### Apollo BBS Archive - January 11 - 21, 1992

    $tatus Club Bulletin Board command:$C

    Press  to abort

    Message: 8853
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Melissa
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 05:34:38

     Did your friend go back into Sears and pay for the socks?

    Message: 8854
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Playing
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 08:04:00

    I'm not playing now. Substituting once in a while, though. No, the churches
    don't ask. Organists are in short supply.

    Message: 8855
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Rod/religion
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 08:05:21

    re: ten percent premium. Seems only fair to me.

    Message: 8856
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: organists
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 19:12:09

    If organists are in such short supply, why don't you all charge *at least*
    union rates?

    Message: 8857
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: rates
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 20:25:28

    We do. The AGO guide for pay is used in most churches, except for the little
    old ladies who play for free.

    Message: 8858
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 02:35:08

    "American Guild of Organists"?  Or does "the AGO guide for pay" mean they
    compensate you at the same rates they used in 1890?

    Message: 8859
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Poor Charger
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 06:03:54

            Even thought I have taken good care of my 1982 Charger, all things
    point to the fact that it may be totaled.  After all, the damage appears it
    may exceed 'Blue-Book' value.  I have been told they will consider the low
    milage (63,000) and the fact it otherwise looks new.

            I sure hope IF they total it, it will give me enough to buy a
    replacement.  After all, things are not to bright around here.

            In the mean time I have a 1992 Dodge Mini-Van to drive with less
    then 3,000 miles on it.  Pretty neet...  I am impressed with the way the
    driver at fault insurance company is handling it so far.  (State-Farm)
    I got the mini-van yesterday and will have it till things are sorted out.
    System-1 is the rental company, and even they have been very nice picking me
    up at Bill Luke Dodge (where the Charger is at)

            *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 8860
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: AGO pay
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 09:30:02

    According the AGO a director may get as much as $30,000 a year if he or she
    has a PhD and is employed full time.

    Message: 8861
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 09:45:37

            Wow!   I am in the WRONG profession....  sigh!

    Anyone hiring out there?

    Damn...  Car is broke, Sandy is almost broke (hurt), Roof leaks, I have no
    work, Mark,Mike and Rod are pissed at me....  Double  sigh!  Is this what
    1992 is going to be like?

                                    -clif

    Message: 8862
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 12:15:02

    I doubt that very much.  Things *have* to start getting better now.

    Is Rod pissed at you?  I must have missed something.  Mark's nuts, so who
    cares.  As for Mike, Mike LOVES to get angry.  If you've made him cross,
    you're probably doing him a favor.  He'd miss you.

    Message: 8863
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Last...
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 12:26:08

            Mike miss me...???   Har har har har har.....

    As for Rod, he is ALWAYS mad at me it seems and when it comes out he was
    uploading about the same message from Mark as Mike did, he will be really
    mad when he finds out that was also ZAPPED. But then again...aren't we all
    'mad' in one form or another?

            As for things getting better 'soon'....  I have heard that before.
    Come to think about it, I have heard that over the last few years....and?

            You can see, I am so busy, I can answer posts mid-day minutes after
    a member logs off.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 8864
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Last....
    Subject: Oh well...
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 22:50:47

    ...if Rod's *always* mad at you, things can't be getting any worse.

    And I promise I don't have any messages from Mr. Adkins to upload.  (I
    suspect he wouldn't trust me with one, anyway!)

    Message: 8865
    Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 04:02:57

    I'm not mad at you.  And I hope Sandy is feeling better.

    If they decide the Charger is a total, why not have them pay you a
    settlement equal to what the value of the car is, minus the salvage value.
    That way, you could keep the car and have it repaired.

    Message: 8866
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 06:04:30

     Every cloud has a silver lining, CLiff. Things will begin to brighten soon,
    I'm sure.
     How about taking advantage of the time you have now to get some training in
    something you've always wanted to do? I have begun some computer courses at
    GCC, and am having a ball! (Things are very slow in the clowning business
    now, too.) Not only am I using some time that otherwise would probably be
    wasted doing something unproductive, but I am also beginning to understand
    this monster I have bought. It's an open entry/open exit course that I can
    do at my leisure. THe High Tech Center at GCC is quite a place, with over
    300 computers for students' use, and a very helpful staff ready to solve
    your problems.
     If you already know all you ever wanted to know about computers, they have
    loads of courses in many varieties of different fields. Surely SOMETHING
    there would attract your interest. Just one suggestion to take up some of
    the slack in your schedule. God bless.

