### Apollo BBS Archive - November 11 - 17, 1989

    Message: 62095
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul
    Date: 11/10/89  Time: 21:10:04

    Re:  ""my husband/wife doesn't understand me", or "I knew it was wrong, but
    just couldn't control myself""

    You left out "The devil made me do it!"  :-)

    Message: 62096
    Author: Mike Carter
    Category: War!
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 11/10/89  Time: 22:19:40

    Your feeble attempts at reason by equipping your message with personal
    attacks only prove your inability to listen..which is important when
    you attempt to reason using rational english.
    Calling me an asshole, saying things are over my head and inferring
    I am stupid is your way of getting people to like your posts...and
    understand your arguments.
    It seems what little you listen to of the posts gets you into angry fits
    of rage. This limits you considerably.
    I wonder how much you prentend to know about the bible and what it has to
    say about interactions with people.
    Keep your hate to yourself. Spread it around on this BBS if you so desire.
    But don't ever expect me to respect your posts when they contain such
    brash statements and lies so easily typed by your mentality.

    Message: 62098
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last..
    Date: 11/10/89  Time: 23:56:42

            Like Wow!   Sorry....  I do not hate Smokers...  just the smoke!

            To some...when their drive is down...their computer is down...but
    Mike is basicly correct.  Smoke has never killed a Z-80, 6809, 8088, and
    other CPU ICs to date that I know of...

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    P.S.  Mike...if I NEVER listen, then WHY did I change the wording of the
    ote?   You got me wrong partner, I do listen!  ("sometimes" in very small
    print)

    Message: 62099
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Vote
    Subject: Adultery
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 01:16:43

      The only fair way to settle this is with a vote, where
    people can anonymously state their opinion on it. Here is
    a suggested set of choices:

              Do you commit adultery, and if so why?
    (1) I commit adultery because my husband/wife doesn't understand me.
    (2) I commit adultery because I can't help it, even though it is wrong.
    (3) I have not committed adultery, and don't mind saying so.
    (4) I have not committed adultery, and wish I had the chance to.
    (5) I do not accept the judgement of the church or the state or
          any other curious interloper upon sexual activities between
          consenting adults. As such, I find this question unreasonable
          and declare that it is none of your business where any of
          my activies might fall under your little classifications for
          other people's private lives.
    (6) None Of The Above

    Message: 62100
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: Vote
    Subject: Above
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 02:12:44

      How come you left out "I do not commit adultry"?  Do you assume that
    everyone does?

         =========  Pascal  #(u,u)#  Yawn!  MacProgrammer  =========

    Message: 62101
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: smoke/computers
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 02:51:41

    I have never come across a mainframe facility which allows smoking, and not
    merely because of employee health.

    Message: 62102
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: On the Lighter Side
    Subject: great shirt mystery
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 02:58:38

    As for comparative anatomy, where would that make a difference -- unless the
    pocket was situated directly over the cleavage.
    And I'm sure she's very intelligent, James.  Is that supposed to be
    relevant, or some sort of bon mot which has flown over my head?

    Message: 62103
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: adultery
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 04:41:03

    Dean, that sounds like a good vote.  After this smoking vote blows over (get
    it?), I think Cliff should put it up.

    However, you forgot choice 7:

    <7>  I do not commit adultery, but plan to take it up as soon as I get
    married.

    Message: 62104
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff Beck
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 04:48:06

    Actually, my sister has three breasts.  THAT's how it was done.

    (And I hope this whole burn-hole/cleavage/my sister's I.Q. debate doesn't
    escalate into something nasty between you and Hawley.)

    My sister would probably think this whole discussion (get it?) is pretty
    weird.  Right now she's alive and well in Albuquerque, and she still has the
    shirt in question -- hole and all.  After she burned my shirt, she bought me
    a similar one, and kept the original.

    Message: 62105
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: ThornBob
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 05:03:45

    So those are your criteria for a good, non-biased documentary on MLK?  OK.
    And if they don't mention any one of the items you mentioned, I guess we'll
    all have completely wasted our time, right?  Gosh, I never realized the
    substantial RISK involved -- it's rather exciting!

    Message: 62106
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: "Cures"
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 05:33:27

    Lung cancer cures smoking.
    AIDS cures homosexuality.
    Venereal diseases cure promiscuity.
    Child abuse cures healthy nurturing.
    Heart attacks cure stress.
    Sex cures virginity.
    Decapitation cures blindness.
    BBSes cure creativity.
    Liver schlerrosis cures alcoholism.
    Fatal overdoses cure drug addiction.
    Religion cures reality.
    Genital dismemberment cures rapists.
    Divorce cures adultery.
    Deafness cures heavy metal.
    Sarcasm cures sincerity.
    Flatulence cures crowds.
    Indiscriminate love cures friendship.
    JT cures secrecy.
    Theft cures wealth.
    Racism cures equality.
    Professional wrestling cures intelligence.
    Top-40 cures talent.
    Time cures infatuation.
    Death cures life.

    Message: 62107
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/last
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 06:42:18

    "Flatulence cures crowds"??? hahahahahahahahahaha. Oh your at it again Zakey
    Baby. Funnier than hell! You could have narrowed down your list however by
    stating that death cures ALL of it. Of course, it wouldn't be as funny!
    hahahahahahahah -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62108
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Mike on Cliff
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 06:44:25

    I don't think Cliff is any different than the rest of us voicing his
    opinions about smoking or otherwise. We all raise our voices and lower them
    later. I also never got the opinion that he hated all smokers either. He
    doesn't hate me. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62109
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: All
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 06:48:15

    Is anyone out there playing the new game SimCity? If so, lets discuss it.
                                 -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62110
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Vote
    Subject: the ideas...
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 07:05:34

            I like the ideas submitted for a ote question...  I will go with
    Dean's posted question as is, unless he wishes to update it with all these
    great suggestions.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62111
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Smoking?
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 07:16:38

            Sorry if ANYONE feels offended....  I do NOT hate smokers...  There
    are even POLITE smokers out there that I have NO problems with.  Then there
    are those that are rude.  But that is life.  I guess I should not put any
    VIGOR in my arguments about such things as smoking.  Sometimes when you lose
    someone you cared for to a disease caused by smoking, you get carried away
    with emotion.  For this I am sorry.

            I just feel so helpless and sad...  I do NOT wish to loose anymore
    friends....  Sniff (tm)

            I will draw my arguments to a conclusion, and as Zak put it, "let it
    blow over" ha ha ha ha..... (hard to laugh when one hurts)

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62112
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Shooting range...
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 19:15:57

            I went out today to just do a practice IQC and an AQC....
    I am getting better and better...  Watch out Sandy!  he he he

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62113
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:17:00

    Re:  "The only fair way to settle this is with a vote"

    I'd like to vote on the question, but I don't feel comfortable with any of
    the 6 options.  How about this option, "I think adultery is morally wrong,
    and I never want to do it."

    Hmmmmm.  Maybe that's not quite right either.  How about this,  "I think
    adultery is morally wrong, and I hope I never get entangled in it."

    How's that sound?

    Message: 62114
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:19:27

    Re:  "I have never come across a mainframe facility which allows smoking"

    That's not so uncommon anymore.  I work at 3 different stations that do not
    allow smoking anywhere in the entire building.  If you want to smoke, you
    must go outside.  One even provides an ash tray right out the back door.

    Message: 62115
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:21:01

    Re:  "unless the pocket was situated directly over the cleavage"

    Maybe she wears an iron bra?

    Message: 62116
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:28:35

    Re:  "I guess we'll
    all have completely wasted our time, right?"

    No, I don't think it would be a waste of our time.  The point I was trying
    to make was, if the file only accentuates the positive and eliminates the
    negative, it falls under the heading of propaganda and not documentary.  All
    the facts should be presented, good and bad.  When any person comes into a
    special position, whether it be spouse, president, or holiday, the whole
    truth should be known.  I don't like it when all the skeletons come piling
    out of the closet after the fact.

    Message: 62117
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:29:48

    Re:  "all the cures"

    How about "war cures peace".

    Message: 62118
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak's list
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 20:40:45

    More than a few of those are quite close to home, eh, Zak???

    Message: 62119
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bob T./62114
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 23:34:25

    Well, naturally I was refering to smoking within the computer room(s).

    Message: 62120
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Zak/62104
    Date: 11/11/89  Time: 23:39:09

    KILL!!!!!!!!!

    (just kidding).  What's to escalate?

