Discussion:
OT... way, way OT: My reply to Mr. Hicks.
(too old to reply)
A-B C.
2004-06-19 23:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Alan Hicks wrote:


> I think that's a huge reason many of us are here. I hate to speculate
> on Seasame Street's [0] reasons for being here, but the fact that this
> company he says he runs is (quote from www.adams-black.com) "a
> well-known and well-established contract programming and software
> consulting house" doesn't quite add up. Unless of course, he's mining
> for data here to include in one of their technical books (as they also
> do book publishing).

I thought I was in your kill file? I was hoping I would be.... so I would
avoid having to respond to stupid remarks like above.

Mr. Hicks, what do you do for a living? Last I heard, you were a pig farmer. I
don't know if it's true, but I like bacon and I like pork... and I would not
run-down your occupation or your company or your life-style or impugn your
integrity simply to win an argument on a newsgroup (or anywhere else.)

Just for the record, I'm 57 years old, married for 23 years to my first,
current, and very expensive wife, and hold a BA from U. of Virginia and an MA
from William and Mary.

I'm president of a small consulting firm in Sacramento, CA. We have a book
publishing division as well, but it has been dormant the past two years....
just looking to ramp it up again now that the economy is better.

I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the State of
CA. This was to implement a new platform for one of the state agencies. The
platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell all you want but it was the right tool
for the job... and that's what our company provides. The contract, the work
assignments, and the financials are all public knowledge, documented, and you
can easily verify with the Dept. of Gen. Services who keep track of
procurements like this.

I'm also the main developer of our JAYA123 web-application. (www.jaya123.com)
This is about 180,000 lines of PHP code running on Linux/Apache,MySQL (again,
the right tool(s) for the job.) I wrote about 80% of the code... nights and
weekends over the past two years. We charge $14.95 a month per user and our
subscription base continues to grow. It's a good system. It's not for EVERY
one of the 10 million (NPR's stats, not mine) small business out there, but
it fills the need for a lot of them.... especially small book publishers
(since we have "the best" royalty system around.) Before JAYA123 I wrote and
sold PUB123 (www.adams-blake.com) for years to the book pub biz. Check our
credentials in that industry and you will see that our software is
well-respected and has a respectable user-base.

In addition I'm the author of The Silver Pen, Words From Home, and
ComputerMoney: Making It In Tech Consulting. I also write a weekly syndicated
column targeted to the small publishing market (of about 20,000). (Those of
you who might have been at the Book Expo America two weeks ago in Chicago
where president Clinton introduced his new book to some 2000 of us might like
my BEA Diary:
http://www.adams-blake.com/item.php?recordid=rant6-12-2004&pagestyle=default
)

I've been programming since I joined Ross Perot's EDS in 1974 (call them if
you don't believe me) and of late, I've finally gotten rather good at it. I
opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.

Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm not
qualified to be a Slackware user and why you feel you need to denigrate me
and my company as a means of disagreeing with me over some inane topic?

I really don't want to fight with you. I compete with Random House and with
Intuit. Believe me, Mr. Hicks, you're small potatoes... and I can have you
for lunch anytime I wish. However, I prefer a civil discourse with you. I
don't understand why you (and a few others) are such assholes ALL THE TIME.

You know the old saying. "Everyone likes a little ass,... but no one likes a
wise ass." But Alan, you seem to be a PAIN IN THE ASS... and for the life of
me I simply don't understand why.

Please put me back in your killfile... and leave me there. Who has time for
this?

ANC.
Dave Uhring
2004-06-19 23:59:09 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:39:39 -0700, A-B C. wrote:

> You know the old saying. "Everyone likes a little ass,... but no one likes a
> wise ass." But Alan, you seem to be a PAIN IN THE ASS... and for the life of
> me I simply don't understand why.
>
> Please put me back in your killfile... and leave me there. Who has time for
> this?

Well put. Bravo!

That fool has been in my killfile for years.
SchroedingerzKat
2004-06-20 00:26:58 UTC
Permalink
>Please put me back in your killfile... and leave me there. Who has time for
>this?
>

Dear Mr. ANC,

Don't you get tired of tooting your own horn?

Sincerely,

Michael
--
michael (at) li7-123 (dot) members.linode.com
notbob
2004-06-20 00:53:27 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, SchroedingerzKat <***@aol.com> wrote:

> Don't you get tired of tooting your own horn?

He's got a PhD in horn tooting.

nb
--
Be considerate of others and
trim your posts. Thank you.
Ondrej Kubecka
2004-06-20 00:25:58 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:39:39 -0700, A-B C. wrote:

> Just for the record, I'm 57 years old, married for 23 years to my first,
> ...
> it. I opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.
> Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm
> not qualified to be a Slackware user...

Quite impressive, truly. But it still doesn't qualify you to be a
Slackware user if those are the words you would want to use. Even if I
would not talk about qualification myself. It's not about how good you
are and what you have achieved. There are some top IT specialists that use
Debiand, others go Solaris and some even Windows. :) Its just matter of
philosophy: if yours differs from that of Slackware and adheres to the one
of Debian (or others) why in the world would you want to use Slackware
that would act like Debian and not use Debian instead and let Slackware be
Slackware?

> I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the
> State of CA. This was to implement a new platform for one of the state
> agencies. The platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell all you want but it
> was the right tool for the job... and that's what our company provides.

You have even told us and I most gladly agree. Various assignments
require various approprient tools and solutions. Slackware is very good in
being Slackware but fails to be Debian and vice verse. But there is a good
use for both depending on what you need and what you want. From what I
have read I can tell: You do not want Slackware.
Alan Hicks
2004-06-20 01:34:36 UTC
Permalink
This'll be my last proxy reply to A-B C. Sorry guys for feeding the
troll.

In alt.os.linux.slackware, Ondrej Kubecka dared to utter,
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:39:39 -0700, A-B C. wrote:
>
>> Just for the record, I'm 57 years old, married for 23 years to my first,
>> ...
>> it. I opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.
>> Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm
>> not qualified to be a Slackware user...

Explain to me why you are. Being of a certain age, being faithful to
your spouse, owning your own successful company, none of those things
are in the least a qualification for as a Slackware user. You want to
know why you're not qualified? Here you go.

http://www.lizella.net/slackware/philosophy.html

> It's not about how good you
> are and what you have achieved. There are some top IT specialists that use
> Debiand, others go Solaris and some even Windows. :) Its just matter of
> philosophy: if yours differs from that of Slackware and adheres to the one
> of Debian (or others) why in the world would you want to use Slackware
> that would act like Debian and not use Debian instead and let Slackware be
> Slackware?

Indeed. Linus Torvalds uses RedHat last I heard. He likes it; it fits
his philosophy. I don't personally like it as much as I do Slackware.
Linus Torvalds for all he's done, isn't a Slacker. He has a different
philosophy of "all I want to fool with is the kernel, so I'll use
whatever takes care of the rest the easiest for me". (Note that as Alan
Hicks, I can't speak personally for Linus Torvalds, that's just my
analysis of the data.)

>> I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the
>> State of CA.

One rule of usenet is to not make grandiose statements about how
excellent you are, regaurdless of whether or not they are factually
true. You just look like an ass when you do that. Personally I don't
give a damn if you can make a million dollar contract with the Martians
and complete it six months ahead of schedule. You want to be a Slacker,
get a set of balls and take some chances with your (testing) machine.
Solve problems on your own. The less you come here asking for help, and
the more you help people here, the closer to a Slacker you become.

You can tell some one's level of Clue not just by the questions they
ask, but by the way they ask their questions. You can tell if they
spend time trying to learn it on their own by providing non-trivial
hypotheses about what might be wrong. They ask for suggestions from
people when they step out in new territory, then take those suggestions
as a guide and walk out into unknown territory.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
Realto Margarino
2004-06-20 01:41:10 UTC
Permalink
Alan Hicks <***@lizella.network> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> This'll be my last proxy reply to A-B C. Sorry guys for feeding the
> troll.

Sorry guys? There are no guys to you, doofus. You are universally
regarded as an arrogant little turd. You're all alone. All the
other turds got chased off. But that goes without saying because
you are a pgp trash troll.

cordially, even to trash trolls,

rm
SuperDaemon
2004-06-20 06:20:11 UTC
Permalink
Alan Hicks wrote:

> Explain to me why you are. Being of a certain age, being faithful to
> your spouse, owning your own successful company, none of those things
> are in the least a qualification for as a Slackware user. You want to
> know why you're not qualified?

You questioned his integrity. He tried to tell you something about his
character by mentioning his age, being faithful, his achievements, etc. You
may have lost the point, it did not have anything to do with being a good
slackware user or otherwise.
Ondrej Kubecka
2004-06-20 21:29:28 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 06:20:11 +0000, SuperDaemon wrote:

> You may have lost the point, it did not have anything to do with being a
> good slackware user or otherwise.

Actually it did since it was followed by:

"Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm
not qualified to be a Slackware user and why you feel you need to
denigrate me and my company as a means of disagreeing with me over some
inane topic?"
SuperDaemon
2004-06-20 22:38:14 UTC
Permalink
Ondrej Kubecka wrote:

> Actually it did since it was followed by:
>

My last post on this thread:

You have to relax. It is just a Computer. It is just an OS, which according
to your hero sucks a bit less. OK? There are more important things out
there, like life, career, family, friends and community.

Everybody can post here. Everybody has a right to express their opinions
[about slackware] here. This is a newsgroup for discussing matters related
to Slackware. This is not a place to get personal and question other
poster's integrity.

It is OK to be enthusiastic about your computer and how you run it. It is
not however OK to feel superior because you do things differently and do
not run swaret. Do it your way. I'd do it my way. It is just a Computer and
I run it as I please. It is a matter of choice. People are different. Do
not question other people's integrity since they do things differently.

It is just an OS and sucks a bit less than the others. No more no less.

You and everyone else are welcome to put me in your killfile also. This is
just too much talk about nothing.


Thank You.
Ondrej Kubecka
2004-06-20 22:59:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:38:14 +0000, SuperDaemon wrote:

> Everybody can post here. Everybody has a right to express their opinions
> [about slackware] here. This is a newsgroup for discussing matters related
> to Slackware. This is not a place to get personal and question other
> poster's integrity.

When and how did I do that?

> It is OK to be enthusiastic about your computer and how you run it. It is
> not however OK to feel superior because you do things differently and do
> not run swaret. Do it your way. I'd do it my way. It is just a Computer
> and I run it as I please. It is a matter of choice. People are different.
> Do not question other people's integrity since they do things differently.

When or how did I tell I feel superior?

I must have not read my posts carefuly.


My point is: Of there is traditional pkgtools in Slackware it is possible
to install swaret (or any other automated package management tool and we
can all be happy.

However if Slackware leaves the way it does packages now and use some
wannabe smart and sophisticated package management system there is a
very limited choice left for those that want to maintain full control by
doing things manualy. You could still use tar and gcc for most of the
tasks, but the system would get a lot more complicated. I am not that
experienced but Slackware seems to be one of very few systems that allow
me to install it without including inetd (and other stuff I don't want -
in this case for security reason: I don't need it, I don't run it.)

I have rather rich previous experience (mainly) with RedHat and Debian. I
have friends using those distributions and I respect there choice as well
as they respect mine. It seems pointless to me if I woudl want Debian
behavior and thus made Slackware act that way and someone else would want
RPMS and converted his Debian to use it. Currently there is a diversity
and it is good for all of us unlike leveling everything to one shape.
SuperDaemon
2004-06-20 23:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Ondrej Kubecka wrote:

> When and how did I do that?
>

I was not talking about you there Ondrej. I was talking about the person
mentioned in the subject of this thread.
Ondrej Kubecka
2004-06-21 09:56:46 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 23:29:02 +0000, SuperDaemon wrote:

> I was not talking about you there Ondrej. I was talking about the person
> mentioned in the subject of this thread.

Sorry, I got mistaken by thread order in this "Pan reader" thing I'm
trying.
Kenneth
2004-06-20 22:24:05 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> wrote:
> Alan Hicks wrote:
>
>> Explain to me why you are. Being of a certain age, being faithful to
>> your spouse, owning your own successful company, none of those things
>> are in the least a qualification for as a Slackware user. You want to
>> know why you're not qualified?
>
> You questioned his integrity. He tried to tell you something about his
> character by mentioning his age, being faithful, his achievements, etc. You
> may have lost the point, it did not have anything to do with being a good
> slackware user or otherwise.