    Message: 8867
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Cliff on mad
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:08:12

    I'm not mad at you either. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 8868
    Author: $ Felix Cat
    Category: Believe it or not!
    Subject: Paul
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 14:36:07

    Re:  THe High Tech Center at GCC is quite a place, with over 300 computers
    for students' use, and a very helpful staff ready to solve your problems.

    GCC also has some high tech "viruses" floating around in their computers.
    Be careful what you bring home and put in your computer.

    Message: 8869
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Old Charger...
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 20:48:37

            Sniff....  The repair estimate got to be a little over $2,800 and
    they decided to just 'TOTAL' the car.   They did not even get all the parts
    that it needed... looks like they just stopped when it got that high.

            I have not been told what they are going to give me for it, nor do
    they know what the 'buy-back' will be ...yet.

            James Hawley and I went to Bill Luke Dodge and took the Charger out
    of there today.... before parts grow legs.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif- the night mare continues

    Message: 8870
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Old Charger ...
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 22:20:43

    If you decide to "trade" the car in for a settlement (instead of keeping it
    and either parting it out yourself or trying to restore it), make sure they
    understand that you had no intention of replacing that car, it was primary
    transportation for you (or Sandy), etc.

    I assume that you know not to finalize a medical settlement until at least
    six months from now -- enough time to make sure no now-hidden problems will
    appear in Sandy.

    Message: 8871
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Felix
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 05:29:18

     THanks for the warning Bob, but I have enough software for my 386 that
    right now I don't need anything that GCC has. THe stuff I'm working with in
    the pit generally stays in my briefcase between sessions. THere is quite a
    bit of similarity betwen the Enable software that they use and the Lotus
    WOrks that were already programmed into my HD. After I get done with the
    course I'm now taking, I think I'll take a course in WIndows, which I also
    have here.

    Message: 8872
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Believe it or not!
    Subject: Paul-Viruses
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:57:02

    Viruses can also be spread via data (as opposed to program) disks, Paul.  I
    don't peecees, so I can't recommend a particular virus detector, but I
    surely recommend you use one.

    Message: 8873
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Hi.
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 16:59:08

    I haven't been on in a few months.  Sorry to hear about Sandy's accident.

    My Australian cousin Katherine will be in the states for about another week.
    I'd like to move to Sydney to study product design (industrial design) and
    apply what I learn about ergonomics to computer software design.

    I might be teaching at GCC at night next semester.  It would be entertaining
    to have Paul Savage as one of my students.

    Message: 8874
    Author: $ James Hawley
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 00:56:46

    Flunk him.  He's such a clown.

    Message: 8875
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/viruses
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 06:36:35

     Maybe I wasn't too clear in my response to Bob. How about NO disks that I
    use at the college get placed into my computer? It can't catch a virus just
    by being in the same room with a possibly corrupted disk, can it? I hope!

    Message: 8876
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Michael my teacher?
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 06:40:02

     That would be entertaining, for both if us! Haven't seen you in ages, and I
    certainly don't have amy problem learning from anybody who knows more about
    these things than I do, which is just about everybody, at least at the High
    Tech Center. Is that where you'll be teaching?
     I think that after this course I'm taking now (the beginners course) I will
    progress to the next one in line, and then possibly the course offered on
    Windows, since I already have that installed in my system.
     Maybe I'll see you there.

    Message: 8877
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: class clown
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 09:49:26

    I'll probably teach Ada or C or Pascal, but the lab time would be spent in
    the High-Tech Center.

    Message: 8878
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Hello...
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 10:44:52

            I have been off the system a few days.  Sandy is really beginning to
    hurt and I have to pretty much attend to her full time.  We live in a
    Tri-Level and it is really painfull to get her up or down stairs.  There is
    no bathroom on the main floor and this becomes a real problem.

            The doctors found that her heel was in real bad shape and she got a
    painfull shot in it thursday and the Doc said it would 'Hurt like Hell for a
    few days'.   He was right, my back does hurt like hell from trying to carry
    Sandy around... it is getting to me.

            I don't have 'TIME' to read the boards, so I hope Billy the Cubby
    Sysop is on the job.