    Message: 62121
    Author: $ Peter Petrisko
    Category: Tales & Tall Stories
    Subject: WAR
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 04:37:14

         "It wasn't that Hitler was a bad man," Mitch started to explain, "he
    just went a little crazy.  He got a little power hungry, you understand?"  I
    nodded as Mitch and I drove past the alley by Gilmour High.
         It was only a few months ago when I transferred to GHS and fell in with
    Mitch.  He was kind of a loner too, kept to himself mostly.  We were
    assigned to each other as lab partners, and started hanging out.  When I
    first went over to his house, he showed me some pamphlets he had laying
    around, about communism.  Some bad shit there, I had to agree with him.  He
    told me how his dad once kicked the shit out of a communist when the bastard
    tried to burn an american flag.  That sick commie deserved it.
         Of course, it wasn't just the communists anymore.  If Mitch had his
    way, he said, we'd split the country straight down the middle.  "It's the
    only way it could work," he said, "the races weren't meant to mix.  It's not
    that the niggers and spicks are inferior or anything, we just aren't made to
    get along.  You understand?"
         Mitch knew this dream would never come true on its own.  "People need
    to wake up." he explained a few days ago.  "The point needs to be driven
    home."  After reading those pamphlets and listening to him all these months,
    I couldn't help but agree.  After all, a few years back my older brother was
    shot by a black guy.  This guy thought my brother had sold his buddies bad
    crack, and just drove by and shot him.  My brother didn't even deal drugs.
    When I told Mitch about my brother, he said, "It's those niggers and spicks
    in those gangs that are selling drugs and wasting people."

         We parked the car about a block from the alley.  Mitch said earlier
    this was my initiation into the inner circle.  After this, the real war
    would start and we'd make things happen.  I headed towards the alley, while
    Mitch got a gas can out of the trunk.  In the alley, we found 'Leroy' asleep
    on a pile of garbage.  We didn't know what his name really was, but he slept
    in the alley by GHS and we'd hit him up for cigarettes and shit during
    lunch, even though we knew he didn't have any.  There he was sleeping like a
    baby, an empty bottle of Night Train under his arm.  "Lazy nigger," Mitch
    mumbled as he poured gasoline onto the bum's clothes.
         "You gotta have a first kill.  This is war, you understand?"  Mitch
    turned and said to me.  I pulled the matches out of my pocket, and lit one.
    I threw it at the guy, and a moment later the blood-curdling screams
    started, as the black man ran, lighting up the night sky.
         Mitch started after him, pulling a cigarette out of his shirt pocket,
    laughing hysterically about how he needed a light real bad.
         I sunk to the ground, telling myself I was doing this to save the white
    race.

    (Just a little something I wrote a few hours before my reading at the Alwun
    House last weekend.  If you saw this week's New Times, you know the Alwun
    House needs your support more than ever.  Support local art - support
    Alwun.)

    Message: 62123
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob/smoking regs
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 05:25:51

     Computer and electronic oriented establishments are not the only places
    that prohibit smoking Bob. THere is no smoking allowed anywhere on the
    workroom floor of the Main Post Office, and I know of several postal
    substations where the same rule is in effect. Many other workplaces who care
    about the health and welfare of their employees are also establishing
    smoking restrictions.

    Message: 62124
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: various
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 06:14:52

    On CURES:  People, feel free to add your own.  "War cures peace" isn't bad.
    I forgot to add "Pornography cures curiosity."  Beauregard, a few of those
    hit close to home, but not "more than a few."

    PETER:  Nice story.  Like many of my own stories, I wish it had an ending.

    THORNBOB:  I too hope it's not propaganda-ish.  We'll see.  However, from
    what I've read, it's mostly a compilation of news footage and speeches that
    happened during MLK's life.  Was his sex life well-publicized then, or did
    it come out in the open a while after he died?  If the latter, this
    documentary (made in 1970) may fall into your propaganda category.

    Message: 62125
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Brain teaser
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 06:34:07

    OK, folks, it's puzzle time.  If you don't like puzzles, please abort this
    message NOW.  ---------------

    There were three candidates for the job of Dean of Students.  The person who
    had to choose one of the three applicants for the job devised a test to see
    which of the three was smartest.  The test is as follows:

         All three people were placed in a room together and blindfolded.  While
    they were blindfolded, the test-maker drew a colored dot - either RED or
    GREEN - on each applicant's forehead.
         The blindfolds were removed.
         The test-maker then asked the three of them, "Raise your hand if you
    see a red dot."  They all looked at each other, and all three of them raised
    a hand.
         The test-maker then asked:  "OK, if you know what color YOUR forehead
    is, please say so."
         All three applicants hesitated.
         Finally, one of the applicants responded, "The dot on my forehead is
    red."
         The test-maker said, "Terrific!  You're right!  You got the job!"

    THE QUESTION IS:  How did the correct-answering applicant know that his
    forehead was red?  The first correct answer wins a prize from Cliff.
    [Hint:  All three of the applicants' forehead-dots were RED.]

    Message: 62126
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Last on Prize?
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 08:06:46

            Zak got that wrong... the first correct answer GIVEs Cliff a prize!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62127
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob/the vote
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 08:42:33

    How about "I don't believe in adultry if married and would never do it"?
    Hmmm .. I wonder if a person can commit adultry if they arn't married??
    Isn't that fornacation or something like that? -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62128
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Smoking
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 08:47:20

    I read in the paper the other day that the prisoners of Yavapi county cannot
    smoke after a certain date. (about a month from now) However, the guards and
    prison faculty has a place where they can go to do so. (In the building)
    I find this totally 'two faced'. Inhumane treatment. ha. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62129
    Author: $ Todd Reese
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: War cures Peace?
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 11:04:23

    Hardly.  War IS Peace.

    Message: 62130
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 14:53:33

    Re:  "Thornbob"

    What's this?  A new nick name?

    Message: 62131
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 14:56:54

    Re:  "Adultery"

    I stand corrected, but only if you are right.

    Message: 62132
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: For sale
    Subject: Coffee tables?
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 16:21:19

            I am not sure if that is what they are really called... but I have
    those two indian style tables with the tile inlay.   The tops are two foot
    square...  Many of you have seen them over at my house in the lower level.
    I believe they cost me about $150.00 each when new...  I will part with them
    for $75.00 each.
            Sniff...  Time for a change in furniture, they are for SALE!
    The room looks a little larger without them...  Need space for GTs'...
    Yea, that's it!  A noble cause...Get Togethers!

    Give me a call if interested...  843-3346  Ask for SysOp Cliff.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62133
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Zak/puzzle
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 17:27:50

    Is it even possible for him to have known?  If two of the three had red
    dots, and the third was unknown (from his own point of view), then he would
    see one of the red dots on the other two, and raise his hand; the other
    two, seeing red dots on each other, would also raise their hands.  Thus, it
    is theoretically impossible for any of the three to logically deduce his own
    color -- based on your description.

    Now then, go ahead and shoot me down.

    Message: 62134
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: MacGregor
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 19:12:20

    Hi,
      I had two versions of 'I have not commited adultery', and a
    'None of the Above', so I thought I had not commiting adultery
    pretty well covered. I will post a new version and you can let me
    know if it still doesn't work for you.
       See You Later
          Dean H.

    Message: 62135
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Vote
    Subject: Update
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 19:16:43

      The only fair way to settle this is with a vote, where
    people can anonymously state their opinion on it. Here is
    a suggested set of choices:

              Do you commit adultery, and if so why?
    (1) I commit adultery because my husband/wife doesn't understand me.
    (2) I commit adultery because I can't help it, but I feel it is wrong.
    (3) I do not commit adultery.
    (4) I do not commit adultery and I condemn anyone who does, no matter
          what they may believe.
    (5) I do not accept the judgement of the church or the state or
          any other curious interloper upon sexual activities between
          consenting adults. As such, I find this question unreasonable
          and declare that it is none of your business where any of
          my activies might fall under your little classifications for
          other people's private lives.
    (6) None Of The Above

    Message: 62136
    Author: Tim Tam
    Category: News Today
    Subject: Deuscthland...
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 19:31:16

    Now that the Berlin Wall is down, let's hope we don't see a reunified
    Germany once again.....judging from the number of neo Nazi's right here
    in Phoenix, Arizona, there must be at least a few still left in Germany,
    still faithful to their God, Martyr and Fuehrer Adolf Hitler, and once
    we have a reunified Germany.....well, look what happened the last time!
    So this is cause for celebration, but let's not get carried away!
    Let's settle for a compromise....a free and democratic U.S.S.R.!!!