You might want to get a little more life experience before you fall for
ABC's nonsense. He does this all the time.

ken
SuperDaemon
2004-06-20 23:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Kenneth wrote:

> You might want to get a little more life experience before you fall for
> ABC's nonsense. He does this all the time.
>
> ken

ken:

I know that ken. Al ain't no angel. You know that and I know that. I've been
reading his posts since he started here less than a year ago. He gets on my
nerves occasionally but admittedly less than others including the person in
the subject of this thread.
Kenneth
2004-06-21 21:21:26 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> wrote:
> Kenneth wrote:
>
>> You might want to get a little more life experience before you fall for
>> ABC's nonsense. He does this all the time.
>>
>> ken
>
> ken:
>
> I know that ken. Al ain't no angel. You know that and I know that. I've been
> reading his posts since he started here less than a year ago. He gets on my
> nerves occasionally but admittedly less than others including the person in
> the subject of this thread.
>
>

Understood.

ken
Keith Keller
2004-06-21 02:51:09 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, Alan Hicks <***@lizella.netWORK> wrote:
>
> Indeed. Linus Torvalds uses RedHat last I heard. He likes it; it fits
> his philosophy. I don't personally like it as much as I do Slackware.
> Linus Torvalds for all he's done, isn't a Slacker. He has a different
> philosophy of "all I want to fool with is the kernel, so I'll use
> whatever takes care of the rest the easiest for me". (Note that as Alan
> Hicks, I can't speak personally for Linus Torvalds, that's just my
> analysis of the data.)

According to the a bunch of the stuff I've read by Linus, he currently
(at the time of his authorship, which varies from a few months to some
years ago) uses RH and SuSE. IIRC he used to use SLS and Slackware,
back in the day, and if he didn't like something that was more or less
permanent about Slackware (e.g., the package management style), he
didn't spend hours of his time venting spleen about it in the
newsgroups, he simply switched to a distro that met his desires better.
(One presumes that, if he had time, he could pretty easily roll his own
distro; it's apparently just not something he cares enough about.)

In addition, if he did vent spleen, at least he's proven his technical
skills enough to others that he wouldn't be perceived as a raving idiot.

- --keith

- --
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom
X***@X.X
2004-06-21 10:45:27 UTC
Permalink
Keith Keller <kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> says...

>According to the a bunch of the stuff I've read by Linus, he currently
>(at the time of his authorship, which varies from a few months to some
>years ago) uses RH and SuSE. IIRC he used to use SLS and Slackware,
>back in the day, and if he didn't like something that was more or less
>permanent about Slackware (e.g., the package management style), he
>didn't spend hours of his time venting spleen about it in the
>newsgroups, he simply switched to a distro that met his desires better.

Wow. What a concept. Does anyone else know that one can switch
distributions rather than complain about the one you are using?

Perhaps there should be a comic book explaining the concept.
HJohnson
2004-06-20 15:58:53 UTC
Permalink
Ondrej Kubecka wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:39:39 -0700, A-B C. wrote:
>
>
>>Just for the record, I'm 57 years old, married for 23 years to my first,
>>...
>>it. I opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.
>>Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm
>>not qualified to be a Slackware user...
>
>
> Quite impressive, truly. But it still doesn't qualify you to be a
> Slackware user if those are the words you would want to use. Even if I
> would not talk about qualification myself. It's not about how good you
> are and what you have achieved. There are some top IT specialists that use
> Debiand, others go Solaris and some even Windows. :) Its just matter of
> philosophy: if yours differs from that of Slackware and adheres to the one
> of Debian (or others) why in the world would you want to use Slackware
> that would act like Debian and not use Debian instead and let Slackware be
> Slackware?
>
>
>>I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the
>>State of CA. This was to implement a new platform for one of the state
>>agencies. The platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell all you want but it
>>was the right tool for the job... and that's what our company provides.
>
>
> You have even told us and I most gladly agree. Various assignments
> require various approprient tools and solutions. Slackware is very good in
> being Slackware but fails to be Debian and vice verse. But there is a good
> use for both depending on what you need and what you want. From what I
> have read I can tell: You do not want Slackware.

(Sigh)

I wish people learn a little more to fulfill their brains before putting
their mouths in gear....(sigh)

A (VERY) short history of Linux distributions.

The first put-together software that you could call a distribution came
from Software Landing Systems (SLS). That was in '92, IIRC. If you got a
CD, you had to copy everything onto floppies in order to install it.
(How far have we come.....)

Patrick was tired of fixing the bugs that this 'distribution' had. After
bug fixing, he then distributed the 'fixed' Linux distribution as a
Slackware distribution. (I started using his 'version' of a Linux
distribution sometime around kernel version 0.97pl11 and followed the
explosive growth of the 'me too' distributions).

From Slackware, came Red Hat, Later, from Red Had, came others, as well
as some more from Slackware. Debian was started by Bruce, more of a 'Can
I do it?' attitude, and named after his then, girlfriend. It has since
obtained a following of those that have long noses stuck high in the
atmosphere. (Is the air really any better, up there?). These people have
a superior attitude and think every thing and every one else is below
them, technically and intelligently.

The Debian distribution is still a 'dependency' based distribution. And
it is too automated and too general so that you really do not have to
know very much about your system. And it won't let you install anything
until you have the pre-requisite modules installed first. (Red Hat RPM
ancestry, here, even though it is a ".deb" compressed file instead of
the ".rpm" package.)

So, it is not a matter of Slackware being a Debian product. It is a
matter of the step-grandchild calling the tribal elder, 'unknowing' or
stupid. (Most kids, do that, until they, too, grow up and realize that
maybe Dad was not so stupid, after all.)

Go back in the corner and don't come out until you put a little more
intelligence in your brain before engaging your mouth. I say that so
that you do not look like the simple fool that you espouse to be.

(Flames doused by killfile)

--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
Alan Hicks
2004-06-20 22:42:34 UTC
Permalink
In alt.os.linux.slackware, HJohnson dared to utter,
> So, it is not a matter of Slackware being a Debian product. It is a
> matter of the step-grandchild calling the tribal elder, 'unknowing' or
> stupid. (Most kids, do that, until they, too, grow up and realize that
> maybe Dad was not so stupid, after all.)

My preacher said this morning that the following is a quote from mark
Twain, though he can't find the source to be sure.

Back when I was 14 my Dad knew nothing. Now that I'm 21, I'm amazed at
how much the old coot has learned in only 7 years.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 00:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Alan Hicks wrote:

> My preacher said this morning that the following is a quote
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.

> Ecclesiastes 7:5

Would you please slow down on your religious undertone, overtone here on
slackware forum. Please find a better forum for this type of advocacy.
Keith Keller
2004-06-21 05:23:53 UTC
Permalink
In article <XJpBc.8419$***@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
SuperDaemon wrote:
> Alan Hicks wrote:
>
>> My preacher said this morning that the following is a quote
>> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
>
>> Ecclesiastes 7:5
>
> Would you please slow down on your religious undertone, overtone here on
> slackware forum. Please find a better forum for this type of advocacy.

I'm pretty hypersensitive to religious proselytizing--I worked in a
public school in San Francisco, even the Church of the Subgenius is
recognized here ;-) --but I would hardly characterize Alan's posts
as religious advocacy. He was relaying a quote he heard from someone
who is probably best characterized to him as his preacher, and his
.sig quote from the Bible is certainly applicable in a wide variety
of non-biblical situations.

Now, back to the goat! (ting)

- --keith

- --
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom
Two Ravens
2004-06-21 06:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Keith Keller wrote:

> Now, back to the goat! (ting)
>
> - --keith

Joost tends to get cross when you mention the 'Goat', where non-members
can see.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 07:03:38 UTC
Permalink
Keith Keller wrote:

> I'm pretty hypersensitive to religious proselytizing--I worked in a
> public school in San Francisco, even the Church of the Subgenius is
> recognized here ;-) --but I would hardly characterize Alan's posts
> as religious advocacy.  He was relaying a quote he heard from someone
> who is probably best characterized to him as his preacher, and his
> .sig quote from the Bible is certainly applicable in a wide variety
> of non-biblical situations.

Keith I respect your response, you're a cool head. but:

If we let the religious people (not necessarily Allen here) loose, they'd
turn this country into the style of governments like the ones in Kingdom
of Saudi Arabia, Islamic Republic of Iran or Taliban regime in Afganistan
eventually.

Ideaology, Religion and Dogmatism just plain suck. period. Religious
overtones are not welcomed here. Advocacy was possibly an strong word in my
post but It may be shocking to some that I don't care how someone spend
their sunday morning and what the "wise Preacher" said.

If it was not for rational heads and revisionsts (Martin Luther King
definitely included) we'd still be eating our own shit religiously like in
the middle ages and be thankfull to the "holy Church". Religion and
dogmatism are impediment to progress when they have decided to oppose
scientific facts, just because they are uncapable to frame Scientific facts
into their higher teachings, into their undrestandings and into their
philosophy of the Natural World.

Just one example the Vatican and the Pope has not recognized their faults
dealing with Galileo yet in 21st Century and Pope advises us not to discuss
Big-Bang Theory. The Pope goes only as far as saying that mistakes were
made when dealing with Galileo.

Call me liberal, leftist, athiest, immoral or wahtever. But I believe that
religion belongs to home. It is a sacred and a personal thing. It is
something in your heart and should not interfere with your rational
thinking and underastanding in your head. It does not belong in public life
and in a public forum. Separation of Church and state is good. The right to
congrate and worship in whatever form and to whatever diety is good. Just
do not bring it into a unrelated public forum and proceed to declare it as
official public policy for everyone to abide by eventually.
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 08:36:27 UTC
Permalink
SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> writes:

> Call me liberal, leftist, athiest, immoral or wahtever.

No thanks - there's been enough name-calling round here already.


> But I believe that religion belongs to home. It is a sacred and a
> personal thing. It is something in your heart and should not interfere
> with your rational thinking and underastanding in your head. It does
> not belong in public life and in a public forum. Separation of Church
> and state is good. The right to congrate and worship in whatever form
> and to whatever diety is good. Just do not bring it into a unrelated
> public forum and proceed to declare it as official public policy for
> everyone to abide by eventually.

Seems to me that Alan's signature is hardly an attempt to dictate "public
policy" or even policy for this group, unlike your post. If you feel
threatened by even this minimal level of exposure to religion, then there
is clearly a problem - but possibly yours? Lighten up!

Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
unknown
2004-06-21 09:49:08 UTC
Permalink
SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> says...

>If we let the religious people (not necessarily Allen here) loose, they'd
>turn this country into the style of governments like the ones in Kingdom
>of Saudi Arabia, Islamic Republic of Iran or Taliban regime in Afganistan
>eventually.

http://www.google.com/search?q=slippery+slope+fallacy
Keith Keller
2004-06-21 15:13:44 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-21, SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> wrote:

[snip proselytizing]

> If it was not for rational heads and revisionsts (Martin Luther King
> definitely included) we'd still be eating our own shit religiously like in
> the middle ages and be thankfull to the "holy Church".

Don't you mean The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.? He wasn't exactly
an atheist, you know. :)

- --keith

- --
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom
Two Ravens
2004-06-21 15:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Keith Keller wrote:

> Don't you mean The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.? He wasn't exactly
> an atheist, you know. :)

I think he was referring to the man, German, (there wasn't such a thing
as Germany at the time, Holy Roman Empire?), who nailed the 32
articles to the door of a Cathederal in Germany the name of which I
forget, we did it in History when I was at school but that was over 40
years ago. Its the man who the Lutheren Church is and The Reverend
Martin Luther King Jr. is named after. He 'started' the Reformation
Protestantism.


--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
Realto Margarino
2004-06-21 16:23:48 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens <tworavens$$@eudoramail.$$com> wrote:
> Keith Keller wrote:

> > Don't you mean The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.? He wasn't
> > exactly an atheist, you know. :)

> I think he was referring to the man, German, (there wasn't such a
> thing as Germany at the time, Holy Roman Empire?), who nailed
> the 32 articles to the door of a Cathederal in Germany the name
> of which I forget, we did it in History when I was at school but
> that was over 40 years ago. Its the man who the Lutheren Church
> is and The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. is named after.

I thought Martin Luther King Jr was named after Martin Luther King
Sr.

cordially, as always,

rm
Two Ravens
2004-06-21 17:07:35 UTC
Permalink
Realto Margarino wrote:

> I thought Martin Luther King Jr was named after Martin Luther King
> Sr.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm

He probably was but I think that SuperDaemon may have been referring to
Martin Luther the 16th Century figure around whom the Protestantism
grew. However 16th Century would definitely make Martin Luther,
'Senior'.
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 18:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens wrote:

> He probably was but I think that SuperDaemon may have been referring to
> Martin Luther the 16th Century figure around whom the Protestantism
> grew. However 16th Century would definitely make Martin Luther,
> 'Senior'.

