probably
get an idea of the visual format.
I'll also upload the files to my Web site (currently nonexistent, as I
just moved to this address recently, but I'll post the URL later)
within a day or two so interested parties can have easier access to
the code for collaborative purposes.
As for the name, I think that GothicCode 2000 is quite good, provided
that Shadow Walker gives her blessing on its use. Does anyone else
have thoughts on this?
--
"Because you can't cotton to evil. No sir. You have to smack evil
on the nose with the rolled-up newspaper of justice and say, 'Bad
evil. Bad, BAD evil.'"
- The Tick
David Gerard
:Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
:something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
:Before you buy.
Make it somewhat human-readable. GC 3 was almost human-readable, GC 98
wasn't.
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
kra...@depechemode.com.SPAMTRAP (Miss Danii) wrote:
> I gave a similar reply before but anyway
> Well I've been thinking.
> I never looked at the old gothcode as I thought it was kinda silly
> But if a list of what questions and what possible permutations the
> answers could have
> eg. a multiple choice Q like
> What color is your hair
> a. brown
> b. black.
> c. blonde
> Or some thing where there is a grade on it
> like what is your sexuality on the (whatsist called?) kinsey scale)
> etc etc
> Was put together I'd be quite happy to code a decoder/encoder for java
> and C versions to get my brain into gear for the the start of the
> first semester...
As I mentioned in the reply I made to you earlier post, I'm keeping
your email addy handy. When something gets together, I'll let you know.
:)
Regards,
The Exiled, Version 2.0
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
stee...@mmcable.com (The Steel Wolf) wrote:
> Actually, I've already started on a new code. I have introductory
> remarks, global modifiers, and the vocation/education sections
> completed. Personally, I think it would be an excellent idea for this
> to be a collaborative project, much like the development of Linux.
> I'll copy the file over to my hard drive and e-mail it to you this
> afternoon.
Excellent. Just use the address impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net, and not
whatever else Deja has a tedency to put up there. Anyhow, That sounds
like an excellent idea. At the very least, I'll act as a central
coordinator - I am sure that a lot of people are better then me at
coding.
> As far as the style that I've been pursuing so far, I decided to scrap
> the Goth.Code 98 style due to the number of complaints people seemed
> to have about it not providing easily visually-decodable information.
> For inspiration, I've been working from a copy of the Goth.Code v3.1
> that I had archived and the most recent Geek Code, so you can probably
> get an idea of the visual format.
Good idea. Although I liked GothCode98 [as the encryption was superbly
complex], it was a bit difficult to read.
> As for the name, I think that GothicCode 2000 is quite good, provided
> that Shadow Walker gives her blessing on its use. Does anyone else
> have thoughts on this?
It's as good as anything else. My fake Latin name can be used as an
interim if there is any particular objection to it.
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
f...@thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard) wrote:
> Make it somewhat human-readable. GC 3 was almost human-readable, GC 98
> wasn't.
Jawohl, Reverend. *does a smart salute* I would be more tended to
operate by the "shake and bake" then "biological chemistry formulas"
approach.
Miss Danii
writ in bright toxic green crayon :
>On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:22:33 GMT, exil...@my-deja.com <exil...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>:Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
>:something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
>:Before you buy.
>
>
>Make it somewhat human-readable. GC 3 was almost human-readable, GC 98
>wasn't.
Aaaaaaw but I remember s*n*c being somewhat proud or at least sounding
that way of fitting the gothcode in a line and a half and I bet I
could half that size and still have more information encoded in it
given a half decent compression system....
I mean if it only took up one line of precious .sig space then there
would be far more inducement to have one
Hell if a set of questions and can be agreed upon and a format[1] for
their basic encoding also....
Actualy thinking about it I can put it together straight off the bat
now... Complete with a scripting system.
So therefore I am requesting comments on my ideas on the
implementation of this... And also whether this system would be better
than the other development line involving a semi (but not realy) human
readable form so I can be involved in whatever system is better...
thereaby avoiding duplication of effort
Part 1 Scripting
Here is a draft on how the scripting would work
All variables would be integers varying between 0-9
and all integers variable or constants would be prefaced by
"%"
So a constant would be something like
"%1" or "%8"
And a variable would always be
"%?"