    Message: 62137
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Vote
    Subject: Old ote
    Date: 11/12/89  Time: 19:42:44

            Those who took the time to answer the poll...thanks

    19 said they do NOT smoke.
     2 said they do Smoke.
     1 said they do smoke now, but plan to give it up by the end of the year.

            I hope this is a trend...and smoking will be a thing of the past by
    the turn of the century.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    P.S.  However, I do not hate Mike Carter or Ann if they continue to smoke
    for the next 80 years or so...  I wish them well!

    Message: 62138
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff Beck
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 04:54:26

    I'm not going to shoot you down, but... YOU'RE WRONG!

    Cliff, give this man $tatus and then put him in the hantom Zone!

    There is a completely logical answer to the puzzle, by the way.  In the
    words of Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel, don't give up.

    Message: 62139
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: ote
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 04:58:59

    For those of us who are not married, and therefore not in a position to
    commit adultery, do we respond with "I do not commit adultery" or "None of
    the above"?

    Message: 62140
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Zak's puzzle
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 05:44:52

     The winning applicant knew that the other two dots were red, and he also
    knew that each of the others saw his dot, and they also raised their hands.
    Therefore, it was a safe assumption to say that his dot was also red.
    Close?

    Message: 62141
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 05:47:05

    Hurray for Yavapai county sherriff's dept.!
     They have more consideration for their prisoners than most smoking parents
    have for their own children!

    Message: 62142
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Todd on war
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 06:55:34

    "War IS peace"??? That doesn't make sense. Please explain. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62143
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff on tables
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 06:57:04

    Remind me at the GT to look them over. I might be interested.
                              -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62144
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff/the sm.vote
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 07:01:00

    It really wan't a fair vote - you polled a 98% of non-smokers. On other
    BBSes, the percentage is just the opposite in some cases. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62145
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul - you missed ..
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 07:03:24

    ... something! They keep the prisoners from smoking, but the faculity of the
    prison still have the right to do so in the building. As I asked, isn't this
    quite two faced? -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62146
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann on Smoke Vote
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 08:55:22

            But this was a poll of Apollo's users...  And you know we got the
    smartest and the wisest users around.

                                    For people like M.C., that was a JOKE

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62147
    Author: $ James Hawley
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Ann/Smoking
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 10:22:07

    I read the article in the paper.  You fail to mention the reasoning why the
    prison decided to stop it.  They had a prisoner make a homemade rocket out
    of matches and start a small fire.

    No matches=no smoking.  And it is a prison after all.  Should we let heroin
    addicts shoot up in prison?  Do we let alcoholics drink beer?  No....

    Message: 62148
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Paul/puzzle
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 16:18:54

    No.  The wording of the puzzle makes it clear that each applicant need only
    see a red dot -- not two red dots -- in order to raise his hand.  The other
    two, each having red dots on their heads, would have had to raise their
    hands even if the third man had a green dot, since they would have seen a
    red dot by looking at each other.

    It seems to me that I have read this puzzle before -- Martin Gardner or
    Raymond Smullyan -- and that the wording was slightly different.

    Message: 62150
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/the puzzle
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 17:14:08

    Zak, your puzzle is unsolvable as stated.  Disregarding you clue, if all
    three had had green dots, no hands would have been raised, and therefore any
    of them would be able to know the color of his own dot, since any reds
    mean at least two hands raised.  If two of them were red, and one of
    them green, then all three hands would be raised; the green man would see
    two red dots, and each of the red dots would see the red dot
    of the other.  If all three of them were red, all three would raise their
    hands; this is identical to the result of two red and one green; therefore,
    it is impossible to distinguish between a case of three red dots, and two
    red with one green, solely on the basis of raised hands . Wait -- let me
    amend that.  If there were two red and one green, either of the red men
    would know their own color, since the only combinations which allow three
    raised hands are red-red-red and red-red-green, and since the red men could
    see and account for the one green, they would know that they were red.  But
    the green man would not be able to know his own color in a red-red-green
    combo.
    If two were green and one red, the red man, seeing two green dots and being
    the only one with his hand down, would know his color.  But the two greens
    would not be able to know.

    So again, since the point of view of any man in a red-red-red combo would be
    the same as the point of view of the green man in a red-red-green combo
    (seeing three raised hands and two red dots), the puzzle can't be solved on
    the basis of raised hands (hmmm...)

    Message: 62151
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 17:34:59

    YES, the winning applicant knew the other two dots were red, and YES, he
    knew that each of the others saw his dot and also raised their hands.

    But based ojust this, it is not a safe assumption to say that his own dot
    was also red.  The two others could be raising their hands in response to
    each other, right?  So you're close, but no cigarette.  Sorry.

    Message: 62152
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 17:38:48

    Whew.  I still contend that there is a completely logical answer -- an
    answer that you almost stumbled upon.  But you missed it.  And I won't tell
    you the answer until you say "Uncle."

    I don't know from where the puzzle originates.  A friend of mine in a
    college linguistics class is where I heard it from.  The teacher asked the
    entire class, and told them that anyone who correctly solved it would not
    have to do homework.  My friend solved it, and the answer makes sense.
    But it's a little tricky.

    Message: 62153
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Zak/I'VE GOT IT!!
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 18:00:05

    OK, as we know, there are two identical states which allow three raised
    hands: red-red-red, and red-red-green.  The point of view of any red man in
    the triple red combo is identical to the point of view of the green man in
    the latter combo.

    HOWEVER -- The red-red-green combo would only allow the two reds to solve
    the puzzle; NOT the red.  Since the puzzle is designed to allow the three
    applicants to fairly compete (obviously), that eliminates the red-red-green
    combo, and thus they must ALL have red dots.

    Yes!  YES!!  YES!!!!!!

    Message: 62154
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 20:33:48

      Or else he knows his is red because if it had been green the other two
    would have seen it and figured out that their own dots were red because
    there can only be one green. Their hesitation when they can see his dot
    shows that all dots are red, since he can see that both of theirs are.
      The winner is the first man to take the other's indecision to be an
    important piece of data.
       See You Later
          Dean H.

    Message: 62155
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Dean/62154
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 21:33:56

    The hesitation could be interpreted in that manner, but it could just as
    easily indicate ordinary confusion as it could indecisiveness.  That is,
    perhaps they were still attempting to analyse the problem.  Keep in mind
    that some hesitation is a given: we have had the same information as the
    applicants, and it has taken a couple of days to solve the puzzle.  Not that
    it couldn't have been solved sooner, but given the fact that the users of
    this bbs are by no means of substandard intelligence, I think that a period
    of hesitation is almost unavoidable. (the period is unspecified.  It could
    be thirty seconds, five minutes, or longer.)  What would require
    explaination would be a complete absence of hesitation.

    Message: 62156
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
    Subject: Back to the Future
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 22:29:37

            This month 'Back to the Future II' will be released...
    Does ANYONE think we can make a fun GT out of this?

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62157
    Author: $ Chris Zagar
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Thanks!
    Date: 11/13/89  Time: 23:30:48

    A letter of thanks to Cliff & Sandy, Rod Williams, David Burkhart, Ann
    Oudin, James Taranto, Nick Ianuzzi, Head Quasar, Ralph Blehm, James Hawley,
    Dean McCarron, Peter Petrisko, Traci Sibel, Todd Reese, Beaurgard Dog, and
    Alan Hamilton.

    This afternoon, Cliff dropped off the wedding gift from all of you to my
    fiancee, Rita Lynn, and me.  Some may be of the opinion that we should have
    waited until after the wedding on Saturday to open the present.  Well, if
    we had, then I wouldn't know to send this message to all of you, would I?

    Those of you who aren't listed above are probably wondering who I am and
    what I am talking about.  Oddly enough, I have what would seem to be two
    conflicting attributes: I am the quietest user of Apollo and I am also a
    SYSOP of this system.  During the past few years, my participation in the
    system has dwindled due to a busy work schedule.  However, all of Apollo's
    truest users got together and purchased a Franklink Mint replica of the
    original U.S.S. Enterprise for my fiancee and me for our wedding.  It came
    with a plaque enjoining me to "live long and prosper" and their names.
    They also included a picture of themselves holding the replica.

    Thank you all for the wonderful gift.  The hardest part is trying to decide
    if I am more impressed by the replica or the grouping together for the
    photo.  Both meant quite a lot to me.  Thank you all!  SYSOP Chris and Rita

    Message: 62158
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: *sigh*
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 03:38:27

    Jeff, your answer (62153) made some sense, but is not the correct response.
    Dean, your answer (62154) is correct.  Congratulations.
    Jeff, your criticism of the correct ansnswer (62155) is the same criticism I
    had at first.  But remember, these people are applicants to be a DEAN OF
    STUDENTS at a fine college!  They made it this far, so they *must* be smart.
    (Actually, it would have been better to specify a period of time for
    hesitation.)  The hesitation is the key.  This exercise shows what a
    critical role perspective plays in analyzing situations...yeah, yeah.

