You know when computers have taken over your life when...
Binah
the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the contents fell out. For
a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo" button was.
Zoinks!
Hmm, I didn't mark this post OT. O.K., here's my on topic bit! Ain't
Mulder such a complete babe? He is a *damn* fine lookin' man. If I
didn't think he already was completely in love with Scully, I'd Mary
Sue myself into the plot somehow and provide that beautiful tortured
man all the comfort he needed out of the pure goodness of my heart
<snort>. I think Bree Sharp had the right idea about Scully!
--
Binah
XFW #1013 ggg
SMUTster#1013
========================================================================
Brain:"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
Pinky:"I think so Brain, but where are we going to find chaps our size?"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Marilyn Mosher
trying to see whether Scully was wearing pants or a skirt in
Revelations. (No detail too small for an ISTJ)
Marilyn
>This morning I goofed by trying to close a huge binder without closing
>the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the contents fell out. For
>a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo" button was.
>Binah
Mopsee
mos...@nbnet.nb.ca (Marilyn Mosher) wrote:
> Last week I found myself trying to scroll down with the TV remote,
> trying to see whether Scully was wearing pants or a skirt in
> Revelations. (No detail too small for an ISTJ)
>
Okay, here's one...
Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip and
when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the receiving end is
familiar with netspeak.
Mopsee~~
--
We should consider every day lost on which we
have not danced at least once.----->Nietzsche
-V-
wrote:
>Last week I found myself trying to scroll down with the TV remote,
>trying to see whether Scully was wearing pants or a skirt in
>Revelations. (No detail too small for an ISTJ)
You know technology has taken over your life when....
Once I tried to open my front door with my automatic car door opener. Only when
I set my car alarm off did I realize the error of my ways ;) I was tired.
Uh...yeah, really tired.
--V, INFP with an unpredictable J
===========================================================
-V- !BOYCOTT FOX! || Down with Herzog.
**I** "In all chaos there is a cosmos, in all disorder a secret order."
X ~DWBOMXI, RR, D!S!D!B: OPoM~
Kristen, Bassoonist Extraordinaire!
Mopsee <elia...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:83orhn$clu$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <385f9fcf...@allnews.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> mos...@nbnet.nb.ca (Marilyn Mosher) wrote:
> > Last week I found myself trying to scroll down with the TV remote,
> > trying to see whether Scully was wearing pants or a skirt in
> > Revelations. (No detail too small for an ISTJ)
> >
>
> Okay, here's one...
>
> Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
> scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip and
> when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the receiving end is
> familiar with netspeak.
I've actually done that before. My friends just looked at me funny. And I've
been caught saying 'aieeee' which looks a lot cooler than it sounds.
Definitely a written exclamation only. ;-) As is 'Woo Hoo', which I have
also been known to say. And when I'm writing something with a pen and paper
(ancient tools of communication) and I write something that is supposed to
be funny, I write little sideways smiley faces. And oooh, wait, one more.
When I'm writing with pen and I want to emphasize a word, instead of
underlining it, I sometimes draw little asterisks on either side of it like
*this*. There should be a support group for this kind of thing...
--
~Kristen
*Bassoonist Extraordinaire*
--
*I* "I am you and you are me and we are all together"
XFW # 17 (WotF - Floor Division)
S.M.U.T.ster #2 :::Bring it on:::
Official keeper of the SMUT Chocolate
http://members.xoom.com/Kristen_b_e/
Proud owner of MulderClone #49,384
*Where is Cuddles?
--
BlueStar
Kristen, Bassoonist Extraordinaire! wrote:
>>
>> Okay, here's one...
>>
>> Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
>> scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip and
>> when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the receiving end is
>> familiar with netspeak.
>
>I've actually done that before. My friends just looked at me funny. And
I've
>been caught saying 'aieeee' which looks a lot cooler than it sounds.
>Definitely a written exclamation only. ;-) As is 'Woo Hoo', which I have
>also been known to say. And when I'm writing something with a pen and paper
>(ancient tools of communication) and I write something that is supposed to
>be funny, I write little sideways smiley faces. And oooh, wait, one more.
>When I'm writing with pen and I want to emphasize a word, instead of
>underlining it, I sometimes draw little asterisks on either side of it like
>*this*. There should be a support group for this kind of thing...
>
I do that too! We're required to keep journals for English class at school,
but we can pick out topic. Every week I write about the latest XF ep, and at
the beginning of this school year I caught myself using asterisks for
emphasis, the abbreviations DD, GA, CC, and using netspeak (like LOL, <g>,
ROTFLMAO, etc). I stopped myself for a while, but I finally gave in to the
pull of netspeak. No one reads those journals, after all. And if anyone ever
does, then they'll know how I feel about Amor Fati and the Smashing Pumpkins
new album. Oh yeah, tons of dirty tidbits there ;-)
Hobbs
--
SMUTster #17
Wife of Robbsie, Jewlzie, and Kool Kristen
"The Basic Con:
Those who can't find anything to live for,
always invent something to die for.
Then they want the rest of us to die for it, too."
np: The Smashing Pumpkins - "The Everlasting Gaze"
listen for the new SP single, "The Everlasting Gaze"--
Now in Rotation on a radio station near you!
Ellie Presner
> This morning I goofed by trying to close a huge binder without closing
> the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the contents fell out. For
> a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo" button was.
<snip>
Right!! And I hate it when I'm reading a book and want to find something
that was mentioned earlier on in the book... but there's no Find or
Search key combo to press!
Ellie
--
"I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I
only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments
that differentiate me from a doormat."
-- Rebecca West, 1913
Scullycat2
>when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the receiving end is
>familiar with netspeak.
I frequently find myself saying, "TTYL" or "TTFN" to people in RL.
Cathi K
http://scullycat2.tsx.org
***************************
"I believe in the faith that grows
and the four right chords can make me cry
When I'm with you I feel like I could die
and that would be all right."
- Third Eye Blind
Kristen, Bassoonist Extraordinaire!
Mopsee <elia...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:83pi51$s5r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> "Kristen, Bassoonist Extraordinaire!" <DANAM...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> > Mopsee <elia...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>
> > > Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
> > > scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip
> > > and when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the
> > > receiving end is familiar with netspeak.
> >
> > I've actually done that before.
>
> I'm feeling better already. I mean, not that I get pleasure out of
> others' dorkiness, it's just that dorkiness loves company. ;)
I hear ya, sister. ;-)
>
> > My friends just looked at me funny. And I've
> > been caught saying 'aieeee' which looks a lot cooler than it sounds.
> > Definitely a written exclamation only. ;-) As is 'Woo Hoo',
>
> I always say "woo hoo" and never thought there was anything wrong with
> it! Am I in need of a clue or something?!
Well, all I know is that I sound rather odd when I say it. Kinda like when I
try to be all cool and say "You go girl!" I'm just way to white to pull it
off. I sound like an idiot saying certain things, or at least I think I do
judging by the reactions I get from people. I have a feeling that 'aieee'
would sound a little off coming from anyone though. ;-)
>
> > which I have
> > also been known to say. And when I'm writing something with a pen and
> > paper(ancient tools of communication) and I write something that is
> > supposed to be funny, I write little sideways smiley faces. And oooh,
> > wait, one more. When I'm writing with pen and I want to emphasize a
> > word, instead of underlining it, I sometimes draw little asterisks on
> > either side of it like *this*. There should be a support group for
> > this kind of thing...
>
> LOL!!! These last two really got me, because, well, first off, I
> rarely write anything by hand anymore. This past semester, however, I
> was a teaching assistant in a philosophy course and as part of my
> duties I had to edit first-draft essay papers, which involved making
> extensive commentary. I, too, found myself making little *'s instead of
> underlining. And, in a few cases where I wrote joking comments on the
> papers of the students I'm on a more familiar basis with, I was....
> SO.... tempted to make the sideways smilies, but opted for either
> regular smilies or no smilies at all. Either way, it just felt wrong,
> but the sideways smilie also seems wrong in the handwritten medium, so
> what choice are we left with? I suppose we could go back to good ol'
> fashioned "making your writing clear enough that the joke, sarcasm,
> humor, etc. is evident without using emoticons," but, well...
>
What?! You mean actually putting in the effort into the writing to show the
sarcasm without needing a cute little wink? Are you trying to work me to
death?? ;-D (see, this was much easier!)
> I've grown so lazy, what can I say. ;)
You're not alone... ;-)
Mopsee
> Mopsee <elia...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
> > scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip
> > and when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the
> > receiving end is familiar with netspeak.
>
> I've actually done that before.
I'm feeling better already. I mean, not that I get pleasure out of
others' dorkiness, it's just that dorkiness loves company. ;)
> My friends just looked at me funny. And I've
> been caught saying 'aieeee' which looks a lot cooler than it sounds.
> Definitely a written exclamation only. ;-) As is 'Woo Hoo',
I always say "woo hoo" and never thought there was anything wrong with
it! Am I in need of a clue or something?!
