Newsgroup math
Epsilon Eridani
astronomical posts. Once astro posts reach about 20 per day, the spam ads
disappear. You'll see this on most forums.
Bert Hyman
<no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Not likely.
For that to happen, the spammers would have to actually read all the
groups to which they post.
More unlikely, they'd have to care.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
Davoud
> The number of CHINK spam ads...
I would just as soon read spam as racist hate speech. "CHINK:" rhymes
with "PLINK."
Davoud
--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.
usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
Chris.B
> I would just as soon read spam as racist hate speech.
"CHINK:" rhymes with "PLINK."
>
And books with cooks and cookes. :-)
Derogatory terms have always been used to dehumanise those one
despises. The standard training for those going to war (or even in
sport) is to find a name which sums up your enemy in the worst
possible light. Often as a simple play on words or a corruption of the
name of your "enemy".
Roman Paedophilic Church... for example. If one pretended to be a true
Christian fighting centuries of injustice for the innocent child. Not
to mention the countless AIDS and sexually transmitted disease
infected rape victims of the churches' local debt collector,
paedophile network.
Plink or plonk.
It makes you think.
The RP Church stinks.
Papa or Pope
Given a man an inch,
of rope
Epsilon Eridani
> Epsilon Eridani wrote:
>> The number of CHINK spam ads...
>
> I would just as soon read spam as racist hate speech. "CHINK:" rhymes
> with "PLINK."
>
> Davoud
>
Because you are a moron who shops Chinkware at Walmart, happily.
Tom McDonald
Don't suppose you'd care to post any astro articles, shithead?
Now about that new Orion $50 FunScope 76mm Reflector Telescope,
maybe compared to the $50 Celestron FirstScope. Any comments on them?
--
Tom "Go Pack" McDonald
canopus56
Epsilon Eridani <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in
news:Ip-dncV35MTl4rzW...@giganews.com:
> The number of CHINK spam ads is in inverse proportion to the number of
> astronomical posts. Once astro posts reach about 20 per day, the spam
> ads disappear. You'll see this on most forums.
Your racist quip aside, the problem has to be laid at Google's feet.
Google purchased dejanews.com some years ago with the promise that they
intended to preserve the usenet legacy as an archival knowledge source.
Apparently,
Google no longer feels it is cost effective to use spam filters. As a
result for their web based usenet portal. As a result, web based
browsing of usenet is effectively dead. The only way it is useable is
to adopt a newsreader that supports slrn filtering.
My speculation is that Google now wants usenet to die as a business
strategy because they want the bandwidth to resell services to high-end
mobile phone owners with a greater willingness to pay. This does not
bode well for Google's recent gaining of control over the rights to
digitally distribute books. Will Google online books get up one morning
and make the decision that Chaucer is "not cost effective" to keep on
their book server?
- Canopus56
Davoud
> My speculation is that Google now wants usenet to die as a business
> strategy because they want the bandwidth to resell services to high-end
> mobile phone owners with a greater willingness to pay. This does not
> bode well for Google's recent gaining of control over the rights to
> digitally distribute books. Will Google online books get up one morning
> and make the decision that Chaucer is "not cost effective" to keep on
> their book server?
In a society in which health "insurance" companies deny treatment to
sick people because they judge the person's dollar value to be too low
(infants, children, low-income people, mothers who don't work outside
the home, non-whites, retired persons) it doesn't strain the
imagination to envision Google declaring that Chaucer has no value.
Epsilon Eridani
news:FDQUm.56712$ky1....@newsfe14.iad:
Sounds like typical, made-in-China garbage. Parents who'd buy their kid a
$50 telescope probably spend the rest of their money on crack, cigarettes
and beer.
Epsilon Eridani
news:Xns9CDF808C67CC3...@69.16.185.252:
> X: no-archive
>
> Epsilon Eridani <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:Ip-dncV35MTl4rzW...@giganews.com:
>
>> The number of CHINK spam ads is in inverse proportion to the number of
>> astronomical posts. Once astro posts reach about 20 per day, the spam
>> ads disappear. You'll see this on most forums.
>
> Your racist quip aside, the problem has to be laid at Google's feet.
Uh huh. Kind of like blaming the gun for shooting someone and not the
shooter.
AM
>> Now about that new Orion $50 FunScope 76mm Reflector Telescope,
>> maybe compared to the $50 Celestron FirstScope. Any comments on them?
>>
>
> Sounds like typical, made-in-China garbage. Parents who'd buy their kid a
> $50 telescope probably spend the rest of their money on crack, cigarettes
> and beer.
I got one, but not for viewing, but for all
the outreaches I do at schools. Between that,
and the Galileoscope, they make excellent indoor
presentation tools !!! Great for young kid's to
paw all over.
Never looked through mine, but hundreds of kid's
have played with it indoors.
Worth it for that alone !
And BTW, the Chinese made Meade UWA eyepieces are
very nice............
--
AM
Bert Hyman
<no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Not quite.
Following up on your metaphor, google is like a criminal gang, supplying
arms and other resources to its criminal members.
Googlegroups makes it easy to spam the newsgroups and google does
absolutely nothing to stop it.