    Anyway, Dean, I guess you get to be the Dean of Students on Apollo BBS.  How
    fitting.

    So, to repeat:  The winner knew that his dot was red because of the
    hesitation of the other applicants.  A little hesitation would be natural,
    but it would be very easy to see that if you saw one green dot and one red
    dot on the other person's head, and all three can see a red dot, then one's
    OWN dot MUST be red.  Since neither of the other two applicants (who we
    assume are somewhat intelligent) were quick to say they were red, the
    winning applicant concluded that he must NOT have a green dot, or else
    somebody would have figured it out by now.  So, by process of elimination,
    he knew his dot was red.
    However, Jeff's response that it would not be a fair test unless they all
    had the same color is not a bad answer.  Maybe my friend will be able to
    get off the hook for even MORE homework!

    Message: 62159
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: War!
    Subject: Another puzzle...
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 03:47:28

    OK, here's another...

    You have three boxes.  One is labeled "20 apples."  One is labeled "20
    oranges."  One is labeled "10 apples, 10 oranges."  The boxes used to
    contain contents which matched their labels.  However, some idiot prankster
    switched things around, so that now all the boxes' labels are wrong, though
    the contents are still 20 oranges, 20 apples, and 10 of each.

    The PROBLEM:  You have to determine what the correct labels are for each
    box.  You can't actually look inside a box, but you can pull one piece of
    fruit out at a time.

    What is the minimum number of pieces of fruit you need to remove before you
    can accurately determine the contents of all the boxes?  What strategy do
    you use?  Why?

    Good luck!

    (Jeff Beck, this is your chance to redeem yourself.)

    P.S.  The labels are still "20 apples," etc.  But no label correctly
    identifies its contents.  Each box is incorrectly labeled.

    Message: 62160
    Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 03:58:20

    You don't have to remove any fruit. Place the crates in separate rooms, let
    them begin to rot, and the odors will guide you.

    Message: 62161
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann/"faculity"
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 05:25:44

     Prisons don't have "faculities" (sic) Ann. They have staffs.
    And yes, it is unfair to prevent prisoners from smoking and not the staff,
    although a small room has been set aside for the staff addicts. If the
    building is to be smoke free, it should be so for all.

    Message: 62162
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: James H./smoking
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 07:39:18

    No to all your questions - but prisoners have always been able to smoke
    including in Yavapi county. The article also didn't sound like they
    particularly did it because of the match/rocket incident either. But to let
    the staff smoke - I still say is two faced. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62163
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Zakey
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 07:41:07

    What puzzle? Hahahahahaha -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62164
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
    Subject: MLK
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 16:50:32

            I would like to know how many are coming to the MLK video GT
    Thursday night?  Please say something......

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62165
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Nick
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 17:02:54

    But it's plastic fruit!

    Message: 62166
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Question?
    Subject: GT
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 17:03:53

    Yes, let Cliff know so he can buy an appropriate amount of beer.

    The GT will be at Cliff's, this Thursday (Nov. 16) at 8:00 PM.

    Message: 62167
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 19:36:57

    Re:  "MLK GT"

    Two Thornburgs are planning to come.  What were we supposed to bring?

    Message: 62168
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak/1st puzzle
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 20:09:17

    Actually, my answer is the definitive one.  Think about it:  The period of
    hesitation was not specified.  Some hesitation is a given, even among smart
    people.  Did your friend (the one who solved the puzzle) come up with the
    answer instantly, or was there a period (of undetermined length) of
    hesitation?  Being smart enough to qualify as a final applicant for a
    position such as Dean of Students does not require a special talent for
    solving logic puzzles.  Unless someone had developed such a talent, or had a
    genius for solving such puzzles intuitively, then some hesitation is a
    given.  I suggest that you have your friend ask the Dean of Students at his
    school the same question, and see if there is a period of hesitation, or
    indeed, if the problem is solved in the same sitting.

    Since a period of hesitation could either indicate confusion or hesitation,
    that is not a definitive way to solve the puzzle.  But the Dean would not
    have given a test that discriminated against one of the three applicants
    (much less made it impossible for an applicant to solve the puzzle).
    Therefore, by my reasoning, red-red-red HAS to be the answer.

    Message: 62169
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Zak/puzzle 2
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 21:01:07

    You would only need to remove one fruit to determine what boxes contained
    what -- as long as you removed that fruit fom the box labeled "10 of each".

    Now you know that the box labeled 10/10 is mislabeled (as are they all).  So
    if you remove an apple from that box, you know that the box contains 20
    apples.  If you remove an orange from that box, you know that the box
    contains 20 oranges.

    For example:  Box 1 is marked 10/10.  Box 2 is marked 20 apples.  Box
    3 is marked 20 oranges.  Let's assume that the fruit removed from box 1 is
    an apple.  This means that box 1 contains 20 apples.  Box 3, marked 20
    oranges, must contain 10 of each, since box 1 contains the apples and box 3
    is incorrectly labeled.  This means that box 2 contains 20 oranges.

    If instead you had pulled an orange from box 1, you would know that box 1
    contained 20 oranges.  Box 2, marked 20 apples, must contain 10 of each,
    since box 1 contains the oranges, and box 2 is incorrectly labeled.  This
    means box 3 contains 20 apples.

    There are only two ways for three unique boxes , with three correspondingly
    unique labels, to be completely mislabeled.  It is easy to see this if you
    diagram, although it turns out to be completely irrelevant to the solution
    of the puzzle.

    Message: 62170
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Mark/Puzzle
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 21:16:17

       The hesitation was given as part of the puzzle, while the fairness of
    the test was assumed by you with no direct evidence. Lets try another one
    with a different approach:
       A human resources director was faced with choosing which of three
    equally qualified executives would be promoted to fill a vacant position.
    All three candidates were logical and intelligent, and any of the three
    would be a good choice. The problem was resolved by having the three
    participate in a game where reason and chance would each play a part.
       They were seated single file, so that the first was facing a wall, the
    second could see the first, and the third could see both the others.
    They were shown a box containing three red hats and two white hats. One hat
    was placed on each of their heads so that none could see the color of their
    own hat. The one who could explain what color hat they had on, and how they
    knew it, would get the promotion.
       The back player, who could see the other two, was asked first and could
    not answer. The middle player, who could see only the one in front, was
    then asked and could not answer either. The front player, who could see
    nothing, was asked and answered correctly to win the promotion.
       What color hat did the front player have on, and how could it be known?

    Message: 62171
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Dean/Zak's puzzle 1
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 22:22:26

    Yes, it is a fact that the hesitation was part of the puzzle text.  It is
    not logical to assume, however, that every portion of text in a logic puzzle
    is germaine to the puzzle.  It could merely be story description.
    The fairness was not assumed, it was implied by the puzzle.  In order for
    the puzzle to have a definite solution which requires no assumptions (such
    as the assumption that the hesitation indicated a reluctance to aid the
    others, rather than ordinary bafflement), the test must be fair.

    Dean Of Students is an administrative position.  It requires administrative
    skills.  An aptitude for logic puzzles is no more a requisite for the job
    than an aptitude for physics.  The solution of such a puzzle is only
    "obvious" in retrospect, or to someone with experience in solving analogous
    puzzles, or someone with a natural intelligence for solving such puzzles.

    Message: 62172
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Dean/your puzzle
    Date: 11/14/89  Time: 22:48:37

    The front player (facing the wall) had to have been wearing a red hat. Since
    there were three red hats, and only two white hats, the back player could
    only have known the color of his own hat if the two players in his sight had
    both been wearing white hats.  At this point, only a red-red or red-white
    combination is possible for the middle and front player.  The middle player
    knew that the  back player could not answer, and thus that either his hat or
    the front player's hat was NOT white.  If the front player's hat was white,
    then the middle player would know that his was red.  Thus, the front
    player's hat was red, because the middle player could not answer.
    The front player knew that since the back player could not answer,
    his hat could not be white.  The front player also knew that since the
    middle player could not answer, his hat had to have been red.