Yes Thank You Two Raven. Revisionism, Protest against wrongly held beliefs,
being dynamic, being pragmatic, avoiding dogmatism, rational cool heads are
engines of progress.

Recent aggressive Feminist and Gay movements have put the religious right on
the defensive. The Feminist and Gay movement directly challenge the
Patriarchal order. The economic progress and economic well being (via
Reagan and Clinton Economic Policies) in recent years also have motivated
people to be more involved in spiritual matters and not just with the daily
bread. Hence the motivation and all the emotions we have observed regarding
a Judge and his engraved 10 commandmendments monuments in that courthouse
recently.
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 18:29:55 UTC
Permalink
SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> writes:

> Two Ravens wrote:
>
>> He probably was but I think that SuperDaemon may have been referring to
>> Martin Luther the 16th Century figure around whom the Protestantism
>> grew. However 16th Century would definitely make Martin Luther,
>> 'Senior'.
>
> Yes Thank You Two Raven. Revisionism, Protest against wrongly held beliefs,
> being dynamic, being pragmatic, avoiding dogmatism, rational cool heads are
> engines of progress.

I really have to ask this - it verges on being a moral obligation - have
you _ever_ read _anything_ that Martin Luther himself wrote? In English
will do. And would you mind telling us what that might be? Do you have
any idea about what Luther stood for and against, and why he did so, any
idea that is rooted in fact as opposed to wishful thinking?

Do tell.

Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
Two Ravens
2004-06-21 18:38:28 UTC
Permalink
Glyn Millington wrote:


> I really have to ask this - it verges on being a moral obligation -
> have you _ever_ read _anything_ that Martin Luther himself wrote? In
> English will do. And would you mind telling us what that might be?
> Do you have any idea about what Luther stood for and against, and why
> he did so, any idea that is rooted in fact as opposed to wishful
> thinking?
>
> Do tell.
>
> Glyn

I seem to remember that part of the 32 articles was an argument against
Papal indulgences, but as I said it was a long time ago when I read it,
so I'm probably wrong. (I do know what an indulgence was if that scores
me a plus point.)

Or was this question directed to SuperDeamon and not myself?
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 19:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens <tworavens$$@eudoramail.$$com> writes:

> I seem to remember that part of the 32 articles was an argument against
> Papal indulgences, but as I said it was a long time ago when I read it,
> so I'm probably wrong. (I do know what an indulgence was if that scores
> me a plus point.)

Sorry - didn't want to sound patronising. But indulgences definitely gets
a plus!!

I think you mean the 95 Theses which he nailed to the Church door at
Wittenberg in 1517 (as opposed to, maybe the Thirtynine Articles of the
Church of England?)

> Or was this question directed to SuperDeamon and not myself?

To SuperDaemon. I didn't recognise Martin Luther from his description!




Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
Two Ravens
2004-06-21 21:14:59 UTC
Permalink
Glyn Millington wrote:

> I think you mean the 95 Theses which he nailed to the Church door at
> Wittenberg in 1517 (as opposed to, maybe the Thirtynine Articles of
> the Church of England?)

Now that really has added to my education! I now, after over 40 years
know which was which, Wittenburg came to me just after I pushed the
send button. Its the 95 Theses, something about a diet of worms (Deit
of Wurms?) and nailing the items to the door.

For all these years I've had this mental picture of a tonsured monk
nailing 32 things, nearly always dirty socks to the door of a Cathedral
and then eating a plate of dirty looking short spaghetti! but at long
last it did come in useful. (That was how I managed to remember it,
unfortunately I've got the 32 confused with 95 and 39, you're sure
that's not 39 steps?)

When my daughter was three I taught her the phrase Lichen lives in a
symbiotic relationship. She then reeled that off during an "A Level"
biology lesson and gained, what I gather, was the amazed admiration of
the teacher.

--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 22:14:20 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens <tworavens$$@eudoramail.$$com> writes:

> Now that really has added to my education! Its the 95 Theses,
> something about a diet of worms (Deit of Wurms?) and nailing the items
> to the door.

I read in of those fake "Children's answers to examination questions"
things years ago something about

"Martin Luther nailed his 95 faeces to the door at Wittemburg"

For the sacred spaghetti have a look at

http://www.luther.de/en/worms.html


> unfortunately I've got the 32 confused with 95 and 39, you're sure
> that's not 39 steps?)

Depends - do you read John Buchan more than the Book of Common Prayer??


>
> When my daughter was three I taught her the phrase Lichen lives in a
> symbiotic relationship. She then reeled that off during an "A Level"
> biology lesson and gained, what I gather, was the amazed admiration of
> the teacher.

I'll keep that one handy ;-)

Do you know, what they say is right - Slackware is the way to learn!!

Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 19:32:30 UTC
Permalink
Glyn Millington wrote:

> I really have to ask this - it verges on being a moral obligation - have
> you ever read anything that Martin Luther himself wrote? In English
> will do.  And would you mind telling us what that might be?  Do you have
> any idea about what Luther stood for and against, and why he did so, any
> idea that is rooted in fact as opposed to wishful thinking?
>

I saw an extended Documentry couple years ago. I undrestood (and remember
from that non-religiuous Scholarly documentry) that Martin Luther was
against the idea of the priests and the pope being the only official medium
between God and the People. He was against the idea of the priests being
the only officials eligible for communicating and contacting with God.
Befor Martin Luther people were supposedly incapable of independant
thinking, incapable of ability to contact and communicate with God,
incapable of wondering about spirituality. It was only the official church
and the priests who were learned enough to dictate what was right and holy
and noone else. Martin Luther was a rightous thinker outside of the
stablished Loop thinking differently. Difficult question you are asking me
here Glyn.

It probably is very simplistic of me but; I think He was against the idea
that only the official stablished priests could meditate, wonder, think and
talk about God. He gave the religion to masses for themselves to wonder, to
think (is this too simplistic or blasphemy?). I am not a theologian and
neither religious nor a philosopher; So I am not sure; and these are only
my undrestandings.

At the end Consequently; I think He was against Church taxes and selling
salvations in here-after for hard currency to finance the church lavish
spendings. Wasn't church selling salvation for some amount of money back
then? and give the poor ignorant peasants a receipt for eternal salvation?
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 20:13:57 UTC
Permalink
SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> writes:
> Glyn Millington wrote:
>> Do you have any idea about what Luther stood for and against, and why
>> he did so, any idea that is rooted in fact as opposed to wishful
>> thinking?
>
> I saw an extended Documentry couple years ago. I undrestood (and remember
> from that non-religiuous Scholarly documentry) that Martin Luther was
> against the idea of the priests and the pope being the only official medium
> between God and the People. He was against the idea of the priests being
> the only officials eligible for communicating and contacting with God.
> Befor Martin Luther people were supposedly incapable of independant
> thinking, incapable of ability to contact and communicate with God,
> incapable of wondering about spirituality. It was only the official church
> and the priests who were learned enough to dictate what was right and holy
> and noone else. Martin Luther was a rightous thinker outside of the
> stablished Loop thinking differently. Difficult question you are asking me
> here Glyn.

OK - yes you are right, they are difficult questions, and that is really
the point which I was (rather rudely, forgive me) trying to make. If
"non-religious " and "scholarly" are things you value, it is good to
know a little about those you bring in to support your argument in one
way or another.

You are right, Luther was incensed about the sale of "Indulgences", time
off from Purgatory for those on their way to heaven granted on payment of
a suitable sum and he did challenge the authority of the Papacy. In many
ways, however, Luther was as dogmatic and intransigent as the Papacy
itself. He had no time at all for the Anabaptists and seems to have
supported the death penalty imposed on them. He was certainly no
free-wheeling free-thinker!

Now of course religion, then as now was mixed up with politics and Luther
found very powerful supporters - otherwise ML would have been one more
brilliant monk who fell foul of Rome ...

Lots of good stuff on Luther on the web!

Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 22:00:23 UTC
Permalink
Glyn Millington wrote:

> OK - yes you are right, they are difficult questions,

Yes these are Philosophy and theology questions. Noone has better answers
than the other. These are subjective matters. These questions have been
lingering since Plato time. That is why it is a good idea to keep them
personal, keep them at home, or keep them for our religious meetings.

> and that is really
> the point which I was (rather rudely, forgive me) trying to make.   If
> "non-religious "   and "scholarly" are things you value, 

I don't value "non-religiosity" as a value. It is NOT a good thing. We need
some assurances, some beleifs in a higher being, some beleif in a higher
truth. I however value scholary attitude, and I do not think Religion and
Science should mix. Science (and technology) should service to our physical
needs. Religion should service to our spiritiual needs. We should not
expect science to prove our religion nor should expect the religion to
answer our scientific questions. If one insists then We should strive to
undrestand how scientific facts fit in our religious frame of thought.

> it is good to
> know a little about those you bring in to support your argument in one
> way or another.

> You are right, Luther was incensed about the sale of "Indulgences", time
> off from Purgatory for those on their way to heaven granted on payment of
> a suitable sum and he did challenge the authority of the Papacy.  In many
> ways, however, Luther was as dogmatic and intransigent as the Papacy
> itself. He had no time at all for the Anabaptists and seems to have
> supported the death penalty imposed on them.  He was certainly no
> free-wheeling free-thinker!

I do not know, as I said I am not a religion historian or a theologian. I
thought his idea of ordinary people are capable of appreciating God and
spirituality was a good thing, if it was his idea originally of course.
>
> Now of course religion, then as now was mixed up with politics and Luther
> found very powerful supporters - otherwise ML would have been one more
> brilliant monk who fell foul of Rome ...

That very well could be. Another factor was the availability of newly
invented printing press machines, when his thesis was much more easy to be
reproduced on paper and be easily distributed all over.


> Lots of good stuff on Luther on the web!

Yes very interesting stuff.
/dev/rob0
2004-06-21 20:58:10 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 19:32:30 +0000, SuperDaemon wrote:
> At the end Consequently; I think He was against Church taxes and selling
> salvations in here-after for hard currency to finance the church lavish
> spendings. Wasn't church selling salvation for some amount of money back
> then? and give the poor ignorant peasants a receipt for eternal salvation?

To bring this back on topic .. sort of ... the Church of the SubGenius
still does sell eternal salvation, and unlike predecessors, they offer
a triple-your-money-back guarantee. You can't go wrong. Hail Bob.
http://www.subgenius.com/

To take this back OFF topic, we have, what, at least 3 theologians here
now? Ondrej, Glyn (IIRC?) and the possibly-lurking Bryan? I bet there's
a 4th ... Roger never did mention what HIS field of study was ... ;)
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply
Glyn Millington
2004-06-21 22:05:40 UTC
Permalink
"/dev/rob0" <***@gmx.co.uk> writes:

> To bring this back on topic .. sort of ... the Church of the SubGenius
> still does sell eternal salvation, and unlike predecessors, they offer
> a triple-your-money-back guarantee. You can't go wrong. Hail Bob.
> http://www.subgenius.com/

Well, I don't know if it counts as "triple" but Luke 6:38 isn't a _bad_ offer!


>
> To take this back OFF topic, we have, what, at least 3 theologians here
> now? Ondrej, Glyn (IIRC?)

Just a simple country parson .....


> and the possibly-lurking Bryan? I bet there's a 4th ... Roger never did
> mention what HIS field of study was ... ;)

Yep - he shows all the symptoms! But I feel sure he mentioned having
studied Computer Science somewhere - and I guess he is too nice to those
with whom he disagrees to be a _serious_ theologian ....


Glyn
--
RTFM http://www.tldp.org/index.html
GAFC http://slackbook.lizella.net/
STFW http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=alt.os.linux.slackware
GAFL http://www.xemacs.org http://www.gnus.org/
Alan Hicks
2004-06-21 22:26:21 UTC
Permalink
In alt.os.linux.slackware, /dev/rob0 dared to utter,
> Roger never did mention what HIS field of study was ... ;)

He's got a B.S. in B.S.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
Keith Keller
2004-06-21 19:13:21 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-21, SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> wrote:
>
> Yes Thank You Two Raven. Revisionism, Protest against wrongly held beliefs,
> being dynamic, being pragmatic, avoiding dogmatism, rational cool heads are
> engines of progress.