Comments would be prefaced by "#" for example and would continue to be
comments until the end of the line
"#This is a comment"
All input would be controlled by commands called by prefacing the
command with an "~"
For example "~digits(%?)" would allow the user to enter a single digit
at that point. in the script
or "~digits(%?%?%?) would force the user to enter 3 digits for the
input to be valid at that point
and "~select(
%0 First Option
%1 Second Option
%2 Third option)"
Would give the user a menu of options
As would
"~select(
%0%1 January
%0%2 Febuary
%0%3 March
%0%4 April
%0%5 May
%0%6 June
%0%7 July
%0%8 August
%0%9 September
%1%0 October
%1%1 November
%1%2 December)"
Or
"~select(
%0 True
%1 False)"
Any suggestions on other commands and their syntax or improvments on
the definition of current would be most welcome.
All text not preceded by a "%", "#" or "~" would be displayed as close
to the original formating of the text file as the display system will
allow.
So the simple script
"
#gothic mockup
#designed by kraant
#16/2/2000
Sex?
~select(
%0 Male
%1 Female
%2 Other)
Date of Birth?...
Day ~digits(%?%?), Month ~digits(%?%?), Year ~digits(%?%?%?%?)
"
Would Yield an input page in the form of
"
Sex?
( ) Male
( ) Female
( ) Other
Date of Birth?...
Day [??], Month [??], Year [????]
"
etc etc
Part 2 Compression
Compression will be based on a simple system which depends on the most
common answers being represented by smaller numbers.
Encoding will be done as shown below
The numbers 0-9 are equivalent to the binary values shown below
0 --> 0
1 --> 10
2 --> 110
3 --> 1110
4 --> 11110
5 --> 1111100
6 --> 1111101
7 --> 1111110
8 --> 11111110
9 --> 11111111
Assuming that the questions are answered with the following values
Date of birth 19/04/1980
Sex M(0)
Favourite Drink - Cider (049)
Love-Life - Happily taken (3)
We'd get a sequence of input to the compression agent
1, 9, 0, 4, 1, 9, 8, 0, 0, 0, 4, 9, 3,
Which would be turned into
10, 11111111, 0, 11110, 10, 11111111, 11111110, 0, 0, 0, 11110,
11111111, 1110,
ie
101111111101111010111111111111111000011110111111111110
Which divided into 7 bit sequences (for conversion to 7 bit unsigned
ascii
1011111, 1110111, 1010111, 1111111, 1111100, 0011110, 1111111,
11110(00) <--- The appended two bits on the end may be any value and
are ignored by the decoding software.
Unfortunately I get stuck at this point in design because some of the
ascii codes which are outputed by this scheme are non-printable chars
Any suggestions on a solution?
daniel - Rooting for the high tech toy factor
Dave Thorn
<kra...@depechemode.com.SPAMTRAP> wrote in message
<38aaad37...@news.bigpond.com>:
>
>Encoding will be done as shown below
>
>The numbers 0-9 are equivalent to the binary values shown below
>
>0 --> 0
>1 --> 10
>2 --> 110
>3 --> 1110
>4 --> 11110
>5 --> 1111100
>6 --> 1111101
>7 --> 1111110
>8 --> 11111110
>9 --> 11111111
>
hang on, this is't base 2 counting. Either you're getting confused,
or are making your own binary counting system.
0 == 0
1 == 1
2 == 10
3 == 11
4 == 100
5 == 101
6 == 110
7 == 111
8 == 1000
9 == 1001
or am I get my counting confused as well?
--
#include <disclaimer.h>
Glenn Olson
<ra...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 exil...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>> Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
>> something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
>
> Why not just blatantly plagurize the old one? Just because the
>original "author" is throwing a tempertantrum....
Because he's expressed willingness to invoke copyright law.
Empty
The old version weren't protected. I think it'd be a slimy thing to do
regardless, but he hasn't a legal leg to stand on in that event.