    Message: 62173
    Author: John Berger
    Category: Joke
    Subject: GOODBYE!
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 01:48:03

         I am the first one.
    The first person to leave Apollo permanently.  For good.  Never to return.
         Ask yourself, "Why?"  Why do you continue to be yanked around on the
    whims of a dictatorial maniac?  Your very presence FUELS his crumbling
    personality.  Without users most BBSes wouldn't exist.
         ARE YOU A NERD?  ARE YOU A LOSER?  Why do you choose to hang around
    computer nerds, losers and geeks?  Maybe it's because misery loves company?
         Doesn't it seem like most BBSes have become a SINKHOLE for assholes,
    nerds, and other forms of human scum?

         IT GOES ON...  Each generation breeds a new batch of obnoxious,
    psychotic, deranged, or braindamaged BBS geeks who will complete the endless
    cycle of nerd-dom; A SELF-PERPETUATING endless infinite stream of losers
    that will never END!
         PREDICTABLE and unchanging...  You just know what they're going to say
    and do.  Aren't you sick of it all?  Isn't it all too phony?  WHY SUBJECT
    YOURSELF to this?  Do you think you need to be treated this way by maniac
    SYSOPS and nerdy USERS?
         Did you intend to spend HUNDREDS of dollars on a computer setup just to
    get treated like SHIT from a bunch of assholes on a BBS?
         YET -- DAILY you submit yourself to their rules, their authority, and
    their WAYS!  SOON you'll become like them!

    (cont.)

    Message: 62174
    Author: John Berger
    Category: Joke
    Subject: GOODBYE! cont.
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 01:55:33

         BREAK the cycle...  I have.  I think it's ALL BULLSHIT!  I don't care
    if I offend anyone.  Someone's GOT to do it.
         I will not log onto BBSes that support dictators, reading of private
    mail, zapping (unless message is illegal), repressive rules.  That is why
    *I* do not log on to Apollo or the MCSO, just to name a few.  I REFUSE to
    hang around computer nerds and geeks!

         Get a REAL LIFE...
         Get real friends...

         A BBS is NO SUBSTITUTE for a social life...so WHY DO YOU MAKE IT ONE?
    Remember, WITHOUT YOU - they wouldn't have anyone to kick around, or have a
    shoulder to cry on...
         BBSes are ELECTRONIC SERFDOM...  Dragging you down to their level.
    Don't you want to be just like them?  Look at them!  Who do you want to be
    today?  Who do you want to be?  IT'S TIME TO PUT YOUR CLOTHES ON AND FACE
    THE WORLD!
         I'd love to start a MASSIVE boycott of BBSes!  Then the SYSOPS would
    have to LISTEN to US for a CHANGE!!!
         If you are interested in helping with legal BBS subversion, boycotting,
    BBS protests, Democratic Systems, send me E-MAIL!  Give me your suggestions.

    ::::::::::::::: John Berger ::::::::::::::::

    Message: 62175
    Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 04:10:01

    Done babbling?  Ok, now go away.

    Message: 62176
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: MLK GT
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 05:28:11

    Can't come. Have a play rehearsal that evening.

    Message: 62177
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Question?
    Subject: John Whatsisname
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 05:34:26

    John WHO???
    Never heard of this guy until the moment he says goodbye! Won't HE be missed
    though?
    Gooodbye forever, leave me E-mail? Hmmmmmmmmmm.

    Message: 62178
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff on GT
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 07:41:55

    I will be there. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62179
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: John or whoever
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 07:48:34

    How can we send you E-mail when you clearly stated you are gone for good?
    And I say, good goodbye with no regrets. You sound like you excaped from tha
    that bobby hatch down on Van Buren. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62180
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Reading E-Mail?
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 09:10:20

            I do NOT read E-Mail...  On Apollo it goes into a GREEKING mode when
    a person is sending private mail, or reading his private mail that was sent
    to him.  Geesh!   Besides...  I never heard of that user before?

            The only real rules on here is not to send illegal & profane posts!
    I do not see how I am 'Oppressive' in any way.  Besides, it is you guys who
    decide what to talk about and what SIGs you want.

            That John (what's his name) has got a ego problem if he thinks that
    SysOps are out to control him.  Oh-well, he has the right to his opinion!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62181
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: MLK movie GT
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 09:57:54

            Tomorrow night (thursday) @ 8:00 PM.....  You need not bring
    anything....but yourselves!

            See ya then

    P.S.  I just KNEW Pual Savage would not be coming... Just knew it!

    Message: 62182
    Author: $ James Hawley
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Cliff/Back to the Fu
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 10:06:56

    That would be interesting.  I was thinking of picking up advance tickets for
    the first evening.

    Message: 62183
    Author: $ Gary Jones
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Goodbye
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 10:48:32

    What ever happened to "don't let the door hit you in the @$$?"

    Message: 62184
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Puzzle
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 11:24:51

      Todd Reese (in Email) and Mark (as Jeff Beck) have both given the correct
    answer to the hat puzzle. Note that such puzzles do not have to be fair in
    every way to the participants by definition. If the front player lands a red
    hat, that player wins, regardless of the skill of the other two. The back
    player can only win on the unlikely combination of both white hats landing
    in view. If the assignment of dots in the first puzzle were done completely
    at random, this would not be unfair to anyone, and only the red-red-green
    combination would give any player a disadvantage, of all the combinations
    which could randomly occur.
       The dangers of assumption as a habit of mind are pointed out in another
    mild way by Mark's assuming that candidates for an executive postion must be
    male, although no reference to gender had been made in the puzzle.
       See You Later,
         Dean H.

    Message: 62185
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Joke
    Subject: John Berger
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 13:29:18

      For the sake of argument, lets take the messages entered by 'John
    Berger' at face value. Here is a person who erroneously thinks he is
    the first to leave Apollo in such a manner, and gives the character of
    the BBS and its users as his reason. Should we be unhappy about it?
    In a way, yes.
      It seems that this person might be suffering from the impoverished
    social existence he attributes to the rest of us. The idea that using
    BBS's somehow deprives one of outside contact, or that people met
    through Apollo would be somehow substandard to people met in other ways,
    would only occur to someone who had looked to the BBS for 'a life', as
    they say, and found it wanting. It may be unfortunate for such people,
    but BBS's in general can not always be counted upon to nurture and
    fulfill the needs of those who come in starved for reinforcement.
      A new user here will find that some active users are easier to talk
    to than others, and some are easier to influence than others. Many people
    here have strong opinions on a wide range of issues, and all have their
    own convictions in some areas. One may learn, not only from airy opinions,
    gently swayed, but from the mighty slapping of stout convictions as well.
      If we read his cry for revenge against this miniature society where he
    did not find what he needed, we can easily see that his reaction to any
    other possible society of thinking people will be the same. His tearful
    farewell to the injustices Apollo reads just like a suicide note if the
    role of the BBS is replaced with the world at large.
       Classified as a oke, old in form and content,but pitiful as always.

    Message: 62187
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 17:27:00

    Re:  "John (what's his name)"

    Actually, John logged onto the wrong BBS and sent that message.  He really
    does like the Apollo BBS.  That message was intended for another BBS which
    shall remain unnamed.

    Good grief John, can't you do anything right?

    Message: 62189
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 18:18:08

    Well, logically, such puzzles (when defined as a method by which to select
    the most qualified applicant) must be fair, otherwise, they are false
    tests.  In the hat puzzle, it is not true that if the front player lands a
    red hat, that player wins.  If they are all equally logical, as your puzzle
    states, then the rear and middle player, knowing that they cannot win by not
    guessing, and knowing that by not guessing they might aid the other(s) in
    solving the puzzle, would simply guess the color of their hats.  For the
    rear player, this is a 50/50 proposition; it is hardly logical or
    intelligent to automatically forfeit by not guessing, since to guess right
    means winning, and to guess wrong has the same result as not guessing (at
    least, for the guesser).

    I did not assume that the players were male.  That I used a masculine
    pronoun means nothing.  I refuse to go through the silliness of typing (or
    saying, for that matter) "he/she", and it is gramatically acceptible to use
    the masculine "his" as a generic pronoun when referencing a person of
    indeterminate sex ("player").

    a random selection of dots in the first puzzle would have a 50 percent
    chance of being unfair, since there are four combinations, two of which are
    biased against at least one of the players (red-red-green and
    green-green-red).

    Message: 62190
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean/cont.
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 18:24:41

    My chief complaint against such logic puzzles is that the scenario given is
    itself illogical.  If a test were devised to choose the most qualified of
    several applicants, common sense would dictate that the test must be fair to
    the applicants individually.  If a random selection is desired, then a
    simple coin flip would eliminate the need for complex logic puzzles.
    It seems to me it is myopic at best to devise a logic puzzle which is absurd
    in its very framing.  Surely the same priniciples can be demonstrated within
    a rational framework.