> which I have
> also been known to say. And when I'm writing something with a pen and
> paper(ancient tools of communication) and I write something that is
> supposed to be funny, I write little sideways smiley faces. And oooh,
> wait, one more. When I'm writing with pen and I want to emphasize a
> word, instead of underlining it, I sometimes draw little asterisks on
> either side of it like *this*. There should be a support group for
> this kind of thing...
LOL!!! These last two really got me, because, well, first off, I
rarely write anything by hand anymore. This past semester, however, I
was a teaching assistant in a philosophy course and as part of my
duties I had to edit first-draft essay papers, which involved making
extensive commentary. I, too, found myself making little *'s instead of
underlining. And, in a few cases where I wrote joking comments on the
papers of the students I'm on a more familiar basis with, I was....
SO.... tempted to make the sideways smilies, but opted for either
regular smilies or no smilies at all. Either way, it just felt wrong,
but the sideways smilie also seems wrong in the handwritten medium, so
what choice are we left with? I suppose we could go back to good ol'
fashioned "making your writing clear enough that the joke, sarcasm,
humor, etc. is evident without using emoticons," but, well...
I've grown so lazy, what can I say. ;)
Mopsee~~
Katrina
>This morning I goofed by trying to close a huge binder without closing
>the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the contents fell out. For
>a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo" button was.
>
<g>
Every time I use "undo" in one of the evil MS products, I shout the following:
"Do over! Do over!"...
I'm sure my cube neighbors appreciate it.
Katrina <--has stuffed monkeys perched on her cube, and waiting for the
flamingo lights to come from Archie McPhee
^..^
"We now return you to FX's Secret Barret Malathon"
-- Dean Haglund <--fuckin' up
Doug Herzog Y1 -- or maybe not.
Sean Carroll
<poro...@bellatlantic.spam!net> wrote:
>> Every time I use "undo" in one of the evil MS products, I shout the
>following:
>> "Do over! Do over!"...
>
>"evil"? why is that?
In what way is M$ anything *but* evil?
--Sean
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/9613/
‘The ends may justify the means, as long as there is something which justifies the ends.’
--Leon Trotsky
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Paul Poroshin
Katrina
Given a choice, I would use the old, blue screen WordPerfect until I die. Plus
I like Lotus 1-2-3 v. 3.1. For *DOS*. I still use the / command menu in the
newer version of 1-2-3.
And I use OS/2 sometimes at work.
Katrina <--never movin' to Redmond
Katrina
>In what way is M$ anything *but* evil?
"The day Microsoft makes something that *doesn't* suck is the day Microsoft
starts making vacuum cleaners."
Katrina
Mo
"Sean Carroll" <
> In what way is M$ anything *but* evil?
Well they are *bound* to be evil because they are successful.
Paul Poroshin
>
> Given a choice, I would use the old, blue screen WordPerfect until I die.
Plus
> I like Lotus 1-2-3 v. 3.1. For *DOS*. I still use the / command menu in
the
> newer version of 1-2-3.
I dont know... i love my Office 2000 with Word. That's the best program for
word-processing i ever used (and i used a lot, including the blue-screen WP
5.1 that you mentioned above).
i guess after using Word for so long (95, then 97, now 2000), i know every
little feature it has, and can pretty much do anything possible with it :-)
but this is like a gripe i have, because unlike 99% (the other 1% being
Microsoft employees and myself)of the people, i actually LIKE Microsoft
products. Mostly I just use their OS, Office and Internet (and all that
comes with it) software, and not much else, and i played a few of their
games (something that, in my opinion, they shouldn't stick to :-)).
I think they make great software, and i rarely (if ever) have problems with
it.
Molly
<big snip>
> Katrina <--has stuffed monkeys perched on her cube, and waiting for the
> flamingo lights to come from Archie McPhee
I love Archie McPhee. JTIS.
--Molly :)
who used to have an eyeball, smiley face, rubber rat, and ants t-shirt from
AMcP.
Boondoggler
> >"evil"? why is that?
> >
> > Given a choice, I would use the old, blue screen WordPerfect until I die.
> Plus
> > I like Lotus 1-2-3 v. 3.1. For *DOS*. I still use the / command menu in
> the
> > newer version of 1-2-3.
>
> I dont know... i love my Office 2000 with Word. That's the best program for
> word-processing i ever used (and i used a lot, including the blue-screen WP
> 5.1 that you mentioned above).
> i guess after using Word for so long (95, then 97, now 2000), i know every
> little feature it has, and can pretty much do anything possible with it :-)
If you can show me where Word has a "reveal codes" option that's as good
as WordPerfect's, then maybe, just maybe, I'll consider elevating it up
a bit on my list. (And I don't want that silly option that puts in the
paragraph symbols for you...I want everything: Tabs, Margins,
Paragraphs, spaces, etc, etc, etc.)
--
Boondoggler
XFW1114, ggg, MBC
MiGiS7 - wire rims or bust!
Paul Poroshin
> as WordPerfect's, then maybe, just maybe, I'll consider elevating it up
> a bit on my list. (And I don't want that silly option that puts in the
> paragraph symbols for you...I want everything: Tabs, Margins,
> Paragraphs, spaces, etc, etc, etc.)
>
i have no need for that, and thought it was very annoying when i turned that
on by mistake in WP 5.1
why do you need that feature anyway?
Scullycat2
>starts making vacuum cleaners."
Oh my god, that got me ROTFLMFAO.
Can I use this? Where does it come from?
Cathi K
http://scullycat2.tsx.org
***************************
"In my imagination was a world no one could touch."
- Patti Scialfa
Crazy Chick
>>starts making vacuum cleaners."
>
>Oh my god, that got me ROTFLMFAO.
>Can I use this? Where does it come from?
I have that one in my quote collection, attributed to Ernst Jan Plugge. I
think that's one of those quotes that's been spread around the internet/usenet
for a long time. Kinda like that hell/exothermic/endothermic story.
Crazy Chick
-
D!S!DB, Samurai SMUTster
XFW#42; WotF Mistress-, *I*
Boondoggler
I needed it when I was writing exams. I wanted to see exactly where the
margins and font got set differently. I wanted to see exactly where my
equation box was placed so I could see how the text was wrapping around
it. I wanted to know if I was spacing or tabbing. Hard returning or
soft returning. It laid out everything for me clearly, and I had a much
easier time of changing things since I knew where and what they were
rather than guessing.
Adora
> "Sean Carroll" wrote:
>
> > In what way is M$ anything *but* evil?
>
> Well they are *bound* to be evil because they are successful.
Some people are jealous of anything that is successful.
Some people use the word "evil" to describe things of which
they are jealous.
Hence, some people call Microsoft "evil."
--
Adora
Cherry Sundae
FEB
"Screw you guys. I'm goin' home."
Donna
in translation from netspeak to english.
Donna <--who learned the definitions of translation, transliteration and
interpretation last semester.
Mopsee wrote:
>
> In article <385f9fcf...@allnews.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> mos...@nbnet.nb.ca (Marilyn Mosher) wrote:
> > Last week I found myself trying to scroll down with the TV remote,
> > trying to see whether Scully was wearing pants or a skirt in
> > Revelations. (No detail too small for an ISTJ)
> >
>
> Okay, here's one...
>
> Sometimes when someone says something funny in real life, I get this
> scary urge to say "LOL!" One of these days I'm gonna let it slip and
> when the moment comes I'd better hope the person on the receiving end is
> familiar with netspeak.
>
laura capozzola
>
> Paul Poroshin <poro...@bellatlantic.spam!net> wrote:
>
> > > If you can show me where Word has a "reveal codes" option that's as good
> > > as WordPerfect's, then maybe, just maybe, I'll consider elevating it up
> > > a bit on my list. (And I don't want that silly option that puts in the
> > > paragraph symbols for you...I want everything: Tabs, Margins,
> > > Paragraphs, spaces, etc, etc, etc.)
> > >
> >
> > i have no need for that, and thought it was very annoying when i turned that
> > on by mistake in WP 5.1
> > why do you need that feature anyway?
>
> I needed it when I was writing exams.
Oh man. The hardest thing for me in moving to Word from WordPerfect
(work forced change with moving to all Microsoft products) was losing
those reveal codes. I was very dependent on them for editing. I find
that to be equivalent to how I use FrontPage. Even though I work on my
website using the WYSIWYG feature, I have to edit in HTML.
Laura
##***************************##****************************##
Merry Christmas from: "All Things Chris Carter"
http://users.erols.com/lauracap/index.html updated 12/12/99
AND
Happy Holidays to The X-Files cast, crew and Ten Thirteen
staff from some alt.tv.x-files posters. See musical card at:
http://users.erols.com/lauracap/HolidayCard.html
HARSH REALM TO BE AIRED ON FX IN MARCH - WOOHOO!
##***************************##***************************##
Mo
"Adora" <
> Some people are jealous of anything that is successful.
> Some people use the word "evil" to describe things of which
> they are jealous.
> Hence, some people call Microsoft "evil."
Very true. I admire Mr Gates. I only wish he could spruce up his image -
well brush his hair at least.
Paul Poroshin
turned that
> > > on by mistake in WP 5.1
> > > why do you need that feature anyway?
> >
> > I needed it when I was writing exams.
hmm
for some reason when i am writing anything in Word, including complex
documents with tables and fancy things, it all comes out how i want it to
be.