Now who's proselytizing in the newsgroup? ;-\

- --keith

- --
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom
Faux_Pseudo
2004-06-21 17:28:21 UTC
Permalink
_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, Two Ravens wrote the following -._
> I think he was referring to the man, German, (there wasn't such a thing
> as Germany at the time, Holy Roman Empire?), who nailed the 32
> articles to the door of a Cathederal in Germany the name of which I
> forget,

Eddie Izzard
The Protestant faith was different. That started probably around
a similar time, but that was about Martin Luther, this German guy
who pinned a note on a church door saying, " 'ang on a minute!"
But in German, so, "Ein Minuten, bitte. Ich habe einen kleinen
Problemo avec diese Religione." He was from everywhere. So yeah
and so the Protestant faith was sort of tacked on by Queen
Elizabeth I a bit Oh, principles! Thank God! We've got some
principles." Nowadays, of England is much more, "Hello, how are
you?" Much more a type... Hello!" A lot of people in Church of
England have no muscles in their arms. "Hello, yes... ( chuckles
) Yes, that's what I thought. ( chuckles Do come in, you're the
only one today! Now the sermon today is taken from a magazine
that I found in a hedge. Now lipstick colors this season
are in the frosted pink area and nail colors to match... And this
reminds me rather of our Lord Jesus! Because surely, when Jesus
went into Nazareth on a donkey, he must have got tarted up a
bit..."

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
John
2004-06-21 17:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Faux_Pseudo wrote:

<snip>

The irony of this is that 'SuperDaemon' has now extended a thread, which
has turned into a discussion on ther history of Protestantism, and gone
wandering off down various by-ways.

Its interesting, is it not, the variety of interests displayed by
Slackware users, when diverted into OT areas?

--
John
Faux_Pseudo
2004-06-22 00:42:54 UTC
Permalink
_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, John wrote the following -._
> Faux_Pseudo wrote:
> The irony of this is that 'SuperDaemon' has now extended a thread,

Yup, it always happens.

> Its interesting, is it not, the variety of interests displayed by
> Slackware users, when diverted into OT areas?

Thus the reason we have a OT list.

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
unknown
2004-06-21 17:39:26 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens <tworavens$$@eudoramail.$$com> says...
>
>Keith Keller wrote:
>
>> Don't you mean The Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.? He wasn't exactly
>> an atheist, you know. :)
>
>I think he was referring to the man, German ... who nailed the 32

You shouldn't assume that others are ignorant (which one would
have to be in order to write "Martin Luther King" when referring
to Martin Luther).
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 19:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote:

> You shouldn't assume that others are ignorant (which one would
> have to be in order to write "Martin Luther King" when referring
> to Martin Luther).

I think this may qualify for mod quotes candidate.
Faux_Pseudo
2004-06-21 17:20:01 UTC
Permalink
_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon wrote the following -._
> Just one example the Vatican and the Pope has not recognized their faults
> dealing with Galileo yet in 21st Century
<snip>
> The Pope goes only as far as saying that mistakes were made when
> dealing with Galileo.

I am sorry that you are ignorant.
Google for "galileo 1992" Hit the I'm feeling luck link and you will
see a letter from the pope addressing this issue. Go down to section
4 as that is where the fun stuff starts. In short Galileo was cleared
by the church 12 years ago, I remember the day it happend with the
same type of joy I felt on October 27th 1997 when the church said that
evolution was not incompatable with God and the Canon.

> and Pope advises us not to discuss Big-Bang Theory.

I do remember Hawking saying something about that. But "advises" is
not the same as "burned with faggots at ones feet".

> Call me liberal, leftist, athiest, immoral or wahtever. But I believe that
> religion belongs to home.

As an Atheist I thing exactly the opposit. Religion, if one decides
to follow one, takes place everyplace. Home, church or in the
office. But one must find the fine line between "My God can beet up
your civil liberties and commen since" and "God was nice to me and
after working hard I got a promotion."

Religious intolerace, on either side of the fence, is bad. If you
can't tolerate religion being brought up in any givin field of life
then you probibly have not yet reached a zen state and neve owned a
goat.

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
SuperDaemon
2004-06-21 18:47:33 UTC
Permalink
Faux_Pseudo wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> _.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon wrote the following -._
>> Just one example the Vatican and the Pope has not recognized their faults
>> dealing with Galileo yet in 21st Century
> <snip>
>> The Pope goes only as far as saying that mistakes were made when
>> dealing with Galileo.
>
> I am sorry that you are ignorant.
> Google for "galileo 1992" Hit the I'm feeling luck link and you will
> see a letter from the pope addressing this issue. Go down to section
> 4 as that is where the fun stuff starts. In short Galileo was cleared
> by the church 12 years ago,

Oh good; about time I'd say. That's good. I am glad to hear that. We are
making progress.


> I remember the day it happend with the
> same type of joy I felt on October 27th 1997 when the church said that
> evolution was not incompatable with God and the Canon.

What you are missing is that Evolution is happening now in wild species
right now. The birds of the same species with bigger beaks (happening by
chance) have a better chance of (more food) and survival than their
siblings with smaller ones. The genes responsible for bigger beak has a
better chance of transmitting to next generation. Do not deny this fact and
take it against your religion. Go back and find out why this fact should
conflict with your religious beliefs, teachings and Philosophy. Maybe You
did not undrestand your religious tachings correctly. Religion as a higher
philosophy should be able to encompass and enframe all natural laws of the
nature.

>> and Pope advises us not to discuss Big-Bang Theory.

> I do remember Hawking saying something about that. But "advises" is
> not the same as "burned with faggots at ones feet".

Oh good, Seem like we have some progress then. AS I undrestand It Pope is
not a scientist, then how come he could advise us about some scientific
facts?

>> Call me liberal, leftist, athiest, immoral or wahtever. But I believe
>> that religion belongs to home.
>
> As an Atheist I thing exactly the opposit. Religion, if one decides
> to follow one, takes place everyplace. Home, church or in the
> office.

Right, God is everywhere.

> But one must find the fine line between "My God can beet up
> your civil liberties and commen since" and "God was nice to me and
> after working hard I got a promotion."


Yes that is right, that is what started this subthread. slow down on some
religious overtones in posts here. I have a lot of respect for people going
to church regulary and being religious and being spiritual. Don't go
overboard and start enforcing your beliefs on me. I don't really care what
Alan's preacher said yesterday morning in the ceremon in his church.

> Religious intolerace, on either side of the fence, is bad.

Religion and spiritually is a good thing. Religion saves people and
banckrupts head shrinkers.

> If you can't tolerate religion being brought up in any givin field of life

nope don't bring it up at work or at this place where I am present. keep it
in your heart and keep it close to you everywhere. keep it for yourself and
I respect you for that.

> then you probibly have not yet reached a zen state and neve owned a
> goat.

Zen state? I thought you were christian. Do you know that Buhdism
fundamentally dnies the existance of God?
Faux_Pseudo
2004-06-22 00:38:44 UTC
Permalink
_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon wrote the following -._
>> I remember the day it happend with the
>> same type of joy I felt on October 27th 1997 when the church said that
>> evolution was not incompatable with God and the Canon.
>
> What you are missing is that Evolution is happening now in wild species
> right now.

I am? I didn't know that. I thought it was happening in both wild
and domestic species alike. I shall have to limit my thoughts on the
subject to only the wild ones from here on out.
</sarcasm>

I stated that "evolution was not incompatible with God and the Canon."
not "evolution was not incompatible with my Atheisism."
Have you ever had a reading comprehension test done?

> The genes responsible for bigger beak has a
> better chance of transmitting to next generation.

Unless you are a bird that likes to eat small seeds. Then it has a
good chance of seeing to it that you starve to death because your
large unweildy beak can't eat what your speicies has spent a few
million years developing a tast for.

> Do not deny this fact and take it against your religion.

Did you miss the part where I said I was an Athiest? I don't have a
religion to take it against.

> Go back and find out why this fact should
> conflict with your religious beliefs, teachings and Philosophy.

Go back and look up the word Athiest.

> Maybe You did not undrestand your religious tachings correctly.

Understanding them is what caused me to dump them.

> Religion as a higher philosophy should be able to encompass and
> enframe all natural laws of the nature.

You finally said something smart.

> AS I undrestand It Pope is not a scientist, then how come he could
> advise us about some scientific facts?

He has a body of 70 pocket protector wearing geek bishops that are his
scientific advisors. These are the people they send out to say "yes
this is a mirical" or "the people here are stupid and will belive
anything. there is no mirical here, just an interesting bit of
reflected light".

Kind of like the priest in the movie Stigmata. Only better written.

> Religion and spiritually is a good thing. Religion saves people and
> banckrupts head shrinkers.

I have seen a few things on television that point to the idea that
religion also bankrupts people. Athough I think Mike from Suicidal
Tendancies said it best "I never said I don't like religion/I just
don't like TV"

> Zen state? I thought you were christian. Do you know that Buhdism
> fundamentally dnies the existance of God?

I could have swarn that at the very begining of my post I stated that
I was an Athiest. I am an Athiest who has studied Theology for 15
years and evolution for 18 years.


- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
Realto Margarino
2004-06-22 00:45:25 UTC
Permalink
I think that the ugliest .sig award has to go to the following
trash:

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA13+TSJec2PH9pbURAjPHAJ9jqgsOhnt3lKgTQ2xzoSUETJP9KwCfXjNW
BUy8SFnh54NMziOB5b5PocE=
=AI7v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


What's the ascii "art" supposed to be?

Yech.

cordially, as always,

rm
/dev/rob0
2004-06-22 01:36:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:38:44 +0000, Faux_Pseudo wrote:
>> Do not deny this fact and take it against your religion.
>
> Did you miss the part where I said I was an Athiest? I don't have a
> religion to take it against.

IMCO atheism is indeed a religion. You BELIEVE there is no deity; no
supernatural. Can you prove it? The only belief system I think comes
close to being a non-religion is agnosticism. However many agnostics
are also humanists (believing in the supremacy of human reasoning), so
back they go into the bin with the other fanatics. :)

To some extent we all have to believe in some things we cannot prove.
Life without faith would be very difficult, maybe impossible.

I went through agnostic and atheist years, and then not that long back
through careful definition of "God" I became quite a believer. Here in
the Bible Belt I can receive and dish out the religious rhetoric with
the best[/worst] of them.

And I do it with sincerity! But the only thing that has changed is my
personal definition of a term. "God" need not be a human-like being;
"God" is the set of rules which guide the universe. (In IPv4 terms,
0.0.0.0/0. :)

Before I fall off this high horse, I want to blabber on incoherently
about humanism. I used to laugh at the US religious right and their
hatred of "secular humanists", but I see it differently now. I still
laugh at them, though: for hypocrisy. They, too, are humanists! What's
the difference between a religious humanist and a secular one? Nothing
significant.

Christian scripture (that is, words generally accepted by the majority
of the people of the world who claim to be Christian) tends to espouse
a lot of humanistic views. Those, I reject. But otherwise I share a lot
of Christian (New Testament) values.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply
SuperDaemon
2004-06-22 03:12:24 UTC
Permalink
/dev/rob0 wrote:

> But the only thing that has changed is my
> personal definition of a term. "God" need not be a human-like being;
> "God" is the set of rules which guide the universe. (In IPv4 terms,
> 0.0.0.0/0. :)

Einstein when asked about God, in his biography, says that he beleives in an
"order in universe". It is fine if someone wants to call that God or a
supreme conciousness.
Alan Hicks
2004-06-21 21:58:38 UTC
Permalink
In alt.os.linux.slackware, Faux_Pseudo dared to utter,
> As an Atheist I thing exactly the opposit. Religion, if one decides
> to follow one, takes place everyplace. Home, church or in the
> office. But one must find the fine line between "My God can beet up
> your civil liberties and commen since" and "God was nice to me and
> after working hard I got a promotion."

As a Christian, I think along very similar lines. Religion is a
personal choice that all make (even if one choises not to believe in a
religion), but it affects all aspects of your life (or should), and
consequently should show in all facets of your life. One shouldn't be
forced to hide his or her religious beliefs because some one else
doesn't like them.

On the other hand, I've got no right to continually pester the hell out
of people to convert. I simply do my best (which often ain't that good)
to live my life according to the principles of my religion, believing
that is not only an adequate witness for my beliefs, but the supreme
and ideal witness for them. I have not attempted to sway anyone here to
my particular beliefs by engaging them in conversation, attacking their
beliefs or defending my own.

Personally I feel like SuperDaemon's been pissed off at me for a while
and is simply using this to further some personal vendetta.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
unknown
2004-06-22 01:48:09 UTC
Permalink
Alan Hicks <***@lizella.netWORK> says...