    Message: 62191
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: pronouns
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 18:45:13

    From "The Elements of Style" :

    "The use of "he" as pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple,
    practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language.  "He"
    has lost all suggestion of maleness in these circumstances.  The word was
    unquestionably biased to begin with (the dominant male), but after hundreds
    of years it has become seemingly indispensible.  It has no perjorative
    connotation; it is never incorrect.  Substituting "he or she" in its place
    is the logical thing to do if it works.  But it often doesn't work, if only
    because repetition makes it sound boring or silly . . . No one need fear
    using "he" if common sense supports it.  The furor recently raised about
    "he" would be more impressive if there were a handy substitute for the word.
     Unfortunately, there isn't -- or at least no one has come up with one yet.
    If you think "she" is a handy substitute for "he", try it and see what
    happens.  Alternately, put all the controversial nouns in the plural and
    avoid the choice of sex altogether, and you may find your prose sounding
    general and diffuse as a result."

    Message: 62192
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last/he
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 19:35:00

    Wow, you should try reading one of the feminist style books

    Message: 62193
    Author: $ James Taranto
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Berger
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 21:14:15

    I think he has some good points.  If I don't get my own SIG by Thanksgiving,
    I'm quitting Apollo too.

    Message: 62195
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last on JT
    Date: 11/15/89  Time: 22:39:58

            You can have the COSmos SIG!  Zak came up with a subject, name and
    interested users for his SIG.  What do you have to offer?

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62196
    Author: $ James Hawley
    Category: News Today
    Subject: Comdex
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 00:37:21

    The portion of Comdex that I attended was interesting.  In one of the Atari
    dealers booth, a salesman for Migraph (hand scanners) asked Jack Tramiel if
    he owned an Atari.  Very funny.

    I met Jerry Pournelle and talked with him for a couple of minutes.  He
    seemed to enjoy playing Populous on a Mega ST.  I asked him what he thought
    about the future of the Atari ST line.  He stated that he thought they were
    going in the right direction and with a lot more potential.

    Message: 62197
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Fair Question
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 05:43:23

      I think it was Jeff Beck who pointed out the artificiality of the puzzles
    that have been posted here recently.  Well, here's a non-artificial one:

      Hazel and her sister Heather are the same age (give or take a few
    minutes), but are not twins.  How can this be, since neither was adopted,
    nor are they half-sisters?

         =========  Pascal  #(O,O)#  Hoot!  MacProgrammer  =========

    Message: 62198
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff!
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 05:56:45

    You just KNEW Pual (sic) Savage wold not be coming, huh?
    Any time you don't think my excuses from your Gts are valid, please feel
    free to check on them. This evening, beginning at 7 PM, I will be found in
    the sanctuary at Sweetwater Church of the Valley on N. 43rd Ave., rehearsing
    or church's Christmas play with a bunch of other people. If you don't want
    to put forth the effort to come over and see, the number is 978-5511.
    If you don't want to put forth the effort to call, shut up.
     That happens to hold a much higher priority for me than watching a
    propaganda film about Martin Luther King.

    Message: 62199
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff on sigs.
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 07:41:49

    Talking about us deciding on the sigs. we want - how about Zak's movie sig?
    That would be a lot of fun. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62200
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: War!
    Subject: Paul
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 09:59:26

            I did not mean to get an attack from you telling me to "Shut UP"...

            Have fun at your rehearsal (and I DO believe you) HONEST!  Better
    you be there then here.....that is for sure.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    P.S.  I love getting the first post I read in the morning telling me to
    'Shut Up'.....  starts my day off like you would not believe.

    Message: 62201
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Paul on MLK
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 10:12:58

            Paul is probably right about the film just being propaganda to show
    the good side of King.  I just wonder how much of his womanizing they will
    talk about and if they will mention his involvment with the Communists, in
    the fact he always surrounded himself with Communists advisors.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62203
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Steve/puzzle
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 14:41:22

    They were not twins, but two sisters of a group of triplets (or quadruplets,
    etc.)

    This may not be the answer you are looking for, but it is valid.

    Alternately, they could be nuns.

    Message: 62204
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: MLK video
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 16:32:29

    I'm glad so many of you have already decided it is propaganda.  You may be
    right, though:

    PROPAGANDA:  The spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose
    of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person.

    If you walk away from this video with the general feeling that the civil
    rights movement was a good thing, or that MLK was a good man, then the video
    will have qualified for that moniker.  The question is, what difference does
    it make?  Why not take the raw information at face-value, and leave it at
    that?  If anything, such a video is trying to persuade you that MLK did a
    lot of good for the civil rights movement, not that adultery is acceptable.

    Cliff, what do you make of MLK's having known communists (if this is true)?

    If the video doesn't go into detail about MLK's sex-life (and it might not,
    since the focus is not on his personal relationships, but on his public
    influence), will it have been a waste, or a big piece of propagandish
    garbage?  I don't think so.  I think you guys are being overly simplistic
    about the whole thing.

    Message: 62205
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Sex & Love
    Subject: Sex in politics
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 16:41:00

    [excerpts from "The Sex of Politics," an article in the December issue of
    Reason magazine.  By David Brudnoy.]

         Lately storied of sexual indiscretions have been fatal, or at least
    damaging, to the careers of American politicians.  It was not always so.
    True, what was standard in the court of Louis XIV has not been so cavalierly
    accepted in the United States.  Still, the private lives of past American
    leaders rarely had a decisive impact on their public effectiveness.
         The 15th president of the United States, James Buchanan, who had
    neither wife nor children to inflict upon the adoring masses, suffered for
    years from innuendo.  His best friend, Sen. Wm. Rufus De Vane King, was
    called "Miss Nancy" by Andrew Jackson and "Aunt Fancy" by others.  The
    president knew that his own nickname, at least in some circles, was "Mr.
    Nancy."
         One of Buchanan's better-esteemed predecessors, Thomas Jefferson, was
    thought by contemporaries to have made one of his slaves, Sally Hemmings,
    his mistress.  Historians argue the subject to this day.
         While her husband Franklin was sleeping with her social secretary,
    Eleanor Roosevelt was drawn intimately, maybe very intimately, to her
    lesbian friend Lorena Hickok, to whom she wrote on one occasion:  "Hick
    darling...Oh I want to put my arms around you...I want to hold you close."
         President Warren Gamaliel Harding his his mistress in a White House
    cloakroom.  One of John Kennedy's good buddies, Washington Post editor Ben
    Bradlee, says JFK frolicked in the White House pool with naked maidens.

    Message: 62206
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Sex & Love
    Subject: Sex in Politics
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 16:47:39

    According to many biographers, JFK's mistresses included Judith Campbell,
    the moll of Mafia honch Sam Giancana.
         When Grover Cleveland was running for president, the Republicans were
    eager to make hay from Cleveland's admission that he had fathered a child
    out of wedlock.  They taunted him:  "Ma, ma, where's pa?"  But when
    Cleveland won, his party, the Democrats, twitted the GOP:  "Gone to the
    White House, ha, ha, ha!"  Now, aren't you glad you asked?

         Maybe you didn't ask, but these and many other tales out of school from
    the world of politics inspired comment in theirr day and engage scholars and
    civilians alike today.  We've learned that General Dwight Eisenhower wanted
    at one point to divorce Mamie and marry his driver.  General George C.
    Marshall, his superior, was furious and sent Ike back onto the parth of
    righteousness with a chiding letter.  Ike went on to carry himself and Mamie
    into the presidency.  Who knows if Eisenhower's wartime fling with the
    lovely driver, were it known then to public and press, would have kept him
    from the presidency as Gary Hart's hanky-panky derailed the playboy of the
    good ship Monkey Business.
         As Cleveland's case shows, even wide public knowledge of infidelity
    didn't necessarily prove catastrophic to a political career 100 years ago.
    JFK's buddies and the press maintained a strict silence during his
    lifetime; even three decades ago not everything dicey about an American
    president turned into common gossip.