Sean Carroll
>I admire Mr Gates.
I find very little to admire in the man who has built himself a
multibillion dollar personal empire without having a single original
idea. When his business's predatory, monopolistic practices were
finally exposed, did he gracefully admit them and settle? No, he went
on TV and whined about how he has become the target of some kind of
lie. Did you know that he alone has more money than all 75 million
people living in the Philippines? I'm sure they'd probably find little
to admire in him either. And that's not jealousy, any more than a
1940s Jewish person finding little to admire in the Nazis is jealousy.
Mo
"Sean Carroll"
> I find very little to admire in the man who has built himself a
> multibillion dollar personal empire without having a single original>
idea.
Who wouldn't?
When his business's predatory, monopolistic practices were
> finally exposed, did he gracefully admit them and settle?
He didn't get to where he is by rolling over and giving up..
>Dd you know that he alone has more money than all 75 million> people living
in the Philippines? I'm sure they'd probably >indlittle> to admire in him
either.
Yep I know he is as rich as many countries. And I don't expect the people in
Philippines give a flying frig about Gates. However if they had the chance
the would jump at the chance to be in his shoes - many would!
So many people tut and mutter about evil businesses without being honest
enough to admit that they'd like to be in that position.
Of course in an ideal world we'd all earn lots of money and that
doc/nurses/firemen etc would earn the millions. But it doesn't and will
never happen
Sean Carroll
>What is so wrong about that. He came up with a great idea and exploited it.
>Who wouldn't?
Maybe an honest person.
Mo
"Sean Carroll" <
> >What is so wrong about that. He came up with a great idea and exploited
it.
> >Who wouldn't?
>
> Maybe an honest person.
> > --Sean
And a person who will not make money!
Any person - with an idea/invention will go out and exploit it - otherwise
why bother having a great idea?
Do you think they should have a great money making thoughts then and keep it
to themselves. Where is the sense in that?
Sean Carroll
>"Sean Carroll" <
>> >What is so wrong about that. He came up with a great idea and exploited
>it.
>> >Who wouldn't?
>>
>> Maybe an honest person.
>
>And a person who will not make money!
So? Since when is money the most important thing in life?
>Any person - with an idea/invention will go out and exploit it - otherwise
>why bother having a great idea?
Uh ... maybe for the good of the human race? I always found that a
compelling reason, myself.
Mo
"Sean Carroll" >
> So? Since when is money the most important thing in life?
It's pretty damn important.
> Uh ... maybe for the good of the human race? I always found that a>
compelling reason, myself.
Uh sometimes it is good for the human race to go out and exploit their
discoveries. Were would we be without modern technology? I think those geeks
who invented all the computer stuff (ok that's a techie as I can get :) have
given us something damn important.
And what of scientific inventions? Should Fleming, Bell et al have kept
quiet? Would be be better off without cars/phones/modern medicine?
Was the Industrial Revolution a bad thing.? Would we all be better in our
little terraced houses - 10 kids with one shoe between them and a lump of
lard for supper? Should all those great inventors have kept their traps
shut?? Sure the Industrial workers were exploited - but before the Ind Rev.
the peasants didn't exactly have a cushy time with their feudal lords did
they?
Sean Carroll
>Uh sometimes it is good for the human race to go out and exploit their
>discoveries.
That depends on what you mean by 'exploit', as I will demonstrate
momentarily.
>Were would we be without modern technology? I think those geeks
>who invented all the computer stuff (ok that's a techie as I can get :) have
>given us something damn important.
>And what of scientific inventions? Should Fleming, Bell et al have kept
>quiet? Would be be better off without cars/phones/modern medicine?
Now, have I ever suggested that technology is bad? Technology is good.
Very good. It is a great thing for the human race.
Wouldn't it be so much better if the people giving it to us were doing
so on a completely honest, open, and advantageous basis instead of a
greedy, selfish, secretive one?
Technology is good. The folks who make it and then let it come out to
the rest of us in tiny little dribbles in whatever way best fills
their pockets aren't.
They say, in defence of Microsoft, that since it has had major control
of the industry the price of computers has dropped greatly. What the
people who say that miss completely is that the price of technology
*always* drops drastically over time -- and that, if it had been
controlled by people producing not-for-profit, the price would be a
tiny fraction of what it is now. Heck, even if we just had that 'free
competition' that reactionary capitalist apologists love so much, the
price would probably be much lower.
Thanking the corporations and the capitalists for giving us technology
is like praising an abusive parent for giving us life. It's
technically true that they've given us a wonderful thing, but the
manner in which they have treated us in giving us that is far, far
from good.
So, should knowledge or technology be 'exploited'? If 'exploited'
means made available to as wide a population as possible so as to
improve the quality of life, then absolutely. But if 'exploited' means
put in the hands of an upper crust of so-called 'successful'
corporatists so that they can make themselves rich and their friends
comfortable while the other 70% of the population gets no advantage,
then absolutely not.
>Was the Industrial Revolution a bad thing.?
The Industrial Revolution was not a bad thing. In fact, it is the
crowning achievement of the period of capitalist rule. But it was also
the series of events that sealed the fate of that same capitalist rule
by making the separation between classes more acute.
The task of humanity now is how to retain the advances of the
Industrial Revolution while dumping the rulers who try to make us
think that they're better than us because those advances happened
under their rule. The task is to take the improvements in life that
capitalism has given to the select few and extend them to *all* the
people.
>Sure the Industrial workers were exploited - but before the Ind Rev.
>the peasants didn't exactly have a cushy time with their feudal lords did
>they?
Out of the frying pan and into the fire. The fall of feudalism and
rise of capitalism was a transition from rule by the hereditarily
privileged to rule by the financially privileged. The workers, the
peasants, the 'commoners' have not received much gain from either
system. Saying that feudalism was oppressive in order to justify the
abuses of capitalism is no more logical than defending Stalin's bloody
purges by pointing out that at least he didn't kill Jews like Hitler.
Bill k.
> >
> > > In what way is M$ anything *but* evil?
> >
> > Well they are *bound* to be evil because they are successful.
>
> Some people use the word "evil" to describe things of which
> they are jealous.
> Hence, some people call Microsoft "evil."
Reminds me of the Judaen People's Front meeting in Life of Brian.;-)
"What have the Romans ever done for us?,the splitters!"
"Well,there's the roads....."
"Ok,there's the roads but what else??"
"The aqueduct...."
"Ok,the aqueduct,but what else?"
"Well,there's wine....and sanitation...and order... "
"Yes,yes,yes,...but other than the roads,aqueduct,wine,sanitation and
order,
what have they done for us?.....";-)
Bill k.
FEB<---loves Windows 98
> --
> Adora
> Cherry Sundae
> FEB
>
> "Screw you guys. I'm goin' home."
>
>
-R
Bill k. wrote in message <842bgc$nnq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Reminds me of the Judaen People's Front meeting in Life of Brian.;-)
>"What have the Romans ever done for us?,the splitters!"
>"Well,there's the roads....."
>"Ok,there's the roads but what else??"
>"The aqueduct...."
>"Ok,the aqueduct,but what else?"
>"Well,there's wine....and sanitation...and order... "
>"Yes,yes,yes,...but other than the roads,aqueduct,wine,sanitation and
>order,
>what have they done for us?.....";-)
T3ECH US HW0 2 TH1NK 4 RS3LVE$!!!1!1!1!11!1!!!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
NRMTPB *yang* I Wooly Mammoth Boy
I'm not just a member. I alt.fan.adhokk
I'm the president. I Good-bye FOX.
Hurshman
> Bill k.
> FEB<---loves Windows 98
Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
Alan H.
Halifax
Mo
"Sean Carroll" <
> Now, have I ever suggested that technology is bad? >Technology is good.
You give the impression that you dislike any successes that make money.
People invent things - it's their intellectual property so they exploit it.
Money is the major motive for most people. I have no problem with that.
> Wouldn't it be so much better if the people giving it to us were doing> so
on a completely honest, open, and advantageous basis instead of a> greedy,
selfish, secretive one?
Of course. However that will not happen. Idealism is great but it is not
practical.
> The task of humanity now is how to retain the advances of the
> Industrial Revolution while dumping the rulers who try to make us> think
that they're better than us because
Please! Get in new rullers who will get some power and behave the same way.
No matter who is on top - power corrupts.
> Out of the frying pan and into the fire. The fall of feudalism and
> rise of capitalism was a transition from rule by the hereditarily
> privileged to rule by the financially privileged. The workers, the
> peasants, the 'commoners' have not received much gain from either> system.
Generally they have gained. Health, education, democracy. None where too big
in feudal times.
>Saying that feudalism was oppressive in order to justify the> >abuses of
capitalism is no more logical than defending Stalin's >bloody> purges by
pointing out that at least he didn't kill Jews >like Hitler.
I wasn't saying that. I was saying that no matter what system we have it
will never be ideal. In the old days it was feudalism now I believe things
have improved. Capitalism is the best option. Socialism has yet to be a
proven success. Man will always be greedy. That is the ultimate problem.