>On the other hand, I've got no right to continually pester the hell out
>of people to convert. I simply do my best (which often ain't that good)
>to live my life according to the principles of my religion, believing
>that is not only an adequate witness for my beliefs, but the supreme
>and ideal witness for them. I have not attempted to sway anyone here to
>my particular beliefs by engaging them in conversation, attacking their
>beliefs or defending my own.

"Quakers are a strange group. I remember when I attended meeting
quite serious debate about whether the meeting should list a
number in the telephone directory, the better to help seekers,
or whether this would amount to proslitizing, something they did
not approve of."
-Ian Davis
Alan Hicks
2004-06-21 21:51:55 UTC
Permalink
In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon dared to utter,
> Would you please slow down on your religious undertone, overtone here on
> slackware forum. Please find a better forum for this type of advocacy.

First off, you mangled the quote. Secondly, that is about as far from
religious prosyletizing that one can get. Let's look at it this way.

This guy I happen to respect alot told me this morning that the
following is a quote from Mark Twain, or at least he thinks it is,
since he can't find the original source.

When I was 14 my Dad knew nothing. Now that I'm 21, I'm surprised at
all the old coot has learned in just 7 years.

Now if that was followed by the following .sig....

It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.

Would you have thought anything of it?

There is a thing called seperation of Church and State, but this is
neither a church nor a state, so it doesn't really count does it?

This idea that anything said by a religious individual or anything
written in the Christian Bible shouldn't be mentioned at all publically
is just absurd. I'm not going around and yelling in your face "you need
Jesus" or "you're going to hell" or any such thing as that. In fact, I
keep my religious beliefs as far from the discussions here as just
about anyone. You have certainly said a lot more concerning your
beliefs in this single thread than I have in my entire time posting to
this newsgroup.

I'm sorry for you if you feel threatened or attacked by a quote from an
atheist (IIRC Mark Twain was an atheist) relayed to me through my
paster, and relayed again from me unto this group. As for my .sig, I
think it would do you a world of good to heed its timeless wisdom,
regaurdless of the source of that wisdom.

You've been stepping on my last nerves here recently and quite
honestly, I feel you're out of line.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
James Woodard
2004-06-22 00:41:03 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:51:55 -0500, Alan Hicks wrote:

> There is a thing called seperation of Church and State

Errrmmm, not really. The First Amendment doesn't guarantee freedom FROM
religion. It guarantees freedom OF religion.
Atheists, agnostics and the A.C.L.U. tend to read "Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion" and gloss over the next few
words until they reach speech, press and assembly. Which most people also
get wrong.
What they seem to miss is the part that says "or the free exercise
thereof". The part that actually gives you, lawyers, teachers, judges,
congressmen, presidents, senators, ad infinitum, the right to espouse your
beliefs. Regardless what those beliefs may be.
An Metet
2004-06-20 01:47:53 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Alan Hicks <***@lizella.network> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> This'll be my last proxy reply to A-B C. Sorry guys for feeding the
> troll.

> In alt.os.linux.slackware, Ondrej Kubecka dared to utter,
> > On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:39:39 -0700, A-B C. wrote:
> >
> >> Just for the record, I'm 57 years old, married for 23 years to my first,
> >> ...
> >> it. I opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.
> >> Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm
> >> not qualified to be a Slackware user...

> Explain to me why you are. Being of a certain age, being faithful to
> your spouse, owning your own successful company, none of those things
> are in the least a qualification for as a Slackware user. You want to
> know why you're not qualified? Here you go.

> http://www.lizella.net/slackware/philosophy.html

> > It's not about how good you
> > are and what you have achieved. There are some top IT specialists that use
> > Debiand, others go Solaris and some even Windows. :) Its just matter of
> > philosophy: if yours differs from that of Slackware and adheres to the one
> > of Debian (or others) why in the world would you want to use Slackware
> > that would act like Debian and not use Debian instead and let Slackware be
> > Slackware?

> Indeed. Linus Torvalds uses RedHat last I heard. He likes it; it fits
> his philosophy. I don't personally like it as much as I do Slackware.
> Linus Torvalds for all he's done, isn't a Slacker. He has a different
> philosophy of "all I want to fool with is the kernel, so I'll use
> whatever takes care of the rest the easiest for me". (Note that as Alan
> Hicks, I can't speak personally for Linus Torvalds, that's just my
> analysis of the data.)

> >> I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the
> >> State of CA.

> One rule of usenet is to not make grandiose statements about how
> excellent you are, regaurdless of whether or not they are factually
> true. You just look like an ass when you do that. Personally I don't
> give a damn if you can make a million dollar contract with the Martians
> and complete it six months ahead of schedule. You want to be a Slacker,
> get a set of balls and take some chances with your (testing) machine.
> Solve problems on your own. The less you come here asking for help, and
> the more you help people here, the closer to a Slacker you become.

> You can tell some one's level of Clue not just by the questions they
> ask, but by the way they ask their questions. You can tell if they
> spend time trying to learn it on their own by providing non-trivial
> hypotheses about what might be wrong. They ask for suggestions from
> people when they step out in new territory, then take those suggestions
> as a guide and walk out into unknown territory.

> - --
> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
> Ecclesiastes 7:5
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA1OmnlKR45I6cfKARAnXzAJ9sxx7I/9p1PKYZ9S1cH1oMxIy7RwCeLw5q
> Jv2mo7A5XdKW2oZpgh1tMuA=
> =0dax
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Kenneth
2004-06-20 02:21:42 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-19, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
>
> Alan Hicks wrote:
>
>
> I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the State of
> CA. This was to implement a new platform for one of the state agencies. The
> platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell all you want but it was the right tool
> for the job... and that's what our company provides. The contract, the work
> assignments, and the financials are all public knowledge, documented, and you
> can easily verify with the Dept. of Gen. Services who keep track of
> procurements like this.

Give me the contract number.


I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.

ken
Realto Margarino
2004-06-20 02:24:02 UTC
Permalink
Kenneth <***@pickone.anyone> wrote:
> On 2004-06-19, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:

> > I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with
> > the State of CA. This was to implement a new platform for one
> > of the state agencies. The platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell
> > all you want but it was the right tool for the job... and
> > that's what our company provides. The contract, the work
> > assignments, and the financials are all public knowledge,
> > documented, and you can easily verify with the Dept. of Gen.
> > Services who keep track of procurements like this.

> Give me the contract number.

Why?

> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.

Why?

cordially, as always,

rm
notbob
2004-06-20 02:53:27 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, Realto Margarino <***@eewwww.org> wrote:

>> Give me the contract number.
>
> Why?

It was offered.

>> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.
>
> Why?

Maybe he's a taxpayer. Fuck off, troll.

nb
--
Be considerate of others and
trim your posts. Thank you.
SchroedingerzKat
2004-06-20 03:00:04 UTC
Permalink
>>> Give me the contract number.
>>
>> Why?
>
>It was offered.

I think a BOZO [0] subcommitee needs to be formed to investigate this alleged
contract. It sounds highly suspicious [1] to me.

>>> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.
>>
>> Why?
>
>Maybe he's a taxpayer. Fuck off, troll.

Michael [2]

[0] I am not affiliated with the BOZOS (tm).
[1] I get paranoid with too much vodka.
[2] I absolutely loathe the use of footnoting.
--
michael (at) li7-123 (dot) members.linode.com
Realto Margarino
2004-06-20 04:01:57 UTC
Permalink
notbob <***@nothome.com> wrote:
> On 2004-06-20, Realto Margarino <***@eewwww.org> wrote:

> >> Give me the contract number.
> >
> > Why?

> It was offered.

Maybe. But why do you want to know it?

> >> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.
> >
> > Why?

> Maybe he's a taxpayer. Fuck off, troll.

_I'm_ a troll? Fuck off, indeed.

Why do you want to see the specifics of the contract?

G'nite Wanda,

cordially, as always,

rm
Kenneth
2004-06-20 04:40:53 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, Realto Margarino <***@eewwww.org> wrote:
> Kenneth <***@pickone.anyone> wrote:
>> On 2004-06-19, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
>
>> > I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with
>> > the State of CA. This was to implement a new platform for one
>> > of the state agencies. The platform was MS ASP.Net. Go and yell
>> > all you want but it was the right tool for the job... and
>> > that's what our company provides. The contract, the work
>> > assignments, and the financials are all public knowledge,
>> > documented, and you can easily verify with the Dept. of Gen.
>> > Services who keep track of procurements like this.
>
>> Give me the contract number.
>
> Why?

Because it's not the first time, or the second time or the third time he's
mentioned this contract...

>
>> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.
>
> Why?

That should be obvious.


Ken
A-B C.
2004-06-20 07:02:43 UTC
Permalink
Kenneth wrote:


>>> Give me the contract number.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because it's not the first time, or the second time or the third time he's
> mentioned this contract...
>

It's a fair question. Here are the details.

Adams-Blake Company, Inc.
CMAS Contract # 4-02-70-1644A
Small Business Certification # 0021933

We operate under the CA Multiple Awards Schedule as do many hundreds (maybe
thousands?) of vendors to the state. What this means is that the State "vets"
vendor applicants for abilities, references, financials etc. It requires the
vendor to post its GSA schedule of prices.... but most small vendors like us
use the GSA of a larger entity instead of developing our own (and going
through the paperwork of establishing one with the Feds.) I forget which one
we are using.... but I think it is Pricewaterhouse Cooper. Lots of
consulting houses use this one. There are one hell of a lot of hoops to jump
through before your company gets a CMAS number.

The next step is to get Small Business Certification. This gives you a "point"
advantage in bidding against large firms and makes you eligible for contracts
designated for small business. The administration has issued a "request" that
all agencies award 25% of their contracts to small businesses. While agency
heads don't legally have to comply, if the governor is serious about
something and you don't comply.... well you get reminded that you serve at
the pleasure of the governor as they escort your ass out the door! So most
agencies seek out vendors with SBC. And the SBC is harder to get and takes
longer than a CMAS. You have to show the last hundred years of taxes and
other financials to prove that you are under $5 million in total yearly
revenue, and not a division of some other entity, etc. and provide bios of
the owners, relatives, etc. along with their financial disclosures, tax
forms, etc.

Both CMAS and SBC are issued by DGS.... but the divisions that do each don't
talk to each other so there is a lot of redundant info you have to provide...
and there is a time lag.... especially now since the state is so short-handed
due to not replacing staff that quit, retire or die.

Once you are awarded a contract number and your schedule is approved, you get
to sign a pre-written, "boiler plate," 50+ page contract with a huge amount
of legal provisions that pretty much states that the terms of engagement,
payment, dispute resolution... and so on... standard stuff you'd see in any
business contract.

While a vendor does not HAVE to spend the time and effort to obtain a CMAS
number and instead seek to get sole-source contracts, by having CMAS it makes
it very easy for any state agency to contract with the vendor.... because all
the legal and "other stuff" has already been agreed upon AND the vendor has
been vetted for references and financial stability. Thus an agency does not
have to engage its own legal dept. to create a contract, negotiate terms,
check refs, etc. That can take many months. CMAS speeds things along.

Most service contracts issued by agencies are rather general in scope and the
actual details of the work to be performed is rather short. Often the
statement of work has already been decided via the RFP or IFB and the vendor
is chosen on a point-scale on their proposal response. Other times, an agency
will put up a very general request.... say "700 hours of C++ programming" or
"two month course on English for Chinese speaking citizens" or "repair of 200
dot matrix printers" and the winner is on PRICE ONLY.

The Dept. of General Services oversees most state contracts over a certain
expenditure level, however some agencies get what is known as "delegated
authority" and can issue contracts without the approval (BUT with the
knowledge and advice) of DGS. And in some cases the state will allow an
agency to issue a sole-source contract where they just pick the vendor they
want and there is no bid process. (This does not happen too often... and DGS
strictly oversees these.... especially since the Oracle mess of two years
ago.)

The process in CA can be cumbersome for both the agency and the vendor. The
system was not designed to be quick or cost efficient. It was designed to be
FAIR. And while CA has had some major contract scandals the past twenty years
(DMV, Oracle, etc.) for the most part the system has been a "clean shot" and
free of corruption.

Many times an agency will contract with a vendor for X hours of work and when
the number is worked they issue an "add on." Sometimes they have to go back
to bid on these add-ons, but most often it is not necessary so long as the
total dollar amount is under a certain level (which I think is $500,000...
but don't quote me as I'm not sure.)

Everything (all paperwork) is open to the public for inspection, however I've
heard that DGS will charge copying and research fees in some cases. I believe
the only documents not open to the public are solution proposals by losing
vendors. This is so that their "trade secrets" are not revealed to the
competition in a losing bid. The winning vendor's solution is, of course,
open to the public.