Ken S. Tucker
LOL: Please provide a link Tom.
I'm trying to figure this out,
http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-470x60-voyager.html
In the paragraph it writes "reflector".
I'm sure this is a good telescope, but the write-up confuses
me.
Ken
wsne...@hotmail.com
>
> Now about that new Orion $50 FunScope 76mm Reflector Telescope,
> maybe compared to the $50 Celestron FirstScope. Any comments on them?
How about buying one of each and doing a side-by-side evaluation? Let
us know what you find out.
William Hamblen
The two gadgets appear to be the same except for the paint job. It
might be fun to convert one into a scale model of Newton's 1668
telescope. An up-scaled model since Newton's was only about an inch
and a quarter instead of three inches. Vixen wants $600 for their
version.
Bud
wsne...@hotmail.com
wrote:
I think you get a red-dot finder with the Orion unit and more
reasonable magnifications of 15x and 30x with the included eyepieces.
At f/4 the spheroidal mirror is a bit of a concern, but if you think
of this as a 15x76 monocular with a built-in support and comfortable
viewing arrangement, this rig looks interesting. For more advanced
amateurs, it might serve well as a finder scope on a large Dob or as a
guidescope for a telephoto lens on a small equatorial mount. For a
general purpose beginner's scope in this size range, I would
recommend going with an f/10, or something larger and more expensive
with a parabolized mirror.
If you really wanted to make a working model of Newton's original
reflector, you could probably find a good plano-concave lens, have the
concave side aluminized ($?) and go from there.
Tom McDonald
Can't afford that. I have a 4.5" Orion StarBlast, and it's a
fine, simple, easy-to-use scope. I was curious about the
comparison, as I know a couple of kids who are interested in
astronomy, have crap plastic "scopes", and might be stimulated to
a real love of astronomy if they had a better, functional,
flexible small Dob.
Hell, at $50, I might even be able to afford to get one for one
of the kids. (The other has an MD for a mom, and probably could
buy one out of her allowance.)
Tom McDonald
I have no idea whether it's a good 'scope, but it says
"upgradeable to 1.25" format". So, presumably it comes with .965"
eyepieces. Weak.
The blurb also mentions an "innovative adjustable aluminum
tripods", while the specs say, "Adjustable Hardwood Tripod".
Confusion seems to be the idea here. This suggests either
carelessness (which does not speak well to Bushnell's care in
their business), or intentional confusion (which does not speak
well to Bushnell's integrity).
Could be a third option; perhaps I am not understanding something
quite simple. Or perhaps Bushnell didn't write the blurb and/or
specs.
Tom McDonald
> On Dec 12, 9:44 am, Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2...@charter.net> wrote:
>> Epsilon Eridani wrote:
>>> The number of CHINK spam ads is in inverse proportion to the number of
>>> astronomical posts. Once astro posts reach about 20 per day, the spam ads
>>> disappear. You'll see this on most forums.
>> Don't suppose you'd care to post any astro articles, shithead?>
>> Now about that new Orion $50 FunScope 76mm Reflector Telescope,
>> maybe compared to the $50 Celestron FirstScope. Any comments on them?
>
> LOL: Please provide a link Tom.
Missed this.
Orion Funscope:
Or:
And Celestron Firstscope:
http://www.celestron.com/c3/product.php?ProdID=568
Or:
HTH.
> I'm trying to figure this out,
> http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-470x60-voyager.html
> In the paragraph it writes "reflector".
> I'm sure this is a good telescope, but the write-up confuses
> me.
> Ken
Ken S. Tucker
That's my fault, the link I gave is NOT Bushnell's, check this out,
http://www.bushnell.com/products/other-products/telescopes/voyager-sky-tour/
We received a Walmart xmas flyer that had the Bushnell 60mm
refractor with something called "smart mount" @ $150.
Off hand it looks innovative to me.
Ken
wsne...@hotmail.com
>
> We received a Walmart xmas flyer that had the Bushnell 60mm
> refractor with something called "smart mount" @ $150.
> Off hand it looks innovative to me.
That amount sounds a little high for a 60mm telescope.
Ken S. Tucker
Well the 'smart mount' audio output is darn interesting,
I admire that innovation, I 'd like to try it.
Ken
wsne...@hotmail.com
Does the scope come with a set of headphones?
Ken S. Tucker
Guess so, but one could set it up in a living room, indoors,
and I figure using the "smart mount" after alignment, point
it around and the scope will talk about where it's pointed.
Sounds like a fun toy. I think it has potential!
Ken
Rich
news:c5-dnUcVYpTTT7nW...@giganews.com:
> Epsilon Eridani wrote:
>>> Now about that new Orion $50 FunScope 76mm Reflector Telescope,
>>> maybe compared to the $50 Celestron FirstScope. Any comments on
>>> them?
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like typical, made-in-China garbage. Parents who'd buy their
>> kid a $50 telescope probably spend the rest of their money on crack,
>> cigarettes and beer.
>
>
> I got one, but not for viewing, but for all
> the outreaches I do at schools. Between that,
> and the Galileoscope, they make excellent indoor
> presentation tools !!!
The Galileoscope has some historical value, unlike some poor man's
Astroscan rip-off from China.