In an ideal world there would be no war, bigotry etc. But it ain't going to
happen. Sure Mr Gates could have been open and caring sharing - but he would
not be as rich as he is now. So what is attractive about that (for him?)
Now I am off to celebrate have horridly sinister commercial Christmas - no
doubt invented by the evil coroporatists pigs to keep the unwashed masses
quiet ;)
Opium for the masses....are we all to witless to realise we are being
manipulated.
Bill k.
<dhur...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
>> Bill k.
>> FEB<---loves Windows 98
>
>Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
I heard that's just an office program,though.
Bill k.
FEB
>
>Alan H.
>Halifax
>
>
Bill k.
>
>Bill k. wrote in message <842bgc$nnq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>>Reminds me of the Judaen People's Front meeting in Life of Brian.;-)
>>"What have the Romans ever done for us?,the splitters!"
>>"Well,there's the roads....."
>>"Ok,there's the roads but what else??"
>>"The aqueduct...."
>>"Ok,the aqueduct,but what else?"
>>"Well,there's wine....and sanitation...and order... "
>>"Yes,yes,yes,...but other than the roads,aqueduct,wine,sanitation and
>>order,
>>what have they done for us?.....";-)
>
>
>T3ECH US HW0 2 TH1NK 4 RS3LVE$!!!1!1!1!11!1!!!
Good one,Adhock.;)
Bill k.
FEB
Adhokk7
<snip>
>No matter who is on top - power corrupts.
I agree. I would also submit that no matter what the intent of any government
is, that government can only be a "success" through coercion. No government
will be accepted by all of the people all of the time, so every form of
government's success boils down to its ability to coerce its people into
acceptance of its laws. The more aggressive a government is, the more that
government will have to rely on coercion. In the current state of technology,
this fact necessarily means that those who wish for more government, wish for
more guns, as guns are the most effective tool for coercion. How do you
enforce a law? Through reason. And if reason doesn't work? Through threats
and intimidation. Government simply means this: I'll make a law and if you
don't follow it on your own, I'll put a gun to your head and make you follow it
or I'll imprison you or I'll kill you.
Governments suck. Anarchy now.
-ad
Paul Poroshin
> >
> >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>
> I heard that's just an office program,though.
>
it's replacement for NT... replacement for win98 so far has no official
name, but it's code-named Millenium
Crazy Chick
>Reminds me of the Judaen People's Front meeting in Life of Brian.;-)
>"What have the Romans ever done for us?,the splitters!"
>"Well,there's the roads....."
>"Ok,there's the roads but what else??"
>"The aqueduct...."
>"Ok,the aqueduct,but what else?"
>"Well,there's wine....and sanitation...and order... "
>"Yes,yes,yes,...but other than the roads,aqueduct,wine,sanitation and
>order,
>what have they done for us?.....";-)
I thought it was the People's Front of Judea?
Sean Carroll
>On Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:50:50 GMT, "Hurshman"
><dhur...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
>>> Bill k.
>>> FEB<---loves Windows 98
>>
>>Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>
>I heard that's just an office program,though.
I heard that Windows 98 is the same thing as Mac 87.
Sean Carroll
>"Sean Carroll" <
>> Now, have I ever suggested that technology is bad? >Technology is good.
>
>You give the impression that you dislike any successes that make money.
I dislike the profit motive. I do not consider it in any way a
'success' to make money. The real successes in life involve other
human beings, not green-dyed sheets of paper.
>Of course. However that will not happen. Idealism is great but it is not
>practical.
<snip>
>I was saying that no matter what system we have it
>will never be ideal.
<snip>
>Man will always be greedy. That is the ultimate problem.
<snip>
>In an ideal world there would be no war, bigotry etc. But it ain't going to
>happen.
Well, fine. <shrug> I guess we can all just go back to bed for the
rest of our lives, since nothing will ever change.
>Now I am off to celebrate have horridly sinister commercial Christmas - no
>doubt invented by the evil coroporatists pigs to keep the unwashed masses
>quiet ;)
Actually, it was invented by unscrupulous Christian PR folks who stole
the pagan holiday in order to popularise their religion. The evil
corporatist pigs came in and took it over later. ;P
>Opium for the masses....are we all to witless to realise we are being
>manipulated.
Well, people do usually choose to smoke opium of their own accord.
Sean Carroll
>I agree. I would also submit that no matter what the intent of any government
>is, that government can only be a "success" through coercion. No government
>will be accepted by all of the people all of the time, so every form of
>government's success boils down to its ability to coerce its people into
>acceptance of its laws. The more aggressive a government is, the more that
>government will have to rely on coercion. In the current state of technology,
>this fact necessarily means that those who wish for more government, wish for
>more guns, as guns are the most effective tool for coercion. How do you
>enforce a law? Through reason. And if reason doesn't work? Through threats
>and intimidation. Government simply means this: I'll make a law and if you
>don't follow it on your own, I'll put a gun to your head and make you follow it
>or I'll imprison you or I'll kill you.
And what happens if there is no government? Instead of the government
coercing people, you have other people coercing people. Once human
nature has evolved and greed and violence are no longer necessary,
then sure, government can disappear. But without the transition period
of democratic centralised socialist government, what would happen if
we removed all government? You would get shot in your sleep by your
neighbour who wanted to rape your wife, and no one would ever punish
him for it because he didn't do anything illegal.
And what of education? Without a government, and a strong central
government at that, who will fund schools? Private citizens? You going
to count on multimillion-dollar donations to cover the costs of
education? Among many other problems with that, it means that the
children in poor, working-class areas will be left out in the cold and
will be forced to wallow ever more in their ignorance and
disadvantage. Eliminating government now would only sharpen and
intensify class differences -- and quite likely lead to the
Revolution, anyway.
>Governments suck. Anarchy now.
Social darwinism sucks. Democratic centralism now. Dictatorship of the
proletariat now. Socialism now. Anarchy later.
Ed
kglov...@aol.comedancing (Katrina) wrote:
> Binah shared:
> >This morning I goofed by trying to close a huge
> binder without closing
> >the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the
> contents fell out. For
> >a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo"
> button was.
> >
> <g>
> Every time I use "undo" in one of the evil MS
> products, I shout the following:
> "Do over! Do over!"...
> I'm sure my cube neighbors appreciate it.
> Katrina <--has stuffed monkeys perched on her cube,
> and waiting for the
> flamingo lights to come from Archie McPhee
> ^..^
> "We now return you to FX's Secret Barret Malathon"
> -- Dean Haglund <--fuckin' up
> Doug Herzog Y1 -- or maybe not.
Runtime error: EFD3479201 - unknown system - "Microsoft".
Use step or run to continue.
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Bill k.
<poro...@bellatlantic.spam!net> wrote:
>> >> FEB<---loves Windows 98
>> >
>> >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>>
>> I heard that's just an office program,though.
>>
>
>it's replacement for NT... replacement for win98 so far has no official
>name, but it's code-named Millenium
>
Well,whatever it is,I'll be the first in line to give Bill Gates
whatever he wants for it because I just *know it'll be worth it.
Bill k.
FEB
Bill k.
>Bill K wrote:
>>Reminds me of the Judaen People's Front meeting in Life of Brian.;-)
>>"What have the Romans ever done for us?,the splitters!"
>>"Well,there's the roads....."
>>"Ok,there's the roads but what else??"
>>"The aqueduct...."
>>"Ok,the aqueduct,but what else?"
>>"Well,there's wine....and sanitation...and order... "
>>"Yes,yes,yes,...but other than the roads,aqueduct,wine,sanitation and
>>order,
>>what have they done for us?.....";-)
>
>I thought it was the People's Front of Judea?
No,no,no.......*GOD,they're as bad as the Popular People's
Front.....splitters!
Bill k.
FEB
Ellie Presner
> >"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
> >> Bill k.
> >> FEB<---loves Windows 98
> >
> >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
U mean they finally learned how to properly emulate a Mac? 8->
Ellie
--
"I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I
only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments
that differentiate me from a doormat."
-- Rebecca West, 1913
Ed
<bi...@pdq.net> wrote:
> This morning I goofed by trying to close a huge binder
> without closing
> the rings after I'd added one paper. Half the
> contents fell out. For
> a brief moment I seriously wondered where the "undo"
> button was.
> Hmm, I didn't mark this post OT. O.K., here's my on
> topic bit! Ain't
> Mulder such a complete babe? He is a *damn* fine
> lookin' man. If I
> didn't think he already was completely in love with
> Scully, I'd Mary
> Sue myself into the plot somehow and provide that
> beautiful tortured
> man all the comfort he needed out of the pure goodness
> of my heart
> <snort>. I think Bree Sharp had the right idea about
> Scully!
> --
> Binah
> XFW #1013 ggg
> SMUTster#1013
> =======================================================
> =================
> Brain:"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
> Pinky:"I think so Brain, but where are we going to
> find chaps our size?"I know the feeling. This morning my girlfriend and I were
lying in bed and...well...nevermind.
Bill k.
skye...@inforoute.net (Ellie Presner) wrote:
> Bill k. <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote:
>
> > >"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
> > >> Bill k.