    Message: 62207
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Sex & Love
    Subject: Sex in Politics
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 16:55:57

         Today?  Today the nation indulges in an orgy of moralistic
    pontification.  Not only the "love that dared not speak its name," as
    homosexuality was once called (and which now can't shut up), but
    hetersosexuality too, if not comfortably ensconced within marriage, surfaces
    to muddy the political waters, if that's possible.
         In Massachusetts, the impotent Republicans devote themselves to
    rehashing the amours of Sen. Edward Kennedy -- always good for a giggle,
    albeit useless in preventing Teddy from merrily returning to the Senate
    election after election with vote totals hovering around 59 percent -- and
    to fulminating about the Bay State's two acknowledged homosexual
    congressmen, Gerry Studds and Barney Frank.  The late summer scandal that
    filled many columns and dominated the talk shows, pushing almost everything
    else to the back pages, concerned Rep. Frank, who would have us believe that
    he let an excess of kindness expose him to betrayal.

    ...
         Years ago, when the Ayatollah Khomeini turned up as Time's Man of the
    Year although Pope John Paul II seemed to many a worthier candidate, many
    Time readers canceled their subscriptions, confusing "great" with "good" and
    assuming that to be the former one must also be the latter.  So, for those
    of that mentality [hi Cliff, Bob!], Alexander couldn't be Great because he
    was bisexual, nor the Sistine Chapel ceiling a magnificent work of art given
    Michelangelo's sexuality, nor Whitman's poetry sublime for the same reasons,
    nor the innumberable licentious kings and queens and presidents and...

    Message: 62208
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Sex & Love
    Subject: Sex in Politics
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 17:01:37

    ...spiritual leaders [!] worthy of admiration owing to their energetic
    heterosexual promiscuity.
         Whether America is better off today, with our ravenous journalists
    prowling the land is zealous search of sexual shenanigans among the pols,
    whether we're a happier nation when careers dissolve into nothingness as
    the bedroom becomes an appropriate subject for political discussion -
    whether this s *progress* - is up to each of us to decide.  Perhaps this
    morbid dwelling on the sex lives of our leaders and would-be leaders serves
    the same function as bread and circuses always do for the masses,
    distracting us from serious things and from the supposed legitimate purposes
    for which we bring some people forward to leadership.

    -------------------

    Cliff, Thornbob (your new nickname):  I do hope you took the time to read
    the above.

    Message: 62209
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 17:27:45

    Re:  "I will be found in the sanctuary at Sweetwater Church of the Valley on
    N. 43rd Ave., rehearsing or church's Christmas play with a bunch of other
    people."

    But Paul, if you are in your clown suit, how will we really know it's you?
    (big smile there Paul)

    Message: 62210
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 17:33:34

    Re:  "JFK's mistresses included Judith Campbell, the moll of Mafia honch Sam
    Giancana."

    Now we know who shot JR, er, I mean JFK.  It was the Mafia!

    Message: 62211
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 17:38:03

    Re:  "So, for those of that mentality [hi Cliff, Bob!]"

    Re:  "Thornbob (your new nickname):  I do hope you took the time to read
    the above."

    Yeh, I read the above.  Just what is it you think I said that is wrong?

    Message: 62212
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Whitman, et al.
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 20:00:25

    I'm not at all well researched in this matter, but is it an established fact
    that Whitman was homosexual?  I understand that he preferred the company of
    men, addressed them in florid terms of endearment, and so forth.  It is
    difficult to estimate the prevalence of homosexuality in that period because
    in both Britain and the U.S., there was a fashion for intense male
    friendships.  As Herman Melville put it, provided they fell short by as
    little as one degree "of the sweetest sentiments entertained between the
    sexes," they were considered perfectly acceptable.

    And what about Michelangelo?  Is there any direct evidence (personal letters
    , etc.) indicating in a definitive manner that he was homosexual?  I have
    never seen the Sisteen Chapel paintings, but it seems to me that, given its
    location and its commission by the church, any indications of homosexuality
    contained therein could only be ambiguous, at best.

    Message: 62213
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Jeff Beck
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 21:15:24

      Yes, your answer was correct -- Hazel, Heather, and Holly are triplets.  I
    hadn't thought about their being nuns as a possible solution, though.

         =========  Pascal  #(O,O)#  Hoot!  MacProgrammer  =========

    Message: 62214
    Author: Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Comdex
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 21:29:58

    What's even funnier than Trammiel 's personal Atari ?

    It's watching 200,000 stuffed shirts and three-pieced suits battle
    each other in an elbox-to-elbow race to grab the freebies and still
    look dignified. Now that WAS funny.

    Message: 62215
    Author: $ Todd Reese
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: John Berger
    Date: 11/16/89  Time: 22:33:40

    Actually, and with no disrespect intended, I believe Rich Fohl was the first
    $tatus User to permanently leave Apollo.

    Message: 62216
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
    Subject: MLK
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 00:52:53

    Re: The Great MLK Film GT!

            The GT ended at 12:45 am...  Thanks Zak for the idea.  And thanks to
    those who came and made it an enjoyable evening for Sandy and I.

            Yawn....  time for Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Message: 62217
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 01:21:49

    RE:  Just what is it you think I said that is wrong?
    That a man who cheats in his private life would by necessity also cheat in
    his public life.  And that they cannot be judged separately.
    Does "Thornbob" bug you?

    Message: 62218
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Beck
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 01:27:17

    I'm not sure if he was homosexual, but there is evidence that he very much
    hated women.  I don't know about Whitman.  The article doesn't specifically
    say that they were homosexual, but that they had something unusual or
    possibly unacceptable about their sexuality.  (Kind of sneaky of the writer,
    actually.)  He might have been better off using Leonardo da Vinci and
    Virgina Woolf as examples.

    Message: 62219
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Leonardo
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 01:56:27

    I take it there is some definitive proof that he was homosexual.  What is
    it? Also, misogeny is not evidence of homosexuality.   For all I know, any
    of these people *might* have been homosexual.  But it seems to me that,
    often, because of modern attitudes and even the deliberate desire to
    generate "great" examples of homosexuals, ambiguous facts are skewed and
    interpreted as positive evidence of this or that. Turn of the century
    biographers pointed out that Whitman "bathed in eau-de-cologne", that he was
    "fond of cooking", that he possessed an "infantile configuration" (boyish,
    perhaps), "delicate skin", that there was "something womanly in him" (read
    sissy) and that he harbored an "attitude and behavior toward sex that could
    not be considered normal."  One physician asked, with great delicacy, "could
    he have been eunuchoid?"  He lived something of a bohemian life and for a
    number of years wore an enormous stud of pearls.  None of this, however, is
    evidence for homosexuality.

    Message: 62220
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Clapton...er, Beck
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 02:27:04

    I wasn't trying to use his misogeny to prove his homosexuality, just
    pointing out that he had an unusual sexuality.  The same with Whitman.  They
    may have been full-blooded heterosexuals, for all I know.

    I am fairly certain that Leonardo was homosexual, though tangible proof
    won't be easy to find.  Standard art textbooks give more information about
    what he did in the realms of art and science -- not in the realms of the
    bedroom.  But I clearly remember one of my teachers saying that he was
    homosexual.  Not that "My teacher said so" is worth anything as
    proof...but that's why I believe it to be the case.
         You may remember the controversy over the Mona Lisa that arose a year
    or so back; Some art historians were claiming that she was a self-portrait
    -- Leonardo stylizing how he'd like to look as a woman, or something like
    that.  These claims were based on the fact (?) that he was homosexual.  In
    any case, I think those claims were mostly dismissed.
         From Gardner's _Art Through the Ages_ :  "[Leonardo's] mind and
    personality seem to us superhuman; the man himself, mysterious and remote."

    Message: 62221
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: War!
    Subject: Cliff/first posts
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 05:33:32

    I'm glad I made your day.