~Empty
------------------------------------------------------------
You are really pretty! |
Tried to lick your wounds, | -Bane, waxing poetic
tongue full of monitor dust. |
http://www.sinclairbrowning.com/emptyspaces
Marcus Pan
wrote:
>The old version weren't protected. I think it'd be a slimy thing to do
>regardless, but he hasn't a legal leg to stand on in that event.
That would be someone throwing a childish hissy fit over not having it
just as much as Peter is throwing about having it. No stooping,
please.
===>StealthGoth Pan<===Editor of Legends
Legends - http://www.legendsmagazine.net
The Pan Pages - http://www.zenweb.com/pan
N.G-D - http://www.zenweb.com/pan/netgoth
siani evans
exil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
> something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
>
why not? i think it would be funny to piss Caffin off more. besides, i
really liked the first few gothcodes- they were silly.
siani
--
\\||//
- oo -
-|--|- (hedgehog)
siani evans
Glenn Olson wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 09:46:32 -0600, christopher john raehl
> <ra...@students.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 exil...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> >> Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
> >> something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
> >
> > Why not just blatantly plagurize the old one? Just because the
> >original "author" is throwing a tempertantrum....
>
> Because he's expressed willingness to invoke copyright law.
i'm pretty sure he never said anything about the first few being
copyright. i don't remember the later ones, because i left for a few
(4) years, but i'm pretty certain he never said anything about copyright
on the first few. and quite frankly he'd have a hell of a time proving
anything. so i reckon we could all blatantly rip off gc1 or 2.
siani evans
Miss Danii wrote:
> Encoding will be done as shown below
>
> The numbers 0-9 are equivalent to the binary values shown below
>
> 0 --> 0
> 1 --> 10
> 2 --> 110
> 3 --> 1110
> 4 --> 11110
> 5 --> 1111100
> 6 --> 1111101
> 7 --> 1111110
> 8 --> 11111110
> 9 --> 11111111
>
> Assuming that the questions are answered with the following values
>
> Date of birth 19/04/1980
> Sex M(0)
> Favourite Drink - Cider (049)
> Love-Life - Happily taken (3)
>
> We'd get a sequence of input to the compression agent
>
> 1, 9, 0, 4, 1, 9, 8, 0, 0, 0, 4, 9, 3,
>
> Which would be turned into
>
> 10, 11111111, 0, 11110, 10, 11111111, 11111110, 0, 0, 0, 11110,
> 11111111, 1110,
>
> ie
>
> 101111111101111010111111111111111000011110111111111110
>
> Which divided into 7 bit sequences (for conversion to 7 bit unsigned
> ascii
>
> 1011111, 1110111, 1010111, 1111111, 1111100, 0011110, 1111111,
> 11110(00) <--- The appended two bits on the end may be any value and
> are ignored by the decoding software.
>
> Unfortunately I get stuck at this point in design because some of the
> ascii codes which are outputed by this scheme are non-printable chars
>
> Any suggestions on a solution?
>
well, that just made my eyes bug out. i sure as hell couldn't be
bothered with a code that i couldn't figure out without a translator.
i vote for something along the lines of gothcode 1. i could actually
read that one. really, to be perfectly honest, i don't think many
people want to be bothered translating someones gothcode if it's not
human readable, and i don't think a lot of people would bother using a
code no one bothers to look at.
siani
--
\\||//
- oo -
-|--|- (hedgehog)
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> exil...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Anyone else want to join in? I'm going to have a lot of fun creating
> > something new and making sure I don't blatantly plagiarize the old one.
> >
>
> why not? i think it would be funny to piss Caffin off more. besides, i
> really liked the first few gothcodes- they were silly.
I don't think that it's either funny or likely to piss Peter off any
more. It's just lame.
<Cartman>
So you guys are going to rip off this other guy's work. That's totally
weak, dude.
</Cartman>
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"Since I've given up food, I can really taste my cigarettes."
http://hyperion.humsoc.utas.edu.au/qzd
Greylock
<snip 170 odd lines of quoted text>
>well, that just made my eyes bug out.