> > >> FEB<---loves Windows 98
> > >
> > >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>
> U mean they finally learned how to properly emulate a Mac? 8->
Yep,and VHS video quality has finally caught up to Betamax,too.;-)
Bill k.
FEB
>
> Ellie
>
> --
> "I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism
is: I
> only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express
sentiments
> that differentiate me from a doormat."
> -- Rebecca West, 1913
>
KennyBob Teller
Mo, you are a true gem. Merry Christmas to you!
>Now I am off to celebrate have horridly sinister commercial Christmas - no
>doubt invented by the evil coroporatists pigs to keep the unwashed masses
>quiet ;)
All things seem to move from chaos to order in somekind of
cosmic cycle. We are all just along for the ride. No government is
perfect; because it is run by and for humans.....and we all know what
miserable little shits THEY are !. History seems to show that a
corrupt govenment, toppled by force, is replaced by an even more
repressive system. We are in a constant flux between tyranny of the
masses and tyranny of the state.
Bob.....KennyBob
--
I still love Curley, but the older I get,
the more I understand where Moe was coming from.
Sean Carroll
Teller) wrote:
> All things seem to move from chaos to order in somekind of
>cosmic cycle.
Nature rarely progresses in simple cycles. It progresses in
quasiperiodic strange-attractor-like patterns that at various times
look like limit cycles, steady states, or random and chaotic
fluctuations. So it is with human history, just as surely as with the
weather.
>We are all just along for the ride.
We *are* the ride.
>No government is
>perfect; because it is run by and for humans.....and we all know what
>miserable little shits THEY are !.
How delectably misanthropic. However, I feel I must rudely intrude on
this wonderfully pessimistic vision and note that governments have
only been run by certain *kinds* of humans, not humans in general.
>History seems to show that a
>corrupt govenment, toppled by force, is replaced by an even more
>repressive system. We are in a constant flux between tyranny of the
>masses and tyranny of the state.
Panta rhei. All things are in motion. Step one of the dialectic
conception of nature.
Step two, which you neglect to proceed to, is that the constant battle
between thesis and antithesis eventually resolves itself into
synthesis. We were once in constant flux between tyranny of the masses
and tyranny of the state; we are now in constant flux between
dictatorship of the bourgeoisie through corporatism, and dictatorship
of the bourgeoisie through government. Democracy and fascism are
battling sides of the same coin. As both dictatorships of the
bourgeoisie synthesised out of the feudal conflict of mercantilism
versus laissez-faire, so the dictatorship of the proletariat shall
synthesise out of them.
And, in its time, even the classless society will see theses and
antitheses form, conflict, and synthesise themselves. Therein lies the
joy of being human -- that change will never end, that the prime
conflicts of life will never remain the same for very long.
KennyBob Teller
>On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 07:13:13 GMT, kete...@pilot.infi.net (KennyBob
>Teller) wrote:
>
>> All things seem to move from chaos to order in somekind of
>>cosmic cycle.
>
>Nature rarely progresses in simple cycles. It progresses in
>quasiperiodic strange-attractor-like patterns that at various times
>look like limit cycles, steady states, or random and chaotic
>fluctuations. So it is with human history, just as surely as with the
>weather.
>
But, are these patterns really random or chaotic, or can we just not
"pan out" enough to see the big picture? (As in the 3 blind men trying
to describe the elephant) As things go, humans are a mere blip in the
timeline of the cosmos. Human governmental experiences are a subset of
that blip.
>>We are all just along for the ride.
>
>We *are* the ride.
Sure we are. Just like an ant riding on a leaf that is floating down a
fast moving stream at spring flood. That ant might be "master of his
domain" on that leaf, but he and his leaf are bound by the whims of
the stream.
>>No government is
>>perfect; because it is run by and for humans.....and we all know what
>>miserable little shits THEY are !.
>
>How delectably misanthropic. However, I feel I must rudely intrude on
>this wonderfully pessimistic vision and note that governments have
>only been run by certain *kinds* of humans, not humans in general.
>
I am not pessimistic; I am pragmatic. A pessimist sees the worst
outcome as inevitable in any event. A pragmatist takes the pessimist's
view and then tries to figure out how to come out on top. As with so
many things in life, the winner is the one who is left standing at the
end of the day.
>>History seems to show that a
>>corrupt govenment, toppled by force, is replaced by an even more
>>repressive system. We are in a constant flux between tyranny of the
>>masses and tyranny of the state.
>
>Panta rhei. All things are in motion. Step one of the dialectic
>conception of nature.
>
>Step two, which you neglect to proceed to, is that the constant battle
>between thesis and antithesis eventually resolves itself into
>synthesis. We were once in constant flux between tyranny of the masses
>and tyranny of the state; we are now in constant flux between
>dictatorship of the bourgeoisie through corporatism, and dictatorship
>of the bourgeoisie through government. Democracy and fascism are
>battling sides of the same coin. As both dictatorships of the
>bourgeoisie synthesised out of the feudal conflict of mercantilism
>versus laissez-faire, so the dictatorship of the proletariat shall
>synthesise out of them.
Just who is this proletariat that you speak of? It has been my
experience that these proles are just rying to advance themselves to a
higher place in the consumer food chain. Philosophy don't pay the
rent.
>And, in its time, even the classless society will see theses and
>antitheses form, conflict, and synthesise themselves. Therein lies the
>joy of being human -- that change will never end, that the prime
>conflicts of life will never remain the same for very long.
The only truley classless society I have seen are the dead.
Counterpoint?
>--Sean
>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/9613/
>'The ends may justify the means, as long as there is something which justifies the ends.'
>--Leon Trotsky
>
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
>------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Bob.....KennyBob
006 7/8 Licensed to ILL
laura capozzola
>
> "Mo" <msm...@clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >No matter who is on top - power corrupts.
>
> is, that government can only be a "success" through coercion. No government
> will be accepted by all of the people all of the time, so every form of
> government's success boils down to its ability to coerce its people into
> acceptance of its laws. The more aggressive a government is, the more that
> government will have to rely on coercion. In the current state of technology,
> this fact necessarily means that those who wish for more government, wish for
> more guns, as guns are the most effective tool for coercion. How do you
> enforce a law? Through reason. And if reason doesn't work? Through threats
> and intimidation. Government simply means this: I'll make a law and if you
> don't follow it on your own, I'll put a gun to your head and make you follow it
> or I'll imprison you or I'll kill you.
>
> -ad
Just keep in mind Congress makes the laws which are blessed by The
President - all your *elected* officials. If you have a problem with
them, you can do something about it by getting the gazillions of people
who share your opinion and who don't vote, to vote and get signatures to
put up candidates of your choice. Then of course, you would have to
raise money so your candidates could get a commercial aired during The
X-Files (just threw that in to make it on topic ;-D).
But, we can't even agree here on what makes a good episode. Could you
imagine trying to convince gazillions of people to vote a particular way
when they all have their own agendas as to what they need and want?
Well, you probably can't unless you raise some money (like a little
capitalist) and get organized (like a stinkin' standard political party)
and then persuade them that your candidate's way is the best way.
Then, of course, he drops his pants during a nationally televised debate
right before the election and it all goes to hell. ;-D
Laura
##***************************##****************************##
Merry Christmas from: "All Things Chris Carter"
http://users.erols.com/lauracap/index.html updated 12/12/99
AND
Happy Holidays to The X-Files cast, crew and Ten Thirteen
staff from some alt.tv.x-files posters. See musical card at:
http://users.erols.com/lauracap/HolidayCard.html
HARSH REALM TO BE AIRED ON FX IN MARCH - WOOHOO!
##***************************##***************************##
Adhokk7
>On 25 Dec 1999 16:48:52 GMT, adh...@aol.coma (Adhokk7) wrote:
>
>>I agree. I would also submit that no matter what the intent of any
government
>>is, that government can only be a "success" through coercion. No government
>>will be accepted by all of the people all of the time, so every form of
>>government's success boils down to its ability to coerce its people into
>>acceptance of its laws. The more aggressive a government is, the more that
>>government will have to rely on coercion. In the current state of
technology,
>>this fact necessarily means that those who wish for more government, wish for
>>more guns, as guns are the most effective tool for coercion. How do you
>>enforce a law? Through reason. And if reason doesn't work? Through threats
>>and intimidation. Government simply means this: I'll make a law and if you
>>don't follow it on your own, I'll put a gun to your head and make you follow
it
>>or I'll imprison you or I'll kill you.
>
>And what happens if there is no government? Instead of the government
>coercing people, you have other people coercing people.
You already have people coercing people. In anarchy, you simply aren't faced
with monolithic coercion like government.
>Once human
>nature has evolved and greed and violence are no longer necessary,
>then sure, government can disappear. But without the transition period
>of democratic centralised socialist government, what would happen if
>we removed all government? You would get shot in your sleep by your
>neighbour who wanted to rape your wife, and no one would ever punish
>him for it because he didn't do anything illegal.
Oh, sure. That kind of thing never happens with governments in place.
>And what of education? Without a government, and a strong central
>government at that, who will fund schools?
Is public education worth putting a gun to my head and forcing me to go along
with it? That's what it boils down to for any law or concept whose execution
is achieved through legislation. I say public education isn't worth that.