> That should be obvious.
>

If you are looking for some kind of dirt, knock yourself out. I've been
contracting to the State for the past 18 years... sometimes directly and
other times through large prime contractors like IBM, KPMG, etc. . And if you
think I'm lying about the contract I mentioned.... well think what you wish.
But it would be foolish for anyone to fabricate a state contract because it
would only take a few calls to uncover such a lie. Everything is public and
on file.... dollars, dates, RFPs, winners, losers... the whole nine yards.

ANC
SuperDaemon
2004-06-20 16:40:26 UTC
Permalink
A-B C. wrote:

> If you are looking for some kind of dirt, knock yourself out. I've been
> contracting to the State for the past 18 years... sometimes directly and
> other times through large prime contractors like IBM, KPMG, etc. . And if
> you think I'm lying about the contract I mentioned.... well think what you
> wish. But it would be foolish for anyone to fabricate a state contract
> because it would only take a few calls to uncover such a lie. Everything
> is public and on file.... dollars, dates, RFPs, winners, losers...  the
> whole nine yards.
>
> ANC

You tell'em kids Al. They need to grow up a bit.
Kenneth
2004-06-20 22:22:54 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
> Kenneth wrote:
>
>
>>>> Give me the contract number.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Because it's not the first time, or the second time or the third time he's
>> mentioned this contract...
>>
>
> It's a fair question. Here are the details.
>
> Adams-Blake Company, Inc.
> CMAS Contract # 4-02-70-1644A
> Small Business Certification # 0021933
>

< long shit deleted >

I already know what kind of contarct you have with the state. In a prior
life I worked under a number of fed and state contracts. They just get you
past the security guard, period. No business I know advertises this
information to the general public. It's of no interest to anyone other than
a state purchasing agent or manger.

You make an issue of having a state contract, not once -- but several times,
for the life of me I don't understand why. It's a non-issue and it does not
in any way shape or form denote anything of significance. The purpose of
most state contracts is to streamline the process. They do not provide an
overall endorsement of quality or service. You are on a approved list along
with a number of other vendors.

You advertise this nonsense on the asusmption that most people will not
realize or do not know how the state contract process works. It might be
impressive to the uninformed.


>
>> That should be obvious.
>>
>
> If you are looking for some kind of dirt, knock yourself out. I've been
> contracting to the State for the past 18 years... sometimes directly and

Again, why is this issue of state contracts so important to you that you
continue to mention it...

You claim to be the best asp.net programmer working for the State of Calif
and your in charge of moving legacy programs to a new platform, you claim
experience in C++....you can't even get your brain around slack...hell, you
couldn't even get your brain around mandrake when you were using that
distro.

You wrote 180,000 lines of PHP code...it's not impressive in this day and age.
PhpAdmin has 110,000 lines of code and that just interacts with an Mysql.
And Lord knows, if you count code like most programmers, that 180k lines of
code includes blank lines, long, long comments, a glp license etc etc.

I've "listened" to you for a year and half now. It's the same story, it's
the same resume. The only thing that changes is your age. You're getting old
your rountine is getting old.

You're 57 and you act like a prepubescent, ignorant teenager.

Your a contradiction wrapped in a contradition, a huckster without a clue.

Your a bullshitter. The tragedy: You're not even a first class bullshitter.


ken
A-B C.
2004-06-20 22:41:01 UTC
Permalink
Kenneth wrote:

> Your a bullshitter. The tragedy: You're not even a first class bullshitter.
>
>
But I have the honesty, integriy, and "courage" to sign my real name to (most
of) my posts. Who are you to judge me.... or anyone here? Actually who are
you to begin with? What's your raison d'être? Tell us something impressive
about you.... if you can. Curious minds....

A.N. Canton
Kenneth
2004-06-21 21:17:05 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-20, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
> Kenneth wrote:
>
>> Your a bullshitter. The tragedy: You're not even a first class bullshitter.
>>
>>
>But I have the honesty, integriy, and "courage" to sign my real name to(most
^^^^^
> of) my posts.
^^^^^

So your courage and integrity are a part time avocation for you...that was my
position all along.

> Tell us something impressive
> about you....

I can smell bullshit a mile away.

ken
~kurt
2004-06-20 04:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Kenneth <***@pickone.anyone> wrote:
> On 2004-06-19, A-B C. <***@adams-blaketakeout.com> wrote:
>>
>> I just finished a 2.5 year, $300,000 consulting assignment with the State of
>> CA. This was to implement a new platform for one of the state agencies. The
>
> Give me the contract number.
>
>
> I'll like to see the specifics of the contract.
>

What, you find it hard to believe, given all his previous posts, that
he wouldn't be able to succeed as a consultant? One does not need to
be a Slacker - you need marketable knowledge within your domain and
the balls/initiative to work for yourself. Although you would think
that being a computer consultant Alan wouldn't need quite so much
hand holding and would be able to research things a little better.
Usually, I find myself skipping his posts because he doesn't get to
the point quick enough. But I have to admit I am annoyed hearing
someone relatively new to Slackware suddenly explaining to us what
needs to change in order for the distro to be successful and for it
to not perish. Every once in a while someone comes along - a new
Slackware user - who is now concerned that without his intervention
his distro of choice, which would be perfect if it wasn't for this or
that, will fail.

- Kurt
HJohnson
2004-06-20 15:37:08 UTC
Permalink
A-B C. wrote:
> Alan Hicks wrote:
>
>
>
>>I think that's a huge reason many of us are here. I hate to speculate
>>on Seasame Street's [0] reasons for being here, but the fact that this
>>company he says he runs is (quote from www.adams-black.com) "a
>>well-known and well-established contract programming and software
>>consulting house" doesn't quite add up. Unless of course, he's mining
>>for data here to include in one of their technical books (as they also
>>do book publishing).
>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - < snip > - - - - - - - - - - - - -


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - < snip > - - - - - - - - - - - - -

>
> Mr. Hicks, now that you know a bit about me, explain why you feel that I'm not
> qualified to be a Slackware user and why you feel you need to denigrate me
> and my company as a means of disagreeing with me over some inane topic?
>
> I really don't want to fight with you. I compete with Random House and with
> Intuit. Believe me, Mr. Hicks, you're small potatoes... and I can have you
> for lunch anytime I wish. However, I prefer a civil discourse with you. I
> don't understand why you (and a few others) are such assholes ALL THE TIME.
>
> You know the old saying. "Everyone likes a little ass,... but no one likes a
> wise ass." But Alan, you seem to be a PAIN IN THE ASS... and for the life of
> me I simply don't understand why.
>
> Please put me back in your killfile... and leave me there. Who has time for
> this?
>
> ANC.
>
>
>

Well put. And eloquently, too.

--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
Two Ravens
2004-06-20 17:54:54 UTC
Permalink
HJohnson wrote:

> Well put. And eloquently, too.

Was it necessary to quote the other 40 something lines though?
--
Two Ravens
"...hit the squirrel..."
HJohnson
2004-06-20 17:56:16 UTC
Permalink
Two Ravens wrote:
> HJohnson wrote:
- - - - < snip > - - - - -
>
> Was it necessary to quote the other 40 something lines though?

Just for re-emphasis.
--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
unknown
2004-06-20 18:53:24 UTC
Permalink
HJohnson <***@AeroSurf.Net> says...
>
>Two Ravens wrote:
>>
>> Was it necessary to quote the other 40 something lines though?
>
>Just for re-emphasis.

Please don't do that.




Netiquette: "When thou enter a city, abide by its customs."
http://www.glowworms.com/~vez/neti.html

How To Followup A Post On Netnews Properly
http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm

Usenet 101: How to properly format a Usenet post
http://home.sprintmail.com/~dtrout/Usenet101.html

Posting help for newbies
http://www.windfalls.net/ukrm/postinghelp.html

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

Zen and the art of the internet (usenet section)
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/docproject/zen/zen-1.0_6.html

The seven don'ts of Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/dont.html

Why bottom-posting is better than top-posting
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

+What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/

The advantages of usenet's quoting conventions
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.mccaughan/g/remarks/uquote.html

Rules for posting to Usenet
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/

Why should I place my response below the quoted text?
http://allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Top-posting_or_bottom-posting

Why you shouldn't ask for E-mail responses on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/mail-responses.html

Quoting Style in Newsgroup Postings
http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html

Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes with this automated fix!
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

For the Engineer/Programmer: News related RFCs and Drafts
http://www.tin.org/docs.html
HJohnson
2004-06-20 18:59:20 UTC
Permalink
Guy Macon wrote:
> HJohnson <***@AeroSurf.Net> says...
>
>>Two Ravens wrote:
>>
>
- - - - < snip > - - - -
>
> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
>

- - - - < snip > - - - - -

seems like a case of the kettle calling the teapot black.....

way too many and some not germain......

--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
Rich Grise
2004-06-21 01:09:58 UTC
Permalink
Boy, they sure do put in a lot of crap about top- vs. bottom-posting.

Hell, you've seen the subject line, and if you're following the thread
like a sane person, you've already seen the question and discussion to
date - if you _really_ need to reiterate the question, put it below so
people can peruse it at their leisure. you could even add footnotes.
[0][1][2]

I swear, it's a religious jihad - if your truth is so true, why does
it require so fucking much drum-beating?

What's your obsession for repeating, over and over again, redundantly,
ad nauseam, all the crap that's already been reiterated countless times
in earlier bottom-posted messages in the thread? Is your self-esteem
so low that you have to be sure that all those people get to have their
say yet again, before it's your turn? Are you too nebulous about what
your comments pertain to that you're incapable of snipping intelligently?

What's up with that obsession?

Thanks,
Rich

"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in message
news:***@corp.supernews.com...
>
> HJohnson <***@AeroSurf.Net> says...
> >
> >Two Ravens wrote:
> >>
> >> Was it necessary to quote the other 40 something lines though?
> >
> >Just for re-emphasis.
>
> Please don't do that.
>
>
>
>
> Netiquette: "When thou enter a city, abide by its customs."
> http://www.glowworms.com/~vez/neti.html
>
> How To Followup A Post On Netnews Properly
> http://www.star-one.org.uk/computer/format.htm
>
> Usenet 101: How to properly format a Usenet post
> http://home.sprintmail.com/~dtrout/Usenet101.html
>
> Posting help for newbies
> http://www.windfalls.net/ukrm/postinghelp.html
>
> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>

[0]
> Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
>

> Zen and the art of the internet (usenet section)
> http://www.cs.indiana.edu/docproject/zen/zen-1.0_6.html
>
> The seven don'ts of Usenet
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/dont.html
>

[1]
> Why bottom-posting is better than top-posting
> http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
>
> +What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
> http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/
>
> The advantages of usenet's quoting conventions
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.mccaughan/g/remarks/uquote.html
>
> Rules for posting to Usenet
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/posting-rules/part1/
>
[2]
> Why should I place my response below the quoted text?
> http://allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Top-posting_or_bottom-posting
>
> Why you shouldn't ask for E-mail responses on Usenet
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/mail-responses.html
>
> Quoting Style in Newsgroup Postings
> http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html
>
> Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes with this automated fix!
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>
> For the Engineer/Programmer: News related RFCs and Drafts
> http://www.tin.org/docs.html
>
>
>
Dave Uhring
2004-06-21 01:24:57 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 01:09:58 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

> Boy, they sure do put in a lot of crap about top- vs. bottom-posting.

You don't read very well, do you?

> What's your obsession for repeating, over and over again, redundantly,
> ad nauseam, all the crap that's already been reiterated countless times
> in earlier bottom-posted messages in the thread? Is your self-esteem
> so low that you have to be sure that all those people get to have their
> say yet again, before it's your turn? Are you too nebulous about what
> your comments pertain to that you're incapable of snipping intelligently?

You are supposed to redact the superfluous quotes before posting. That is
why Outhouse Excess places your cursor at the top of the article.

> What's up with that obsession?

Had you bothered to read and attempt to understand what was linked you
would know by now.

Bye, Bye.
notbob
2004-06-21 02:46:58 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-21, Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:

> Boy, they sure do put in a lot of crap about top- vs. bottom-posting.

Your post is a perfect example of why. I wasn't two words into your post
and I'm already asking, "who is 'they'?". The second question was, why is
there no attribute. At first I thought you trimmed it out. Then, after
reading the next 3 paragraphs, still not quite understanding what you were
on about, I finally had to scroll down. Voila, there's the original post
way down at the bottom. So, now I gotta scroll down and read the OP and
then scroll back up to re-read your post in context. So now, since you
can't seem to grasp the simple concept that the question precedes the
answer, I've gotta scroll up and down to make any sense of your post and
compose a reply. What a PIA!