            By the way, they want to give me 2300.00 for my Charger...but I
    can't find a car in similar condition to replace the Charger in that price
    range.   Everything I look at is high milage, falling apart, piles of junk.
    Sure, I could probably fix them up...for another two grand... but why should
    I.  Liz MaCoy at State Farm insurance does not wish to budge on this.  I may
    have an independent appraiser come in an see what s/he thinks the real value
    of my car was.  Like for instance, weatherstriping that would get old, torn
    or brittal...I would replace with NEW weatherstriping/cat-whiskers etc.
    Liz MaCoy tells me that is NORMAL maintenance...???  Then, How come I can't
    find cars out there in this condition... for 2300.00
    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif- State Farm *SUCKS*

    Message: 8879
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Sandy the Gimp
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 11:51:46

    Sorry to hear Sandy's still feeling poorly.  Hope things improve soon!

    Message: 8880
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Paul Tests Positive!
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 11:52:17

    > How about NO disks that I use at the college get placed into my
    > computer?

    Now THAT sounds smarter!  :)

    Message: 8881
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:34:42

    I'm sorry to hear that Sandy's still hurting, Cliff.  What is it with the
    heel, a bad sprain, torn ligament or something like that that didn't show up
    on the X-ray?  That's the problem when there's bruises all over.  Until some
    of the lesser ones start going away, you don't notice so much which ones are
    *really* hurting.

    Yeah, Bill's doing his job here all right and keeping up his end of the
    argument.

    Too bad about the Charger.  Could it be put back into driveable condition
    for the two thousand and some-odd dollars, with the rest to be fixed up
    later?  Except that that's still a bummer because it still means a net
    financial loss to get it back to its original condition.

    My neighbor does bodywork (and very well too, I might add).  Let me know if
    you think it's worth giving him a call.  Depending on what the damage is, he
    may be able to suggest some way out at a more reasonable price.

    He also has a very nice '79 Lincoln Continental for sale, very good
    condition both inside and out with extensive mechanical reconditioning.
    He's asking $4500 for it.  I know you probably don't want to put that much
    money into a car right now, but it's worth mentioning for anyone who's
    interested because I'm sure it's a good buy.

    Message: 8882
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 19:40:24

            The 2300.00 is what they will give me, but they KEEP the car.  It is
    difficult to fix if I ain't got it.  I can also do some body work, but the
    whole right rear quarter needs replacement...  Way beyond the 'bondo' fix.

            Also... I ONLY buy Mopar Cars... thanks anyway.  I am looking the
    market over for another 2.2 four banger.  That Charger was quick, and yet
    got fantastic mileage.

            Oh yea, The Charger is still drivable... more then I can say for the
    Ford f-150 truck that attacked my car.

            Today I got some lines on possible replacements in that price
    range, that I could get up to snuff in a reasonable time with little cash
    outlay.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif- sigh.... wish it had NOT happened

    Message: 8883
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 14:26:23

    The Lincoln's in nice shape, but unlike the Charger, I can't say that a
    Lincoln is all that quick.  It was particularly noticeable after driving my
    5-liter.  I like cars that get up and go as well.

    It must be at least a minor satisfaction to know that the Charger won the
    fight with the truck...

    Message: 8884
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 18:45:54

     Several years ago, I fractured my heel, doing something totally essary ans
    and stupid. KNowing that it was totally my own fault  didn't make the pain
    one bit less, though, so I canfully sympathize with you on your happy pills.
     Hope that it gets better quickly, 'cause it ain't no fun!

    Message: 8885
    Author: $ Joe Bottomlee
    Category: Debate / dispute
    Subject: Bill/Viruses
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 00:10:41

    RE: Viruses can also be spread via data.

    I disagree. Only Exe or COM. files can spread viruses. Data files can
    become corrupt. But it can not spread a virus.

             <<< Joe >>>

    Message: 8886
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:09:45

    My neighbor also has a Dodge Dart GT (V8), I think it's a '69, that he's
    planning on doing up and selling.  It has some dents he's going to fix.
    Don't know anything about it otherwise, but I gather this is a bit of a
    classic.  I'm not an expert on MoPar.  (And I'm a bloody foreigner to boot.
    I know about Cortinas and stuff like that.)  His comment about the Charger
    though was that if it were his car and it still ran fine, he'd buy it back
    off the insurance company and fix up the body.  I'm sure he'd be willing to
    take a brief look at it and pronounce a verdict on whether it could be fixed
    for a moderate price.  How much will the insurance co. give you if you want
    to buy the car back from them?