Does my way make for a better society or a worse society? I don't know. I'm
not concerned with potential results as much as I am in the moral validity of
the process.
>Private citizens? You going
>to count on multimillion-dollar donations to cover the costs of
>education?
I'm not counting on anyone to fill that vacuum. It's a secondary concern to
the fact that I have to support public education or government employees will
point guns at me.
-ad, has a problem with authority
Adhokk7
>Adhokk7 wrote:
>
>> Governments suck. Anarchy now.
>>
>> -ad
>
>Just keep in mind Congress makes the laws which are blessed by The
>President - all your *elected* officials.
<snip>
>Then, of course, he drops his pants during a nationally televised debate
>right before the election and it all goes to hell. ;-D
This furthers my conviction that governments suck. I vote. I participate. I
stay informed. I get George Bush and Bill Clinton for my troubles. Now, I'm
likely to George W. Bush or Al Gore for my troubles. These guys can not be the
solution to any problem. President schmesident.
-ad
Ellie Presner
> In article <1e3da5z.1gh6vpd9o3ygwN%skye...@inforoute.net>,
> skye...@inforoute.net (Ellie Presner) wrote:
> > Bill k. <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
> > > >> Bill k.
> > > >> FEB<---loves Windows 98
> > > >
> > > >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
> >
> > U mean they finally learned how to properly emulate a Mac? 8->
>
> Yep,and VHS video quality has finally caught up to Betamax,too.;-)
>
>
> Bill k.
> FEB
D'oh!!
Ellie
:-)
Hurshman
>
Not just office. For anyone who wants the rock solid
base that NT gives you. But I susepct most home users
will stay with '98 since it will allow a wider range of badly
written games to run on it.
--
Alan H.
Halifax
Hurshman
> > >> FEB<---loves Windows 98
> > >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
> > I heard that's just an office program,though.
>
Win2000 is not just a replacement for NT. It adds most of
the features that first showed up on W95-98 (P&P, DirectX,
etc) plus extending the server side to support much larger unit
configurations.
> name, but it's code-named Millenium
Which, as a beta tester, I'll soon be playing with.
Alan H.
Halifax
Hurshman
> >
> whatever he wants for it because I just *know it'll be worth it.
For which, we the shareholders, salute you.
Now I have to go sell some airline shares.
Alan H.
Halifax
Hurshman
Then you best not take up computer programming. Unlike
the worlds of economics or astrophysics, it is hard to cover
your stupidity.
Alan H.
Halifax
Hurshman
> laura capozzola <laur...@erols.com> wrote:
> >>Oh man. The hardest thing for me in moving to Word from WordPerfect
> >>(work forced change with moving to all Microsoft products) was losing
> >>those reveal codes. I was very dependent on them for editing. I find
> >>that to be equivalent to how I use FrontPage. Even though I work on my
> >>website using the WYSIWYG feature, I have to edit in HTML.
> How fucking hard would it be for MS to put in a reveal codes feature
> anyway? Huh? HOW DAMN HARD WOULD IT BE????
Oh sputtles!! There are no reveal codes in Word because it
does not embed formatting codes in the character stream. Formatting
information is located in special data structures that are associated with
logical sections of text.
The format used by Wordperfect was the traditional way to add formatting
information to a text file. It takes up less space and requires less
processing
power than the method used by Word. As such, it was a good fit on older
machines. But it does not work as well in modern, Wysiwyg systems. It also
suffers the inherent problems assocaited with 'in stream' coding systems.
Oh, I'm a Wordperfect user, BTW.
Alan Hurshman
Halifax
Sean Carroll
>se...@kua.net (Sean Carroll) wrote:
>
>>And what happens if there is no government? Instead of the government
>>coercing people, you have other people coercing people.
>
>You already have people coercing people. In anarchy, you simply aren't faced
>with monolithic coercion like government.
Government, properly regarded, is a tool for the coerced to coerce
back at the coercers.
>>Once human
>>nature has evolved and greed and violence are no longer necessary,
>>then sure, government can disappear. But without the transition period
>>of democratic centralised socialist government, what would happen if
>>we removed all government? You would get shot in your sleep by your
>>neighbour who wanted to rape your wife, and no one would ever punish
>>him for it because he didn't do anything illegal.
>
>Oh, sure. That kind of thing never happens with governments in place.
At least it doesn't happen in an organised fashion every couple of
moments with not a single one of the murderers/rapists being punished.
>Does my way make for a better society or a worse society? I don't know. I'm
>not concerned with potential results as much as I am in the moral validity of
>the process.
'The ends may justify the means, as long as there is something which
justifies the ends.'
'Moral validity' does little good to a process when the result is the
total annihilation of all morality, let alone education. Immediate
anarchy, far from meaning a new liberty, will mean a new slavery for
all humankind. In fact, it could mean *literal* slavery -- if there is
no government, what is to prevent a very large white man with a gun
from once again holding slaves? This is just one example of the
disastrous consequences.
>-ad, has a problem with authority
So do I, but in a vastly different way. Authority such as we have now,
in the form of an upper class of professional politicians who tell us
what morality to have, everyone should have a problem with. But the
authority of the *people*, the authority of the masses, expressed
through government as a central tool, is something to strive for, not
to fear.
An institution that can defend human rights and liberties against the
intrusion of those who don't subscribe to the first clause of 'An it
harm none, do what ye will' is a good thing.
To paraphrase Henry David Thoreau, no government is the government
that men will have, when they are ready for it. But that readiness
cannot be achieved by simply throwing humanity into anarchy, anymore
than a child can be taught to swim by throwing it into the middle of
the ocean.
shannar...@xemplary.com
great free text editor/html editor or this new program that
comes highly recommended. It's much like Homesite, but it's
free: First Page 2000
http://hotfiles.zdnet.com/cgi-bin/texis/swlib/hotfiles/info.html?fcode=0013DH
-------------------------------------
Laurie Haynes
Co-archivist Xemplary
http://www.xemplary.com
Xemplary Music Reviews and MP3s
http://www.xemplary.net
-----------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe to the xfc fiction list, go to
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/xfc-atxc
To subscribe to the xfc feedback list, go to
http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/xfc-fdbk
Sean Carroll
Teller) wrote:
>On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 04:56:33 GMT, se...@kua.net (Sean Carroll) wrote:
>
>>Nature rarely progresses in simple cycles. It progresses in
>>quasiperiodic strange-attractor-like patterns that at various times
>>look like limit cycles, steady states, or random and chaotic
>>fluctuations. So it is with human history, just as surely as with the
>>weather.
>>
>But, are these patterns really random or chaotic, or can we just not
>"pan out" enough to see the big picture? (As in the 3 blind men trying
>to describe the elephant)
Nature has built within it a certain randomness, at least on the
microscopic level; no serious scientist can deny that anymore, with
the experimental success of quantum theory. As to macroscopic
patterns, sure, it might be a serious case of forest-for-the-trees.
But what of that? We can still be pretty sure from the limited
observation we have that the simple cycle-after-cycle pattern you
suggest is erroneous.
>As things go, humans are a mere blip in the
>timeline of the cosmos. Human governmental experiences are a subset of
>that blip.
True. Yet humans are the first species to evolve, at least on this
planet, that has the capability of going back to learn about that very
universe it's a blip of, as far as we know. And who knows how long
we'll continue to be here? Scientists, in studying the human race,
have observed several possible characteristics implying that we may be
able to avoid the natural processes of extinction.
>>>We are all just along for the ride.
>>
>>We *are* the ride.
>
>Sure we are. Just like an ant riding on a leaf that is floating down a
>fast moving stream at spring flood. That ant might be "master of his
>domain" on that leaf, but he and his leaf are bound by the whims of
>the stream.
And if the ant is capable of studying the stream and divining its
characteristics before he is swept over a waterfall, then he may have
the capability to grab onto a branch and save himself. As long as he
spends all his time remaining delusional that the leaf is all there is
and spends his time on it ordering around all the little bacteria
around him and making them build him things, he is done for.
>As with so
>many things in life, the winner is the one who is left standing at the
>end of the day.
A very Smithian-Darwinist view. My idea of a winner is one who has
figured out how to end the game, and thereby leave the greatest number
of people still standing.
>Just who is this proletariat that you speak of? It has been my
>experience that these proles are just rying to advance themselves to a
>higher place in the consumer food chain. Philosophy don't pay the
>rent.
Which is why there need to be both intellectuals and much more
extensive, improved, free public education.
>The only truley classless society I have seen are the dead.
Not even true if one accepts the Christian view of things. After all,
are there not angels, archangels, and the Supreme God? Much more like
a feudal kingdom than a classless society. But then, perhaps like me,
you reject all that anyway.
>Counterpoint?
My counter has several thousand points by now.
Ellie Presner
> Oh sputtles!! There are no reveal codes in Word because it
> does not embed formatting codes in the character stream. Formatting
> information is located in special data structures that are associated with
> logical sections of text.
>
> The format used by Wordperfect was the traditional way to add formatting
> information to a text file. It takes up less space and requires less
> processing
> power than the method used by Word. As such, it was a good fit on older
> machines. But it does not work as well in modern, Wysiwyg systems. It also
> suffers the inherent problems assocaited with 'in stream' coding systems.