    Message: 62222
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bob/clown suit
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 05:42:20

    Freddie Freckles will be home in the closet and makeup cabinet on those days
    Bob, as I don the garb of a Jewish merchant in the Jerusalem temple during
    Jesus' time.
     I hope poor Freddie doesn't get too lonely. (big smile right back at ya)

    Message: 62223
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: M.L.K. et al.
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 08:54:33

    This is my personal opinion for what it's worth re: all the scandal printed
    about our politicians and M.L.K. ..... for one, I believe about a forth of
    it - it's so easy to write such stuff and make lots of moolah off of it once
    the person is dead. How much has been made off of Elvis alone? How much
    embellishment has been added to these stories for shock value? Because of it
    all, we won't ever really know the truth.
    Take the example on King ... in all respects, he is an American hero. He
    advocated no-violence and only ask for what is right to begin with. He not
    only changed the blacks problems - he changed the whites also - made many
    turn from prejudice into loving our fellow man - all men! He united them to
    a great extent - more so than at any time in history. He helped make America
    into a better country - to face up to what it stood for and to act upon
    those beliefs. Prejudice and bigotry are ugly and he showed us how ugly it
    really was. It was a giant sore upon this land and he helped heal it.
    Unfortunately, it's still healing, but certainly better thanks to people
    like him. So I say, so what to his personal life. Compared to what he did
    that was good, the bad certainly doesn't out weight it. Why must we take our
    heros and tear them apart piece by piece? How terrible that we took such a
    man and now he's known more for the adultrous affairs he had and his
    communist connections than the good he did! In fact, it's always in the same
    breath. Never do you hear anymore of just the good. I didn't want to KNOW
    all of this scandal and am sorry I do. This man was shot down cruely because
    he was trying to make this a better country. He DID make it a better country
    and in our zeal for scandal, lets not forget that. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62224
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: More
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 09:10:06

    We did the very same thing to Bobby and Jack Kennedy. I've did massive
    reading on both and always came to the conclusion they really tried and
    wanted to make this a better country. To me, they were the real American
    heros of the first class. Yes, I've read all the negative stuff too, but
    here again, the bad does not out weigh the good they did. I liked to believe
    that Jack and Jackie were the ideal couple that were happy and that Jack was
    doing a good job as president. He at least was the last president I had any
    faith in. (Bush who?) I wasn't disappointed in finding out about his
    personal life - I didn't care what he did. Only that he was my president and
    I had faith in him fully. It seems now, with our policians, the media looks
    for the dirt first than what the man is capable of. Right now, we don't have
    any heros and I miss them to be honest.
    I'll even stick my neck out and say that I don't think Mecham was that bad!
    He made mistakes, yes, but I think underneath all the media garbage and the
    Arizona politicians that didn't want him in office because he didn't agree
    with them - he would have made a great governor. Reading between the lines,
    I saw a man that really wanted and could have helped this state. But we
    stared believing all the garbage and the truth was lost and we won Moffart.
    Oh Joy! -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62225
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: The G.T.
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 09:46:38

    It was a most pleasant GT last night. Good to see Dean, Beau, Zakey and
    James again after a long time. Of course, Bonnie and Bob's presence is
    always nice. Thanks for having us Cliff and Sandy. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62226
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: store wars
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 15:39:55

    Well, for at least the second time now, Smitty's has taken out a full page
    ad in the republic comparing around 70 products ("both regular priced and
    advertised specials") to those of Smith's and Albertson's.  The ad shows
    that Smith's prices are 10% higher than Smitty's, and Albertson's prices are
    13% higher than Smitty's.
    Contrast this with recent ads by Smith's and Albertson's comparing prices
    (Smith's in fact compared over 300 items).

    I doubt that it's a revelation to anyone, but it just goes to show you how
    price comparisons can be manipulated to "prove" anything.

    Message: 62227
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: News Today
    Subject: The Jungle -- 1989
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 15:53:25

    Donna Bazemore, a former worker at a Perdue Industries poultry plant in
    North Carolina testified for a congressional panel, a labor-management
    relations subcomittee of the House Education and Labor Comittee.  The
    testimony came during a hearing on proposed changes to a whistle-blowing
    law.
            "To start with, the plants are filthy.  The floors regularly are
    covered with grease, fat, sand, and roaches.  Bugs are up and down the sides
    of the walls . . . chickens regularly fall off the line and into all the
    muck on the floor.  The supervisors have workers put them back on the line."
    Bazemore said workers are instructed every day to remove tags from hundreds
    of chickens condemned for diseases such as tumors and growths on their
    intestines.  Chicken parts are sometimes removed from a filthy floor drain
    and thrown back onto the line, she said.
    At Perdue, she said, workers were told that if they spoke to reporters or
    the Agriculture department, they would be fired.
    Bazemore is now an organizer for the Center for Women's Economic
    Alternatives, a support group for workers in the poultry industry.
    Perdue Farms responded by issuing a press release calling Bazemore "less
    than a model employee."
    Rep. Marge Rouksema, R-N.J., said that the matter would be "referred to the
    appropriate congressional comittee, as well as the Agriculture Dept.
    (as if this could go on without government corruption in the Ag. Dept.)

    Message: 62228
    Author: Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Joe Satriani
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 15:58:02

    Has anyone heard his new album, "Flying in a Blue Dream" ?  I was looking
    forward to his next album, until I read that he has left his instrumental
    format and sings (his own lyrics) on the album.  What percentage of the 18
    (!) tracks features his (no doubt) less than dulcimer tones?

    Message: 62229
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: The SYSOP Speaks
    Subject: SIG wars
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 16:22:22

            Not really...  However, let me tell you about a *NEW* SIG on Apollo
    that was the brain child of $tatus member Zak Woodruff, the m and Video
    SIG.  Currently, for as few members that have signed up for it, it is the
    busiest SIG on Apollo!   Some of the subject matter being talked about is,
    Married with Childern, (a sick sit-com (my opinion)), a few TRIVIA questions
    have already been posted (and as of this post, no one has answered my trivia
    question correctly yet)  and a number of other TV/Movie related facts and
    gossip.

            If you have $tatus, and would like to belong to this SIG....Just
    send me a letter in the ost office, and I will promptly set it into your
    $tatus profile.   If you are not a $tatus Member of Apollo.... Why not read
    the <$>cmd file in the ain menu and consider joining.

            Yes, Zak is the SigOp of the m SIG, and has selected the
    categories himself.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*

    Message: 62230
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: last
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 16:42:44

    Aw, shucks...

    Message: 62231
    Author: Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Price wars
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 16:55:32

    Yep. Smitty's can manipulate their prices for ONE day and still
    be legal on advertising.
    If not for the prices, I'd say Smith's has Snitt's beat hands down
    for the selection and quality. Then again, who's to say what will
    happen 6 months down the road when all of this brohuha dissolves...

    Well, there is one good thing amoungst all this...only the
    best all-round stores will survive.

    Message: 62232
    Author: $ Bob Thornburg
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Zak
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 18:27:19

    Re:  "Does "Thornbob" bug you?"

    Not really.  I've been called worse.

    Re:  "a man who cheats in his private life would by necessity also cheat in
    his public life"

    Well that's close.  I probably would have said it a little differently, like
    this:

    A man who cheats in private life is more inclined to also cheat in his
    public life, than a man who does not cheat in his private life.

    Message: 62233
    Author: $ James Taranto
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Woodruf
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 19:58:53

    I think I once heard David Brudnoy is homosexual.  I may be mistaken about
    that, however.

    Message: 62234
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Mark/Puzzle
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 21:26:20

       Neither puzzle said that it was meant to find the most
    qualified applicant. It is as obvious that qualifications fall
    outside the scope of these puzzles as it is that the whole point
    here was to do the puzzles, not to try and advance the state of
    human resource management.
       If we assume that such a puzzle has to be absolutely fair and
    allow equal chance of solution to each player, we are assuming at
    least two things too many. First, that those responsible wanted
    it to be so, even though they are using a logic puzzle instead of
    any realistic method. Second, that those responsible did, in
    fact, actually, and without error, come up with a perfect puzzle.
       You are wrong in stating that a landing a red hat does not
    guarantee victory for the front player in the hat puzzle. It was
    stated that the player had to be able to tell the color of hat,
    and how they KNEW it. This eliminates guessing as an alternative.
       Facing this situation, any player who assumes that the puzzle
    is fair to all players would have to conclude that there can be
    no way for any of them to win. If the front player believed this,
    there would be no reason to listen to the other player's
    responses or give them any thought. The front player could just
    say, 'No' when asked if the color of the front hat was known.

    Message: 62235
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Mark/puzzle
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 21:27:08

       In the matter of 'his', Professor Strunk has been dead since
    1946. His writing may still be the authority on the subject, but
    I note that Todd Reese was able to answer the puzzle without
    giving any appearance of assuming male gender for the players.
       See You Later,
          Dean H.

    Message: 62236
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
    Subject: MLK GT
    Date: 11/17/89  Time: 21:33:15

    It was great to see everybody, and to meet Bob and Bonnie.  Too bad that
    "Bob" and Rod didn't show up.

    Message: 62237
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Taranto
    Date: 11/18/89  Time: 00:27:40

    Why are you concerned about David Brudnoy's sexuality?

    Message: 62238
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff/prices
    Date: 11/18/89  Time: 07:53:33

    Regardless of what the ads say - Smith's is the all around lowest and you
    can really save. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 62239
    Author: $ James Taranto
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Woodruff
    Date: 11/18/89  Time: 09:00:15

    If I were concerned with Brudnoy's sexuality, I would remember whether he is
    homosexual or not.

Content of this site is © Mark Firestone or whomever wrote it. All rights reserved.