    Message: 8887
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Believe it or not!
    Subject: Joe-Safe Computing
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:39:55

    > Only Exe or COM. files can spread viruses. Data files can
    > become corrupt. But it can not spread a virus.

    You're probably speaking from better knowledge than I have, Joe.  My main
    experience of late is with the Amiga.  Once they are in RAM, many of the
    viruses that afflict AmigaDOS go on to infect EVERY disk inserted into every
    drive.  And they continue to do so until the machine is shut off.

    Message: 8888
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Cliff on insurance
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 08:35:57

    What is so sad - if you had put ALL that money aside that you have spent on
    insurance over the years, you could afford a nice car now that yours is
    wrecked!
    BTW - as I was telling Sandy - look for your insurance rates to go up no
    matter if it's your fault or not. Fair? Hell not!!! -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 8889
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Kars / Automotive
    Subject: Gordon
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 09:33:18

            I like 69 Darts...

            The insurance company has only said that buy-back would be at least
    $450.00 PLUS.    The quoting has been for replacment body panels.  Not a 5
    pound bucket of fiberglas (bondo).  The parts are rather expensive, but if
    your friend wants to look at it, let him.
            The problem with buy-back from a 'total' is that this goes into the
    title of the car and even after you fix it PERFECTLY...it has no value for
    re-sale.

            Bring him by....

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 8890
    Author: $ James Hawley
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 13:18:48

    Why should it go into the title?  If the title never changes hands, then it
    CAN'T go into the title.  That would only apply if you bought a total, I
    think.

    Message: 8891
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 14:43:13

            A new law requires that any auto that is totaled to have its plates
    and title turned in and you get a salvage title in return.
            And when/if the auto is repaired, it must be inspected by the state
    and then you get a new tile...but, the fact it was a total stays in the new
    title.  Thus...making it worth a lot less for resale.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 8892
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Viruses
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 20:24:24

    What Joe says is true for most MS-DOS applications.  It certainly is not
    true for Macintosh files.  I can't say one way or the other about Amiga.

    Message: 8893
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 00:55:38

    Where is the Charger, Cliff?  Is it at your house, or somewhere else?

    Message: 8894
    Author: $ Joe Bottomlee
    Category: Entertainment
    Subject: Safe Computing
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 06:08:09

    A few months ago the Pastor of my church had a hard drive crash and thought
    that his computer had been attacked by a computer virus. As a joke I left
    him a little package of sandwitch(sp) baggies with the following note
    attached:

        For safe computing please place one of these plastic bags over the
    diskette before interting it into the floppy drive.

                       <<< Joe >>>

    P.S. everyone got a big laugh over this. Even now, remembering it brings a
    big smile to my face.

    Message: 8895
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Cliff #8891
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 06:40:38

    There is ways to get around that even though it may cost more - go to New
    Mexico and registar the car, come back here and re-register it. Salvage will
    not appear on the title. The Corvette and a Cadillac that Whitey had bought
    from the insurance lot a few years back came from N.M. and they do not
    require a car to have a salvaged lic. Other states are the same.
    If you buy and repair your car and then have to have the low blow of a
    salvaged lic. - you would have been entirely cheated through no fault of
    your own. -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 8896
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: My Charger
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 09:19:23

            Is at my home *AT THIS TIME*   This could change if the insurance
    company gives me what I want.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 8897
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Ann/Whitey
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 12:26:36

            I should have known...leave it to Whitey to find away around that
    silly law.   Thanks Annie... your the sweetest ASSp I know!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif- grin (of course)

    Message: 8898
    Author: $ Gary Jones
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 15:39:30

    Get better Sandy, although how you could get much better than you are now is
    hard to understand.  You're already much too good for this place as it is.

    Sandy's fan club.

    $tatus Club Bulletin Board command:EC

    You chose Chit-Chat

    Subject:What Me Mad?

    Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
     1:I'm not mad, just disappointed.  If anyone should not like Mark it would be
     2:me.  You heard about what happened way back when.
     3:
     4:You need to lighten up.  Your rule about people logging in under an alias
     5:and then leaving very clever messages is stupid.  BBSing should be fun.  Now
     6:your shields are up and you are hurting your BBS.  I thought you called
     7:yourself a Xtian but I guess you do so for some kind of convenience.
     8:
     9:                                Rod
    10:end

    Edit command:S

    Saving message...
    The message is 8899

    $tatus Club Bulletin Board command:JN

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* X-Rated Cosmos Bulletin Board entered *=*

    X-Rated Cosmos Bulletin Board command:$C

    Press  to abort

    Message: 5302
    Author: $ Gary Jones
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ Whitney
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 15:24:34

    Thanks for the info on Officer Whitney.  The Glendale Whitneys I kmow are
    from the Brazil-Whitney clan.  They'e have been Glendale sinse early days.

    Gary

    Message: 5303
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ Whitney
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 21:52:02

    He's not longer in super-intensive care.  His skull has been closed up, the
    tracheotomy went well.  He's not responding as well as he used to, though,
    so apparently they're classifying it now as a "moderate to extreme" coma.

    His dad tells him he'd better wake up or he'll miss the Redskins in the
    Super Bowl ...

    Message: 5304
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Emissions
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 17:30:05

    I've been told that a modern computerized performance car like the Corvette
    passes idle or constant load emissions tests easily but still pollutes a lot
    under hard acceleration because the engine computer switches to an open-loop
    control system to dump as much fuel into the engine as possible.

    Message: 5305
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ Whitney
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 19:15:32

    Russ opened an eye and moved his *right* leg today.  He'd not had responses
    on that side today.  This is a marked change, and is certainly good news
    after what his father was saying yesterday ("Well, *if* he wakes up ...")

    The internist wants to move him to St. Luke's because they have a better PT
    program there.

    Let's all hope that the only PT he has to do is to overcome 2-3 weeks of
    muscle atrophy...

    Message: 5306
    Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: emissions
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 04:30:43

    That's true.  Generally, all computer controlled vehicles go "open loop" at
    full throttle.  EPA regulations don't apply to engines at full throttle,
    since an engine spends little of its operating time there.

    Message: 5307
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ/Good News
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:43:58

    That is good news.

    Message: 5308
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ W.
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 14:06:45

            Is Russ going to be moved to the Phoenix St. Lukes?
    When I get to where I go to work again, I would like to visit Russ.
    My visits might be short, but I am sure any visit is better than none.

            Sandy Sysop the Gimpette of Apollo

    Message: 5309
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Answer !
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 20:11:01

    While stopping by to see Russ is a nice gesture, I think that the only
    visitors he's allow are immediate family.

    Message: 5310
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: $#!+
    Subject: Randy Sandy
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:38:15

    > ...just call me Queen G

    Uh... Is that as in "spot?"

    Good to see at least your fingers are doing relatively well.

    Message: 5311
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Shit-Chat!
    Subject: Queen G
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 13:40:59

            He hehehe to you Bill .......

    You Guess what I mean ........

    Message: 5312
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 13:41:18

            It never hurts to ask when I am there ......

    Message: 5313
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 14:17:07

    I don't know if he's been moved, or if it is scheduled. I also don't know
    what has occurred *since* Thursday.  I'll find out tomorrow and report.

    Message: 5314
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Shit-Chat!
    Subject: Beau in the know
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 20:15:08

            Boy ..... there, Mr. Beau ...... aren't we up with our current
    events?  Hehehe

    Message: 5315
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Excuse me!
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 22:32:48

    Although I know Jack&Sally well (like I said, we vacation with them each
    year), I know that there are many other people who call them, so I leave
    them in what peace they can get.  Jack usually stops by my office or talks
    to me in the hall, and failing that, another friend of ours usually has the
    poop.

    Message: 5316
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Shit-Chat!
    Subject: PooP!
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 16:40:06

            Poop? It's called 'poop', now?
            What happened to 'scoop'?

    Message: 5317
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 20:27:16

    Nothing noteworthy to report.  He was fighting a pretty bad fever on Sunday,
    but it broke.  As soon as he has a couple of good days in a row, they'll
    move him to St. Luke's.

    Message: 5318
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 20:00:34

    No major events over the weekend.  He is still improving (physical
    condition) which will get him set up to move to "Synigos" ?? (spelling) --
    some place which specials in coma wakeup therapy.