>
> Oh, I'm a Wordperfect user, BTW.
>
> Alan Hurshman
> Halifax
Hi, people! Gotta butt in. I've been using Word on a Mac since 1988.
There is most definitely a 'Reveal codes' command. It's under 'View' and
it either says Show or Hide. It shows spaces, tabs, paragraph symbols,
hard page breaks, etc. etc. Maybe there's no Show codes for Word on a
PC, but there sure is in Word for Macs.
Ellie
Hurshman
> Hurshman <dhur...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > Oh sputtles!! There are no reveal codes in Word because it
> > does not embed formatting codes in the character stream. Formatting
> > information is located in special data structures that are associated
with
> > logical sections of text.
>
> There is most definitely a 'Reveal codes' command. It's under 'View' and
> it either says Show or Hide. It shows spaces, tabs, paragraph symbols,
> hard page breaks, etc. etc.
That's not the same as reveal codes.
Alan Hurshman
Adhokk7
>Government, properly regarded, is a tool for the coerced to coerce
>back at the coercers.
Government is a tool for those capable to use to reshape the world according to
their views. Properly regarded, it is a weapon and nothing more.
>On 26 Dec 1999 13:34:00 GMT, adh...@aol.coma (Adhokk7) wrote:
>
>>se...@kua.net (Sean Carroll) wrote:
>>>You would get shot in your sleep by your
>>>neighbour who wanted to rape your wife, and no one would ever punish
>>>him for it because he didn't do anything illegal.
>>
>>Oh, sure. That kind of thing never happens with governments in place.
>
>At least it doesn't happen in an organised fashion every couple of
>moments with not a single one of the murderers/rapists being punished.
Why do you assume that with no governments in place, people would become
defenseless? While I acknowledge the good any organized protective body (local
police, the military, etc...) accomplishes, ultimately I look to myself for
personal protection and defense.
You also seem to assume that punishment for bad behavior would never occur in
anarchy. Surely you know that is incorrect.
>'Moral validity' does little good to a process when the result is the
>total annihilation of all morality, let alone education.
I don't know what the result would be and no one else does either. That's the
problem with any ideology which assures cures for whatever ails the human
condition. They all treat humans as static creatures, while humans are
dynamic. All governments fail when compared against their ideals unless those
ideals are of an egocentric nature as expressed by those in or seeking power.
Anarchy means living on your feet. Governments are only capable of offering
varying ways to die on your knees.
>In fact, it could mean *literal* slavery -- if there is
>no government, what is to prevent a very large white man with a gun
>from once again holding slaves?
Again, I don't know what would happen, but here are a few possibilitties:
1. The same thing which would prevent a very large black man with a gun from
holding slaves.
2. Heightened sense of community may sweep a world in anarchy, thus making it a
safer place.
3. Proliferation of guns, which could conceivably lead to less violence
although that is admittedly unlikely.
4. Likely voluntary withdrawal from society of those with pro-slavery mindsets.
5. In anarchy, a person's worth would likely become more strongly based on what
they contribute than on the irrelevant (race, gender to some degree, religion).
-ad, feeling more anarchist than right-libertarian for 2000
KennyBob Teller
>>On Sun, 26 Dec 1999 04:56:33 GMT, se...@kua.net (Sean Carroll) wrote:
>>
>
>Nature has built within it a certain randomness, at least on the
>microscopic level; no serious scientist can deny that anymore, with
>the experimental success of quantum theory. As to macroscopic
>patterns, sure, it might be a serious case of forest-for-the-trees.
>But what of that? We can still be pretty sure from the limited
>observation we have that the simple cycle-after-cycle pattern you
>suggest is erroneous.
The cycle between randomness and order may or may not be occuring in a
pattern, or it may be occuring in a pattern that we cannot fathom.
>
>>As things go, humans are a mere blip in the
>>timeline of the cosmos. Human governmental experiences are a subset of
>>that blip.
>
>True. Yet humans are the first species to evolve, at least on this
>planet, that has the capability of going back to learn about that very
>universe it's a blip of, as far as we know. And who knows how long
>we'll continue to be here? Scientists, in studying the human race,
>have observed several possible characteristics implying that we may be
>able to avoid the natural processes of extinction.
Learn, yes. We gain knowledge, but very little wisdom. The very
scientists that you champion may indeed enable us to avoid natural
extinction by giving us the tools to create our UNnatural extinction.
Science has given us nuclear weapons, napalm, biological and chemical
weapons, along with a host of more prosaic means with which to send us
the way of the dinosaur.
>
>>>>We are all just along for the ride.
>>>
>>>We *are* the ride.
>>
>>Sure we are. Just like an ant riding on a leaf that is floating down a
>>fast moving stream at spring flood. That ant might be "master of his
>>domain" on that leaf, but he and his leaf are bound by the whims of
>>the stream.
>
>And if the ant is capable of studying the stream and divining its
>characteristics before he is swept over a waterfall, then he may have
>the capability to grab onto a branch and save himself. As long as he
>spends all his time remaining delusional that the leaf is all there is
>and spends his time on it ordering around all the little bacteria
>around him and making them build him things, he is done for.
>
Actually, we are more like bacteria in a petri dish. While the food
supply remains, we breed prodigiously (something like 6 Billion at
last count?) Eventually we may choke ourselves to death on our own
waste, just like our friends in their dish. Perhaps some other cosmic
body will smash into our planet and destroy our petri dish.
>>As with so
>>many things in life, the winner is the one who is left standing at the
>>end of the day.
>
>A very Smithian-Darwinist view. My idea of a winner is one who has
>figured out how to end the game, and thereby leave the greatest number
>of people still standing.
>
That is very noble. Just because you have figured a way to end the
game, do not assume that the game will then end. There are many who
don't want the game to end. If religion is the opiate of the masses,
power is the opiate of the elite.
>>Just who is this proletariat that you speak of? It has been my
>>experience that these proles are just rying to advance themselves to a
>>higher place in the consumer food chain. Philosophy don't pay the
>>rent.
>
>Which is why there need to be both intellectuals and much more
>extensive, improved, free public education.
Who is going to pay for this "free" education? What about those who
don't want to go along with your program?
>
>The only truley classless society I have seen are the dead.
>
>Not even true if one accepts the Christian view of things. After all,
>are there not angels, archangels, and the Supreme God? Much more like
>a feudal kingdom than a classless society. But then, perhaps like me,
>you reject all that anyway.
Either way, they are under the judgement of God or composting nicely
into nitrogen based fertilizer. Equal.
>
>>Counterpoint?
>
>My counter has several thousand points by now.
It is OK Sean, when I was 17, I knew everything. The older I get, the
less I am sure of.
>--Sean
>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/9613/
>'The ends may justify the means, as long as there is something which justifies the ends.'
>--Leon Trotsky
Go murder Trotsky with an iceaxe.
--Lenin
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
>------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Bob.....KennyBob
Sean Carroll
>>In fact, it could mean *literal* slavery -- if there is
>>no government, what is to prevent a very large white man with a gun
>>from once again holding slaves?
>
>Again, I don't know what would happen, but here are a few possibilitties:
>
>1. The same thing which would prevent a very large black man with a gun from
>holding slaves.
And what thing is that, exactly?
>2. Heightened sense of community may sweep a world in anarchy, thus making it a
>safer place.
Heightened sense of community? Just by removing government, people
would magically change? No, the only way a 'heightened sense of
community' can develop is through education and through a complete
alteration of current traditions and systems, followed by a transition
period of adjustment.
>4. Likely voluntary withdrawal from society of those with pro-slavery mindsets.
Huh? And why would they do that? If they have pro-slavery mindsets,
they *already* have no respect for human life, why would they do
anything voluntarily to make life better for others?
>5. In anarchy, a person's worth would likely become more strongly based on what
>they contribute than on the irrelevant (race, gender to some degree, religion).
How? I see the same thing as a vision, but what would cause that to
happen if government just disappeared now? All it would do would be to
open up the course of action for all those people who see worth as
helping themselves at the expense of others. Sure, maybe after a long
period of adjustment, what you say would come to pass; but in the
meantime, you've lost that argument you used before about 'I don't
care about the ends, just the morality of the means'.
>-ad, feeling more anarchist than right-libertarian for 2000
And I'm feeling more fervently communistic than ever.
--Sean
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/9613/
'The ends may justify the means, as long as there is something which justifies the ends.'
--Leon Trotsky
Bill k.
Why? I'll be in the friendly skies again next month.
And the airlines must be making more money than ever .
Last month,on a 3 hr flight, I was served 2 pretzels in a bag and a
tangerine.
Bill k.
FEB
>
> Alan H.
> Halifax
Sean Carroll
Teller) wrote:
>Science has given us nuclear weapons, napalm, biological and chemical
>weapons,
None of those are due to science. They are due to engineers and
governments. The greatest scientists -- look at Einstein -- knew that
science without morality is a disaster.
>along with a host of more prosaic means with which to send us
>the way of the dinosaur.
Um, currently I believe there are 3500 species of dinosaur, and they
are almost the only vertebrate animals to fly.