Usually, your posts are relatively sensible and occasionally helpful, but
your habit of top posting makes one wonder just who is "obsessed" here.
Then, after bitching about Two Ravens posting all those oft-repeated links,
you turn right around and re-post them all over again instead of trimming
them out. One might consider getting one's Usenet-posting act together
before criticizing others.

nb
--
Be considerate of others and
trim your posts. Thank you.
Rich Grise
2004-06-21 03:06:28 UTC
Permalink
So, when you read the post[0], what had you just read previously? Wasn't it
the previous message in the thread, to which I was responding?

And, when it's appropriate, I can mid-post

"notbob" <***@nothome.com> wrote in message
news:C_rBc.80957$***@attbi_s02...
> On 2004-06-21, Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:
>
> > Boy, they sure do put in a lot of crap about top- vs. bottom-posting.

[0]
> Your post is a perfect example of why. I wasn't two words into your post
> and I'm already asking, "who is 'they'?".

It's the rhetorical "they." When you read a post that's 4 responses deep
into a thread, have you already forgotten everything that the thread was
about?

So, is bottom-posting a way to compensate for a deficient attention span?

please scroll down for more

>The second question was, why is
> there no attribute. At first I thought you trimmed it out. Then, after
> reading the next 3 paragraphs, still not quite understanding what you were
> on about, I finally had to scroll down. Voila, there's the original post
> way down at the bottom.

And also in the first reference (that's the one to which I was responding,
and _its_ reference, and so on.

Are you in the habit of jumping into the middle of threads, essentially
cluless, and insisting on being brought up to date _every_ _single_ _time_?


> So, now I gotta scroll down and read the OP and
> then scroll back up to re-read your post in context.

This is what I keep trying to tell you - if you have an attention span
greater than the length of time it takes to click the "next" button,
you're already in the _middle_ of the context, for heaven's sakes!

Kinda like the usher going around the theater reminding everybody what
movie they're watching, or something.

The thing that gets me is that it's such a religious thing! When Moses
came down the mountain, commandment 11 was "Thou Shalt Not Top-Post,"
right?

Sheesh.
Rich

So, bring on the plonks - anybody who gets into such a religious fervor
over such piddly things probably doesn't have much else to offer anyway.




> So now, since you
> can't seem to grasp the simple concept that the question precedes the
> answer, I've gotta scroll up and down to make any sense of your post and
> compose a reply. What a PIA!
>
> Usually, your posts are relatively sensible and occasionally helpful, but
> your habit of top posting makes one wonder just who is "obsessed" here.
> Then, after bitching about Two Ravens posting all those oft-repeated
links,
> you turn right around and re-post them all over again instead of trimming
> them out. One might consider getting one's Usenet-posting act together
> before criticizing others.
>
> nb
> --
> Be considerate of others and
> trim your posts. Thank you.
Realto Margarino
2004-06-21 03:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:

> So, when you read the post[0], what had you just read previously?
> Wasn't it the previous message in the thread, to which I was
> responding?

Not for most users. Most users have the posts sorted
chronologically, not by threads. Most users check their newsreader
every so often for new messages and they don't have the old ones
showing even if they are sorted by thread.

Plainly put, top-posting is amateurish and gets on the nerves of
the vast majority of readers. Since bottom posting and trimming is
trivial it would seem that top-posters simply want to aggravate
others. IOW, top-posting amounts to trolling.

There is no good reason for one to insist on top posting.

cordially, as always,

rm
Dan C
2004-06-21 04:05:32 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:06:28 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

> So, bring on the plonks - anybody who gets into such a religious fervor
> over such piddly things probably doesn't have much else to offer anyway.

Perhaps you should take your own advice. In fact, any of you other
fucking children reading this could, too. Grow the fuck up and be quiet
if you have nothing better than this to do. It's old and tired, give it a
rest for Ghod's sake.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951
HJohnson
2004-06-21 04:24:48 UTC
Permalink
I find that those who have to use profanity as a means of emphasis,
usually have nothing worth listening to.



Dan C wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 03:06:28 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:
>
>
>>So, bring on the plonks - anybody who gets into such a religious fervor
>>over such piddly things probably doesn't have much else to offer anyway.
>
>
> Perhaps you should take your own advice. In fact, any of you other
> fucking children reading this could, too. Grow the fuck up and be quiet


--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
Faux_Pseudo
2004-06-21 12:56:09 UTC
Permalink
_.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, HJohnson wrote the following -._
<snip top posting>
> I find that those who have to use profanity as a means of emphasis,
> usually have nothing worth listening to.
>

In the words of Bono: "That's fucking brilliant"

- --
.-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
Dan C
2004-06-21 18:55:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:24:48 -0700, HJohnson wrote:

> I find that those who have to use profanity as a means of emphasis,
> usually have nothing worth listening to.

That's because you're a fucking moron, and an ignorant piece of shit
top-poster, to boot. STFU.

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951
Kai Brust
2004-06-21 04:38:58 UTC
Permalink
[to top-post, or not to top-post...]

Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:
> So, when you read the post[0], what had you just read previously? Wasn't it
> the previous message in the thread, to which I was responding?

Think about people reading the previously thread yesterday. If a thread
is not that important, and you are reading a couple of other threads,
possibly in a couple of other newsgroups - do you remind _every_ single
posting? I doubt it.
Rich Grise
2004-06-22 03:17:38 UTC
Permalink
"Kai Brust" <***@epost.de> wrote in message
news:***@uni-berlin.de...
> [to top-post, or not to top-post...]
>
> Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:
> > So, when you read the post[0], what had you just read previously?
Wasn't it
> > the previous message in the thread, to which I was responding?
>
> Think about people reading the previously thread yesterday. If a thread
> is not that important, and you are reading a couple of other threads,
> possibly in a couple of other newsgroups - do you remind _every_ single
> posting?

Not only do I know by the subject and by the thread, but if I see
somebody who has such a low opinion of what they say that they make
their purported readers scroll down through three pages of rehashed
old crap, I'll generally skip that particular post. Sometimes I
skip just by name, and sometimes I'll skip whole threads based on
name. A lot of times I skip posts by subject.

Everybody bitches about Windoze, but Butthood Distress does for
me what I want done, newsreader-wise. And it defaults to "put the
cursor at the top of the reply." And it does threads sanely, oddly
enough (something sane from M$, that is) So it's Good Enough for
me. But that's not Slackware Linux related anyway, is it? :-)

> I doubt it.
>
>
Doubt on, that's your prerogative.

Cheers!
Rich
notbob
2004-06-21 04:51:30 UTC
Permalink
On 2004-06-21, Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:

> It's the rhetorical "they." When you read a post that's 4 responses deep
> into a thread, have you already forgotten everything that the thread was
> about?

Usually, yes. Being active in a dozen, or so, newsgroups, sometimes reading
in excess of 200 articles a day, I can't remember every article in every
newsgroup and where the last article in the thread left off. Nobody can. Do
you go back and read all the previously read articles (posts) in a thread to
bring yourself up to speed before reading the next unread article? That's
absurd. The next unread article has the attribute and content of the
previous article. It's in there to provide context. Having to constantly
scroll up and down, specially on a longish article, to decipher what the OP
was and how the reply relates to it is just easier to do in a linear
sequence. I really don't understand why some people don't see this. Perhaps
it's some form of vertical dyslexia. Whatever, I'm sure I'm not going to
change your mind so I won't try.

later...
nb



>
> So, is bottom-posting a way to compensate for a deficient attention span?
>
> please scroll down for more
>
>>The second question was, why is
>> there no attribute. At first I thought you trimmed it out. Then, after
>> reading the next 3 paragraphs, still not quite understanding what you were
>> on about, I finally had to scroll down. Voila, there's the original post
>> way down at the bottom.
>
> And also in the first reference (that's the one to which I was responding,
> and _its_ reference, and so on.
>
> Are you in the habit of jumping into the middle of threads, essentially
> cluless, and insisting on being brought up to date _every_ _single_ _time_?
>
>
>> So, now I gotta scroll down and read the OP and
>> then scroll back up to re-read your post in context.
>
> This is what I keep trying to tell you - if you have an attention span
> greater than the length of time it takes to click the "next" button,
> you're already in the _middle_ of the context, for heaven's sakes!
>
> Kinda like the usher going around the theater reminding everybody what
> movie they're watching, or something.
>
> The thing that gets me is that it's such a religious thing! When Moses
> came down the mountain, commandment 11 was "Thou Shalt Not Top-Post,"
> right?
>
> Sheesh.
> Rich
>
> So, bring on the plonks - anybody who gets into such a religious fervor
> over such piddly things probably doesn't have much else to offer anyway.
>
>
>
>
>> So now, since you
>> can't seem to grasp the simple concept that the question precedes the
>> answer, I've gotta scroll up and down to make any sense of your post and
>> compose a reply. What a PIA!
>>
>> Usually, your posts are relatively sensible and occasionally helpful, but
>> your habit of top posting makes one wonder just who is "obsessed" here.
>> Then, after bitching about Two Ravens posting all those oft-repeated
> links,
>> you turn right around and re-post them all over again instead of trimming
>> them out. One might consider getting one's Usenet-posting act together
>> before criticizing others.
>>
>> nb
>> --
>> Be considerate of others and
>> trim your posts. Thank you.
>
>


--
Be considerate of others and
trim your posts. Thank you.
Rich Grise
2004-06-22 03:27:51 UTC
Permalink
"notbob" <***@nothome.com> wrote in message
news:mPtBc.87367$***@attbi_s03...
> On 2004-06-21, Rich Grise <***@example.net> wrote:
>
> > It's the rhetorical "they." When you read a post that's 4 responses deep
> > into a thread, have you already forgotten everything that the thread was
> > about?
>
> Usually, yes. Being active in a dozen, or so, newsgroups, sometimes
reading
> in excess of 200 articles a day, I can't remember every article in every
> newsgroup and where the last article in the thread left off. Nobody can.
Do
> you go back and read all the previously read articles (posts) in a thread
to
> bring yourself up to speed before reading the next unread article?

I usually follow threads, and I usually don't find it necessary to do a full
review every time I open the newsreader. Yes, I do retain a lot of what I
read. It's called "Retention." It's a Reading thing. Another Reading thing
I have is "Comprehension," which isn't necessarily rlelvant.

Maybe it's a matter of focus. If I have the time to read 200 articles, I'm
probably not going to be jumping around at random - my newsreader organizes
threads by thread, thank you very much.

> That's
> absurd. The next unread article has the attribute and content of the
> previous article. It's in there to provide context.

Yes, but if you're following the thread, you've just read that post.
If you're the kind of person that jumps into the middle of threads,
and whose mental retention is so deficient that you need to reread
everything before you can grasp an addition to the conversation,
then you go back and read the reference(s.)

> Having to constantly
> scroll up and down, specially on a longish article, to decipher what the
OP
> was and how the reply relates to it is just easier to do in a linear
> sequence.

So you wind up scrolling through page after page of the same old same
old same old over and over and over and over and over again - I guess
some people need that level of repetition to make an idea stick in
their head long enough to get to the end of the next sentence, but
it's not my job to spoon-feed them.

And it's not a religion with me. I post in the fashion that's most
appropriate to the context and subject matter. I don't _insist_ on
top posting, and I don't fly into paroxysms of sanctimony and DEMAND
that everybody post the way I want them to.

> I really don't understand why some people don't see this. Perhaps
> it's some form of vertical dyslexia. Whatever, I'm sure I'm not going to
> change your mind so I won't try.

Well, you sure made a valiant effort just here!

Cheers!
Rich
unknown
2004-06-21 09:43:49 UTC
Permalink
Rich Grise <***@example.net> says...

>So, when you read the post, what had you just read previously?
>Wasn't it the previous message in the thread, to which I was responding?

I wasn't aware that you had solved the longstanding issue of different
Usenet posts taking different amounts of time to arrive. How did you
do it?

I also wasn't aware that you had somehow changed Usenet so that it is
no longer possible to read a post before Rich Grise replies to it and
then reading Rich Grise's reply a day or two later. How did you solve
that issue?

The rest of us, of course, post in such a way that the reader does not
depend on the previous post being there in the right order and unread.
This is what is know as adapting to reality.

The posting conventions were very well thought out, and they do make
it a lot easier to communicate. Read the web pages below to see why.