    Message: 5319
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Cosmos-Chatter
    Subject: Russ
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 21:20:28

    Another of those times when no news is good news.  Thanks for posting these
    bulletins.

    X-Rated Cosmos Bulletin Board command:JN

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board command:$C

    Press  to abort

    Message: 1590
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
    Subject: I Hate Harry
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:40:48

    I think I'm beginning to hate Harry Connick, Jr.  He's young and
    good-looking, talented and has quite a string of hit albums, and his fiance
    is a lingerie model.  Oh well.

    Message: 1591
    Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
    Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
    Subject: lingerie models
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 01:54:49

    Lingerie models usually aren't that great looking.

    Message: 1592
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
    Subject: Models
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 12:52:18

    > Lingerie models usually aren't that great looking.

    Oh.  Well, that makes me feel better.  :)

    Actually, I've worked with quite a few models and actresses.  Many must be
    lighted and photographed very carefully if they are to look good.  Others
    look great no matter what you do to them.  I think a lot of it has to do
    with their ability to project a pleasant personality.

    Message: 1593
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
    Subject: Models
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 19:35:23

    Interesting that you should be on that topic.  Today at the Herberger, we
    had our first fashion show (and hopefully are last).  There were about 5
    models flown in from NY and LA and the rest (18) were from a Phoenix agency.
    You could really tell the difference.  The presence on stage (like a smile)
    and the attitude the "real" professionals projected was so much higher than
    that of most of the local girls.  And you're right about looking good.  I
    saw all these ladies before the make-up and costumes:  Ugggggly.  I guess it
    doesn't matter much what they really look like since it's covered with make
    up.  A few were cute looking but most, I was really surprized, were really
    not.  One of the "real" professionals was a real bitch but I didn't have to
    take any crap from her.  Most of the girls were really nice.  In fact, one
    of the dressers was a girl I knew in high school.  We were on Pom together.
    She was usually the one in the middle of the line since she was so tall.
    She told me today that she wasn't called for this "gig" because she wasn't
    tall enough.  "Only 5'10" and shoe size 8".

    Message: 1594
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit-Chat & Sing
    Subject: Question
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 21:22:15

    Do they model lingerie because their bodies are better than their faces?

    Nick's Music Palace Bulletin Board command:JN

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* Public Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Public Bulletin Board command:$C

    Press  to abort

    Message: 81552
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Bulletins
    Subject: Mark Adkins
    Date: 01/12/92  Time: 23:20:07

            Public announcement for legal reasons:

            Mark Adkins is KICKED off Apollo.. and this goes for any other name
    he might choose to use.

            I also request no other user or member posts his messages on Apollo.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 81553
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:35:11

    First things first.  I'm very glad to hear Sandy is OK, beyond a few
    bruises.  Hope she's better soon and that rear end gets fixed up OK.  The
    car, I mean.

    Message: 81554
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Arch/Hegel etc. 1/2
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:36:21

    Hegel is a gap in my philosophy that I haven't properly filled in yet; and I
    apologize if I've missed something on here because I was away.  But I don't
    think we disagree in the slightest.  I look at government from a different
    angle, and I see the question of power and control.  When we realize that
    neither the policy of the right nor that of the left fulfills people's
    needs, we have to step back and ask ourselves, not how they differ from one
    another, but what they have in common that people find objectionable.  Where
    they differ is in what they seek to control; but what they have in common is
    that both sides seek to control *something*.  The U.S. Constitution is
    clearly aimed at limiting that control.

    An old saying that I'm sure you're familiar with: "Take what you want, and
    pay for it (says God)."  This is the way life was meant to be.

    Conservative version: "Take what you want and pay for it; but if you take
    *this*, you're really gonna pay for it (because I say so)."

    Liberal version: "Take what you want, except for *that* (because I say so),
    and all of us will pay for it (because I say so)."

    I've never quite figured out why the left-wing and right-wing positions
    shoul be the "natural opposites" of one another, though both of them retain
    the basic intent to exert control over *something*.

    Message: 81555
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Arch/Hegel etc. 2/2
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:37:26

    We need to get people's thinking turned ninety degrees, to wake them up to
    the realization that the alternatives aren't to allow the government to
    control one thing *or* another, but to pass that control back to the people.
    Relinquishing government control is a move *forward*, in my thinking, and
    "dodging from left to right" is the politicians' attempt to reinforce the
    illusion that there's only one dimension to move in.