If you are so damn wonderful and so damn old skool, why do you keep making
*really* silly errors?
----
H*ydn
"beauty ends in decay, even in a particle accelerator."
- St Albatross
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
>why not? i think it would be funny to piss Caffin off more.
>besides, i really liked the first few gothcodes- they were silly.
*sigh* The purpose is not to piss Synic off. Actually, the idea doesn't
even faze him. Not that it should, anyhow.
Glenn Olson
(Mr Q. Z. Diablo) wrote:
><Cartman>
>
>So you guys are going to rip off this other guy's work. That's totally
>weak, dude.
>
></Cartman>
Context kind of kills that line.
Cartman would be the first person to rip off some other guy's work.
exil...@my-deja.com
dia...@prometheus.humsoc.utas.edu.au (Mr Q. Z. Diablo) wrote:
>I don't think that it's either funny or likely to piss Peter off any
>more. It's just lame.
The GothicCode 2000 [working title] is not intended to piss off people.
Actually, I sincerely doubt it will have any emotional impact on people
whatsoever. It may be a lame project, but we're enjoying working on it.
*shrug*
>So you guys are going to rip off this other guy's work. That's
>totally weak, dude.
No part of the former GothCode will be plagiarized. While the
GothicCode 2000 will bear resemblence to prior GothCodes, and be based
in part on them. this will be no different then the GothCode resembling
the GeekCode. Otherwise, the GothicCode 2000 will be a different work,
with the GothCode being a spiritual ancestor, rather then a direct
physical ancestor.
impe...@webmail.bellsouth.net
siani evans <sia...@home.com> wrote:
>i'm pretty sure he never said anything about the first few being
>copyright. i don't remember the later ones, because i left for a few
>(4) years, but i'm pretty certain he never said anything about
>copyright on the first few. and quite frankly he'd have a hell of a
>time proving anything. so i reckon we could all blatantly rip off
>gc1 or 2.
In prior discussion with Synic, and also with the agreement of the
workers on the project, the GothicCode 2000 will not blatantly rip off
the GothCode. While it may be based in part on the GothCode, and
resemble it after a fashion, etc, etc. Already posted on this. Same
answer.
siani evans
Greylock wrote:
>
> Last episode siani evans <sia...@home.com> said:
>
> <snip 170 odd lines of quoted text>
>
> >well, that just made my eyes bug out.
>
> If you are so damn wonderful and so damn old skool, why do you keep making
> *really* silly errors?
>
because i am also very lazy.
and i am using a free @home service which doesn't always get things in a
logical order. for instance, this arrived on march 1st.
and i finally read the post which was previously mentioned two days
after i sent mine.
anyway, jeez, don't get your knickers in a knot, it's just my opinion.
feel free to ignore it. i ignore ones i don't like. :)
Greylock
>Greylock wrote:
>>
>> Last episode siani evans <sia...@home.com> said:
>>
>> <snip 170 odd lines of quoted text>
>
Don't make others pay for your laziness.
Surely you've seen this argument before?
>and i am using a free @home service which doesn't always get things in a
>logical order.
I pay for each and every byte I download.
UK people pay for every second they are on-line.
It is very good netizen's duty to help reduce mindless bandwidth waste, so
we might waste bandwidth in a more useful manner.
>anyway, jeez, don't get your knickers in a knot, it's just my opinion.
>feel free to ignore it. i ignore ones i don't like. :)
Your opinion didn't even register.
It was the fact you failed to *snip* 170+ lines of needlessly quoted text.
Since no one else had jumped on you for it, I decided to roll out the
Arpebnator.
Teknomancer
Greylock wrote:
>
>
> I pay for each and every byte I download.
> UK people pay for every second they are on-line.
Well, those that don't run the news server at work anyway....<ahem>
Sod it, if I'm still here at 01:15 they can spare me some bandwidth! How
I love working in IT....
--
Teknomancer:
"Technology of a sufficiently advanced level will be indistinguishable
from
magic"
Arthur C Clarke