>Perhaps some other cosmic
>body will smash into our planet and destroy our petri dish.
I wouldn't count on it. There's no reasonable evidence that any of the
bodies that have smashed into our planet so far have killed anything
except the unlucky SOB's standing at Ground Zero.
>It is OK Sean, when I was 17, I knew everything. The older I get, the
>less I am sure of.
I'm sure of many things. The wisdom of age is not one of them. I was
much smarter when I was a small child.
>Go murder Trotsky with an iceaxe.
>--Lenin
Uh, that would be Stalin.
Hurshman
> > Now I have to go sell some airline shares.
>
> Why? I'll be in the friendly skies again next month.
> And the airlines must be making more money than ever .
> Last month,on a 3 hr flight, I was served 2 pretzels in a bag and a
> tangerine.
Well the 'Bill Effect' has now been fully reflected in the price
of the stock. So it's time to get out before all this travel ends
and the price plummets. Never be the first in or the last out.
That's my motto!
Alan Hurshman
Hurshman
> "Hurshman" <dhur...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > Now I have to go sell some airline shares.
>
> Why? I'll be in the friendly skies again next month.
Do the American authorities know about all those
secret visits you get late at night from them Algerian
donair makers? Do they? Huh?
Paul Poroshin
> >>documents with tables and fancy things, it all comes out how i want it
to
> >>be.
>
> Wow, sounds like you do work on some pretty incredible documents if
> they have *tables* ...
>
> Feh ... get into some imported Excel files, a few columns, footnotes,
> end notes, text boxes with embedded graphics, and then we can talk.
>
excuse me, i only mentioned tables and other things, which i did not
specify, but which include the things you listed and more.
after 5 years of using Word i think i can safely say that whatever i want
done in a document, i can do
KennyBob Teller
>On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 03:39:52 GMT, kete...@pilot.infi.net (KennyBob
>Teller) wrote:
>
>>Science has given us nuclear weapons, napalm, biological and chemical
>>weapons,
>
>None of those are due to science. They are due to engineers and
>governments. The greatest scientists -- look at Einstein -- knew that
>science without morality is a disaster.
Oh Cow Cookies !! Engineers may have built the bomb, but scientists
developed the concepts. These great scientists may have been
"abhored" by what they were doing, but that certainly did not seem to
slow them down any. They could have refused to participate at all, but
they did not. Help me on this point Sean, but wasn't it Einstein who
approached Roosevelt about the theoretical possibility of the atomic
bomb?
>
>>along with a host of more prosaic means with which to send us
>>the way of the dinosaur.
>
>Um, currently I believe there are 3500 species of dinosaur, and they
>are almost the only vertebrate animals to fly.
>
You don't see too many of them wandering around today.
>>Perhaps some other cosmic
>>body will smash into our planet and destroy our petri dish.
>
>I wouldn't count on it. There's no reasonable evidence that any of the
>bodies that have smashed into our planet so far have killed anything
>except the unlucky SOB's standing at Ground Zero.
The jury is out on that one. Personally, I think we are in far more
danger from a worldwide pandemic, like the 1918 influenza. As
populations become more dense the ease of transfer of disease becomes
easier. This, coupled with the ease of same day worldwide
transportation allows for very effective spread of disease.
>>It is OK Sean, when I was 17, I knew everything. The older I get, the
>>less I am sure of.
>
>I'm sure of many things. The wisdom of age is not one of them. I was
>much smarter when I was a small child.
Hold onto what you are sure of, but approach the future with an open
mind.
>>Go murder Trotsky with an iceaxe.
>>--Lenin
>
>Uh, that would be Stalin.
Ahhhhhhhh, but Stalin was channeling Lenin ! Shirley McLean told me!
Adora
> "Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:50:50 GMT, "Hurshman" wrote:
>
> > > Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>
> base that NT gives you. But I susepct most home users
> will stay with '98 since it will allow a wider range of badly
> written games to run on it.
I don't like NT. NT may never crash, but I can reboot my
98 box, run through Scan Disk, log back on, and relaunch
the program that hung in less time than it takes for NT
to close it. Really. I've actually tested it.
I won't let my users have it either because it gives them
too much control over processes, allows them to do
too much damage to the system, and I don't want to
spend that kind of time trying to clean it up.
--
Adora
Cherry Sundae
FEB
"Screw you guys. I'm goin' home."
Adora
> "Paul Poroshin" <poro...@bellatlantic.spam!net> wrote:
> > Bill k. wrote:
> > > Hurshman wrote:
> > > > Bill k. wrote:
>
> > > > > FEB<---loves Windows 98
> > > > Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
> > > I heard that's just an office program,though.
> >
> > no official name, but it's code-named Millenium
<psst!> Millennium has two n's ;-)
> Well,whatever it is,I'll be the first in line to give Bill Gates
> whatever he wants for it because I just *know it'll be worth it.
Don't believe him. He'll just wait for his fiancée to dupe a
copy from work, smuggle it across the border, and install
it for him :-P
Robert I Lieberman
Emacs users of the world GNUnite! ;P
Lieb
--
Psychic!Twin #2 *<x|:-)
DUOA, ILa!
bearer of the ATXF Incomprehensible Crown
Boondoggler
> In article <O8M94.2423$aE3.3...@typhoon1.gnilink.net>,
> Paul Poroshin <poro...@bellatlantic.spam!net> wrote:
> >> >>for some reason when i am writing anything in Word, including complex
> >> >>documents with tables and fancy things, it all comes out how i want it
> >to
> >> >>be.
> >>
> >> Wow, sounds like you do work on some pretty incredible documents if
> >> they have *tables* ...
> >>
> >> Feh ... get into some imported Excel files, a few columns, footnotes,
> >> end notes, text boxes with embedded graphics, and then we can talk.
> >>
> >
> >excuse me, i only mentioned tables and other things, which i did not
> >specify, but which include the things you listed and more.
> >
> >after 5 years of using Word i think i can safely say that whatever i want
> >done in a document, i can do
Yes, but it's a pain. Especially when you have two different font
sizes, or if you want to get rid of some offending margins in a portion
of the document.
> Emacs users of the world GNUnite! ;P
I vie for vi.
--
Boondoggler
XFW1114, ggg, MBC
MiGiS7 - wire rims or bust!
Eric NRTJ Roberts
> Bill k. <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote:
>
> > >"Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote in message ...
> > >> Bill k.
> > >
> > >Ah, but wait till you meet Windows2000!
>
No, they still haven't figured out how to make it over-priced and
incompatible...
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eric "No Relation To Julia" Roberts
B.Comm, MCP, PDQ, LLBean, FEB(tm)
prair...@sympatico.ca
"I read somewhere that 77 percent of all the mentally ill live in poverty.
Actually I’m more intrigued by the 23 percent who are apparently doing quite
well for themselves."
- Emo Philips
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eric NRTJ Roberts
news:7QN94.1298$k_6.1...@news-west.eli.net...
> "Hurshman" <dhur...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > "Bill k." <ab...@v-wave.com> wrote:
> > > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999 14:50:50 GMT, "Hurshman" wrote:
> >
> >
> > base that NT gives you. But I susepct most home users
> > will stay with '98 since it will allow a wider range of badly
> > written games to run on it.
>
> I don't like NT. NT may never crash, but I can reboot my
> 98 box, run through Scan Disk, log back on, and relaunch
> the program that hung in less time than it takes for NT
> to close it. Really. I've actually tested it.
>
> I won't let my users have it either because it gives them
> too much control over processes, allows them to do
> too much damage to the system, and I don't want to
> spend that kind of time trying to clean it up.
You obviously haven't discovered the magical world of the policy editor...
`ik
>This furthers my conviction that governments suck. I vote. I participate.
I
>stay informed. I get George Bush and Bill Clinton for my troubles. Now,
I'm
>likely to George W. Bush or Al Gore for my troubles. These guys can not be
the
>solution to any problem. President schmesident.
>
***Ik would like to take this opportunity, albeit a day late and more than a
dollar short, (as usual), to announce her Presidential Candidacy for the
year 2008, when she'll reach 35 years of age.
Mark it on your calendars people, and until then, keep sending Ad those
twenties...as I just know they'll be donated one day.
--Brought to you by the ever hopeful pessimist,
`ik - *It really is profound. Trust me*
Http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/5047
`ik
>Very true. I admire Mr Gates. I only wish he could spruce up his image -
>well brush his hair at least.
***I *love* Bill (You Know You are a Nerd When...?)...his image and his hair
are just fine by me, and no, it really isn't the money, though that does
help me to keep the faith!
-'ik, who reminds everyone tS+8KiYF
Adhokk7
>***Ik would like to take this opportunity, albeit a day late and more than a
>dollar short, (as usual), to announce her Presidential Candidacy for the
>year 2008, when she'll reach 35 years of age.
>
>Mark it on your calendars people, and until then, keep sending Ad those
>twenties...as I just know they'll be donated one day.
Have I mentioned that I think it's all going to hell in just a few hours? I
think t-shirts are going to be the new money, so send ad t-shirts. Thank you.
-ad, wearing his Veruca Salt t-shirt and listening to the Casino soundtrack