    It's regrettable how politicians have succeeded in embedding this linear
    thinking into people's minds.  Every so often you see a survey questionnaire
    asking how you rate your political views, but it only gives you the option
    of filling in some point on the same old straight line: "conservative",
    "liberal", or "moderate".

    I've said here before that it's ironic that the Communist system professed
    to concentrate so hard on equal distribution of *wealth* to the people.  We
    know that didn't happen in practice, but that's almost a side issue; the
    point is that since people will naturally use their own power to acquire
    wealth to differing degrees, the only way to achieve perfectly equal
    distribution of wealth is by depriving people of power.  Communism thus
    focused on material needs to the total exclusion of motivational needs.
    Distribution of power is a far better goal.

    Message: 81556
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Cliff/Mike/Arch
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:39:48

       Cliff> My labor today should be worth the same 20 years from now if
       Cliff> I save my earned wages.

    This is a typical example of why smartass jerkoffs in government win, while
    their victims flounder around and waste their time fighting among
    themselves, instead of fighting the real enemy.  We're all so ticked off and
    busy looking for a good fight that we grab the first one we see and spend
    all our efforts on that one.  Why don't we listen properly to the valuable
    information that our friends have to offer, then look beyond our noses to
    find out where the real fight is?

    I KNOW how we *could* interpret Cliff's words.  If we conveniently ignore
    the word "today", we can pretend he means that his labor should be just as
    valuable in 20 years as it is now.  We can ignore the obvious clues in the
    word "save".  He *should* have said "the *wealth* I've saved from my labor
    today should be worth the same 20 years from now..."  Big deal.  What his
    *labor* is worth 20 years from now is a separate issue; but most of all,
    it's a distraction from the real argument.  The more people waste their
    energies on petty fights, the less energy they have left over to fight the
    real enemy.  Arch spotted this one in no time at all.  Why can't we all
    LISTEN and DIG for the real meaning behind what people are saying?

    That applies to both friends and enemies too.

    Message: 81557
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/Hiro
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:40:19

    I have to admit that I spotted who Hiro was based on seeing both messages
    together.  But then, how often am I up and about between 0526 and 0640?

    Message: 81558
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill/inflation
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:41:30

    I don't think we really disagree about the cause of inflation.  Archimedes
    already did a good job of explaining how debt leads to the printing of more
    FRNs in 81531.  I think what you're saying is that you incline more to the
    "demand-pull" side of the theory: that inflation is caused by too much paper
    chasing too few goods.  I don't believe, though, that it tells the whole
    story to say "Borrowing doesn't push inflation; inflation pushes borrowing".
    That's why I said that "cost-push" versus "demand-pull" is a chicken-and-egg
    debate because they both amount to the same thing.  If anyone wants to argue
    that it's an economists' smokescreen to distract attention from the real
    issue, I promise not to make fun of them.  The whole thing is a tightly-
    coupled system that moves in lockstep.  FRNs are printed in *response* to
    people and businesses borrowing money.  The act of printing FRNs doesn't in
    itself force people to borrow.  People borrow because of their own wants.
    But when too many FRNs are in circulation and prices rise, those wants are
    less easily satisfied, so people are more motivated to borrow.

    The system needs both factors to operate: the demand of people to borrow
    money, and the willingness of the government to print more FRNs in response.
    Take one of these away, and the inflation spiral would stop.  But you'll
    never take away people's desire for wealth.  So the system is only stopped
    by taking away the machinery that prints out illusions of wealth, and
    substituting instead a system that supplies *real* wealth, but also says:
    "That's all there is right now.  If you want more, you're going to have to
    work for it and make it yourselves."

    Message: 81559
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill/what we want
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:42:48

    I've never argued that the people aren't stupid.  I'm afraid too many of
    them are.  Some of them just aren't capable of understanding the issues, but
    I think a lot of that has to do with their feelings.  Understanding issues
    takes effort, and people have to be motivated to make effort.  They'll make
    the effort only if they sense a reward at the end of it, in the form of some
    good feeling.  If you make the effort of thought, and what you get out of it
    is "My God!  That's awful!  That's scary!  I've been fooled!" -- and *if*
    the way to change that state of affairs is not immediately obvious -- then
    that's not much of a reward.  Better not to think about it.  Unfortunately
    it's characteristic of many people that they don't think ahead, and would
    rather trade in tomorrow's rewards for comfort today.