Bottom vs. top posting and quotation style on Usenet
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

Why bottom-posting is better than top-posting
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

+What do you mean "my reply is upside-down"?
http://www.i-hate-computers.demon.co.uk/

The advantages of usenet's quoting conventions
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/g.mccaughan/g/remarks/uquote.html

Why should I place my response below the quoted text?
http://allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Top-posting_or_bottom-posting

Quoting Style in Newsgroup Postings
http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html
Larry Blanchard
2004-06-20 23:25:26 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@news20.forteinc.com>,
***@adams-blaketakeout.com says...
> I've been programming since I joined Ross Perot's EDS in 1974 (call them if
> you don't believe me) and of late, I've finally gotten rather good at it. I
> opened my own company in 1979 and have not had a "real job" since.
>
Damm newbie - I started programming on Univac in the '50s :-).
But I suspect I'm considerably older than you (I'm 67).

Sounds like you've worked hard and done well - congratulations.

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?
An Metet
2004-06-20 23:23:18 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Alan Hicks <***@lizella.network> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> In alt.os.linux.slackware, HJohnson dared to utter,
> > So, it is not a matter of Slackware being a Debian product. It is a
> > matter of the step-grandchild calling the tribal elder, 'unknowing' or
> > stupid. (Most kids, do that, until they, too, grow up and realize that
> > maybe Dad was not so stupid, after all.)

> My preacher said this morning that the following is a quote from mark
> Twain, though he can't find the source to be sure.

> Back when I was 14 my Dad knew nothing. Now that I'm 21, I'm amazed at
> how much the old coot has learned in only 7 years.

> - --
> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
> Ecclesiastes 7:5
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA1hLWlKR45I6cfKARAkLpAKCTUIEKlyx0vNbNTXaEBoIoPaBkOgCfagpZ
> cFGIDDL2ZWGIhZ85bNbyFV0=
> =idB7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 03:09:30 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Keith Keller <kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> On 2004-06-20, Alan Hicks <***@lizella.netWORK> wrote:
> >
> > Indeed. Linus Torvalds uses RedHat last I heard. He likes it; it fits
> > his philosophy. I don't personally like it as much as I do Slackware.
> > Linus Torvalds for all he's done, isn't a Slacker. He has a different
> > philosophy of "all I want to fool with is the kernel, so I'll use
> > whatever takes care of the rest the easiest for me". (Note that as Alan
> > Hicks, I can't speak personally for Linus Torvalds, that's just my
> > analysis of the data.)

> According to the a bunch of the stuff I've read by Linus, he currently
> (at the time of his authorship, which varies from a few months to some
> years ago) uses RH and SuSE. IIRC he used to use SLS and Slackware,
> back in the day, and if he didn't like something that was more or less
> permanent about Slackware (e.g., the package management style), he
> didn't spend hours of his time venting spleen about it in the
> newsgroups, he simply switched to a distro that met his desires better.
> (One presumes that, if he had time, he could pretty easily roll his own
> distro; it's apparently just not something he cares enough about.)

> In addition, if he did vent spleen, at least he's proven his technical
> skills enough to others that he wouldn't be perceived as a raving idiot.

> - --keith

> - --
> kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
> (try just my userid to email me)
> AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA1k0chVcNCxZ5ID8RArgpAKCQrdovB7CsfEb3Ttmix5AyHpH6vQCglc3Q
> LkBK4NzoKpAdrSHTq84GeKo=
> =Defh
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 16:47:46 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Keith Keller <kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> In article <XJpBc.8419$***@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> SuperDaemon wrote:
> > Alan Hicks wrote:
> >
> >> My preacher said this morning that the following is a quote
> >> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
> >
> >> Ecclesiastes 7:5
> >
> > Would you please slow down on your religious undertone, overtone here on
> > slackware forum. Please find a better forum for this type of advocacy.

> I'm pretty hypersensitive to religious proselytizing--I worked in a
> public school in San Francisco, even the Church of the Subgenius is
> recognized here ;-) --but I would hardly characterize Alan's posts
> as religious advocacy. He was relaying a quote he heard from someone
> who is probably best characterized to him as his preacher, and his
> .sig quote from the Bible is certainly applicable in a wide variety
> of non-biblical situations.

> Now, back to the goat! (ting)

> - --keith

> - --
> kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
> (try just my userid to email me)
> AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin)

> iD8DBQFA1nDqhVcNCxZ5ID8RAlKJAJ9tQbSBVDnC7zPCmQZgVvSZFg/BLQCdFDqp
> aTcHXHMlYvxrGe3xDG64chg=
> =zXfu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 17:55:32 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Faux_Pseudo <***@ip68-230-192-17.rd.hr.cox.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> _.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, Two Ravens wrote the following -._
> > I think he was referring to the man, German, (there wasn't such a thing
> > as Germany at the time, Holy Roman Empire?), who nailed the 32
> > articles to the door of a Cathederal in Germany the name of which I
> > forget,

> Eddie Izzard
> The Protestant faith was different. That started probably around
> a similar time, but that was about Martin Luther, this German guy
> who pinned a note on a church door saying, " 'ang on a minute!"
> But in German, so, "Ein Minuten, bitte. Ich habe einen kleinen
> Problemo avec diese Religione." He was from everywhere. So yeah
> and so the Protestant faith was sort of tacked on by Queen
> Elizabeth I a bit Oh, principles! Thank God! We've got some
> principles." Nowadays, of England is much more, "Hello, how are
> you?" Much more a type... Hello!" A lot of people in Church of
> England have no muscles in their arms. "Hello, yes... ( chuckles
> ) Yes, that's what I thought. ( chuckles Do come in, you're the
> only one today! Now the sermon today is taken from a magazine
> that I found in a hedge. Now lipstick colors this season
> are in the frosted pink area and nail colors to match... And this
> reminds me rather of our Lord Jesus! Because surely, when Jesus
> went into Nazareth on a donkey, he must have got tarted up a
> bit..."

> - --
> .-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
> ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
> ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
> ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA1xq1SJec2PH9pbURAps5AJ998PAO12nXzA9fOy4F1DcVvS+wAQCfeu44
> Lub1gzuHjy6M2wtP0495LQc=
> =HVUi
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 19:50:34 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Keith Keller <kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> On 2004-06-21, SuperDaemon <***@DiskAndExecutionMON.biz> wrote:
> >
> > Yes Thank You Two Raven. Revisionism, Protest against wrongly held beliefs,
> > being dynamic, being pragmatic, avoiding dogmatism, rational cool heads are
> > engines of progress.

> Now who's proselytizing in the newsgroup? ;-\

> - --keith

> - --
> kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
> (try just my userid to email me)
> AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

> iD4DBQFA1zNQhVcNCxZ5ID8RAjreAJj8Dw8ZOGZ/JjJ7QLDkiaxLX23cAKCdm83s
> wmWkdmR4U5gEibg9XygFnQ==
> =yy/v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 22:12:53 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Alan Hicks <***@lizella.network> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon dared to utter,
> > Would you please slow down on your religious undertone, overtone here on
> > slackware forum. Please find a better forum for this type of advocacy.

> First off, you mangled the quote. Secondly, that is about as far from
> religious prosyletizing that one can get. Let's look at it this way.

> This guy I happen to respect alot told me this morning that the
> following is a quote from Mark Twain, or at least he thinks it is,
> since he can't find the original source.

> When I was 14 my Dad knew nothing. Now that I'm 21, I'm surprised at
> all the old coot has learned in just 7 years.

> Now if that was followed by the following .sig....

> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.

> Would you have thought anything of it?

> There is a thing called seperation of Church and State, but this is
> neither a church nor a state, so it doesn't really count does it?

> This idea that anything said by a religious individual or anything
> written in the Christian Bible shouldn't be mentioned at all publically
> is just absurd. I'm not going around and yelling in your face "you need
> Jesus" or "you're going to hell" or any such thing as that. In fact, I
> keep my religious beliefs as far from the discussions here as just
> about anyone. You have certainly said a lot more concerning your
> beliefs in this single thread than I have in my entire time posting to
> this newsgroup.

> I'm sorry for you if you feel threatened or attacked by a quote from an
> atheist (IIRC Mark Twain was an atheist) relayed to me through my
> paster, and relayed again from me unto this group. As for my .sig, I
> think it would do you a world of good to heed its timeless wisdom,
> regaurdless of the source of that wisdom.

> You've been stepping on my last nerves here recently and quite
> honestly, I feel you're out of line.

> - --
> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
> Ecclesiastes 7:5
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA11h2lKR45I6cfKARAmjVAJ9JbiW/KA5RQHbb5cISwYZ6+jbc7wCgmerC
> YY1mjxBgBe6SwVWxHiD6Pt0=
> =oj9R
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-21 22:55:26 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Alan Hicks <***@lizella.network> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> In alt.os.linux.slackware, /dev/rob0 dared to utter,
> > Roger never did mention what HIS field of study was ... ;)

> He's got a B.S. in B.S.

> - --
> It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
> Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
> Ecclesiastes 7:5
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA12CIlKR45I6cfKARAu4zAJ9ms95bl541rhKHoGWhLwR/x/yXhwCfeikr
> SvzERs+BI2rxbjhRfXOCB+I=
> =IrzJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-22 00:57:48 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Faux_Pseudo <***@ip68-230-192-17.rd.hr.cox.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> _.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, John wrote the following -._
> > Faux_Pseudo wrote:
> > The irony of this is that 'SuperDaemon' has now extended a thread,

> Yup, it always happens.

> > Its interesting, is it not, the variety of interests displayed by
> > Slackware users, when diverted into OT areas?

> Thus the reason we have a OT list.

> - --
> .-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
> ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
> ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
> ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA14CMSJec2PH9pbURAi8RAJ9BrtcXcXFKVDj0z7jxkId4KkxlOACfbXZI
> aQl0UDnacYJJoqr4fdq6vKg=
> =dyR5
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
An Metet
2004-06-22 01:15:20 UTC
Permalink
NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------

pgp trash troll delete

Faux_Pseudo <***@ip68-230-192-17.rd.hr.cox.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> _.-In alt.os.linux.slackware, SuperDaemon wrote the following -._
> >> I remember the day it happend with the
> >> same type of joy I felt on October 27th 1997 when the church said that
> >> evolution was not incompatable with God and the Canon.
> >
> > What you are missing is that Evolution is happening now in wild species
> > right now.

> I am? I didn't know that. I thought it was happening in both wild
> and domestic species alike. I shall have to limit my thoughts on the
> subject to only the wild ones from here on out.
> </sarcasm>

> I stated that "evolution was not incompatible with God and the Canon."
> not "evolution was not incompatible with my Atheisism."
> Have you ever had a reading comprehension test done?

> > The genes responsible for bigger beak has a
> > better chance of transmitting to next generation.

> Unless you are a bird that likes to eat small seeds. Then it has a
> good chance of seeing to it that you starve to death because your
> large unweildy beak can't eat what your speicies has spent a few
> million years developing a tast for.

> > Do not deny this fact and take it against your religion.

> Did you miss the part where I said I was an Athiest? I don't have a
> religion to take it against.

> > Go back and find out why this fact should
> > conflict with your religious beliefs, teachings and Philosophy.

> Go back and look up the word Athiest.

> > Maybe You did not undrestand your religious tachings correctly.

> Understanding them is what caused me to dump them.

> > Religion as a higher philosophy should be able to encompass and
> > enframe all natural laws of the nature.

> You finally said something smart.

> > AS I undrestand It Pope is not a scientist, then how come he could
> > advise us about some scientific facts?

> He has a body of 70 pocket protector wearing geek bishops that are his
> scientific advisors. These are the people they send out to say "yes
> this is a mirical" or "the people here are stupid and will belive
> anything. there is no mirical here, just an interesting bit of
> reflected light".

> Kind of like the priest in the movie Stigmata. Only better written.

> > Religion and spiritually is a good thing. Religion saves people and
> > banckrupts head shrinkers.

> I have seen a few things on television that point to the idea that
> religion also bankrupts people. Athough I think Mike from Suicidal
> Tendancies said it best "I never said I don't like religion/I just
> don't like TV"

> > Zen state? I thought you were christian. Do you know that Buhdism
> > fundamentally dnies the existance of God?

> I could have swarn that at the very begining of my post I stated that
> I was an Athiest. I am an Athiest who has studied Theology for 15
> years and evolution for 18 years.


> - --
> .-')) http://asciipr0n.com/fp ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
> ' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
> ((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
> ((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

> iD8DBQFA13+TSJec2PH9pbURAjPHAJ9jqgsOhnt3lKgTQ2xzoSUETJP9KwCfXjNW
> BUy8SFnh54NMziOB5b5PocE=
> =AI7v
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...