    Another problem is the media.  The media, especially TV stations (which take
    a lot of capital to set up), are controlled mainly by large organizations
    that benefit from the status quo.  TV offers instant gratification and puts
    people to sleep with comforting distractions like soap operas and similar
    excitement, which discourage critical thought.  I hope I don't sound too
    much like Harlan Ellison.  TV does have enormous power to stimulate the mind
    and influence opinions, but that power is like a gun: it can be pointed in
    any desired direction, not necessarily toward the target.  TV actually does
    two things: it soaks up time that would otherwise be filled by critical
    thought; and in addition, when it does use its power to send a message, the
    message it sends is usually the one that organizations with established
    power would like you to hear.

    Message: 81560
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: What we want (2/4)
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:44:06

    As I said earlier, most people like a good fight, and most people recognize
    that the world is full of competition.  Trying to persuade people that this
    isn't so would be disingenuous, far too unsubtle.  They'd see through it in
    an instant.  So TV presents real contests between people and factions.  On a
    political level, it presents contests between Republocrats and Demolicians.
    The excitement of the fight is very real, and it totally distracts people's
    attention from the fact that there are other alternatives that are rarely
    presented.  TV isn't stupid, and it knows quite well that people are
    frustrated with certain aspects of our political system, so from time to
    time it also throws out a sop to these people with programs like "The IRS: A
    Question of Power."  This gains credibility for TV.  It tackles the real
    issue of power itself at a tangent, rather than focusing the spotlight full
    on it.  It pretends that what goes wrong in our political system is just an
    infection that breaks out here and there, rather than a cancer invading the
    whole body.  By zooming in on the trees, it obscures our view of the forest.

    I find it interesting that Archimedes, like me, doesn't watch much TV.  I
    call it mental pollution control.

    We can't stop people from watching TV, and my daughter watches it, though
    not as obsessively as some kids.  Many parents let kids watch TV all the
    time without comment, because it's a convenient babysitter.  I think it's
    dangerous to let pollution pour into people's eyes and ears unchallenged.

    Message: 81561
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: What we want (3/4)
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:45:26

    Some parents try to shut off kids' access to TV.  I'm afraid this is
    unrealistic and only arouses nonproductive hostility.  It also shuts off
    access to essential data about the way the world works.  Pollution can be
    neutralized.  I like to encourage critical thought in my daughter by drawing
    her attention to what Deborah Tannen would call the "metamessage" -- the
    motivation behind the message.  If somebody is trying to sell you something,
    they have a message for you; but when you stop to think about it, common
    sense says that there's a reason why they're going to all this effort to
    send you that message.  A little thought helps to discern that *their*
    motive is to make a sale.  Whether that sale is to your benefit or not is up
    to you to judge.

    I'm not a revolutionary anarchist who labels "the establishment" as an enemy
    to be put up against the wall and shot.  I just recognize the reality that
    my ex-wife told me years ago, and I treasure this simple thought of hers in
    spite of the fact that we couldn't live together: "People do things for
    their own reasons."  Your reasons and her reasons are not my reasons.
    People pursue their own interests, and it's fruitless (counterproductive as
    well) to hate them for doing it.  At the same time, only a fool would fail
    to recognize that other people's interests are often in opposition to our
    own.  That's a simple fact of life.  Sooner that pretend other people are
    around either to give me a good time, or to grind me into the dirt, I'd
    rather expose the fact that their interests and my interests are just
    separate, and sit down at the negotiating table to thrash out an agreement.

    Message: 81562
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: What we want (4/4)
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:46:51

    Anyway, I'm wandering off the subject as usual.  I think TV has a pernicious
    effect on people, but people aren't all that stupid and they realize in
    either a vague or a clear way that politicians screw them over.  The reasons
    politicians keep getting elected is that people don't get a realistic
    alternative.  There are many alternative candidates out there, and many
    alternative parties, but the electoral system makes it far too risky to vote
    for an alternative.  Why vote for an alternative when there are so many of
    them that you know perfectly well most people won't vote for the same one,
    so the result will be that the most-hated opposition candidate will probably
    win?  If you hate the Democrats, your *first* priority is to make sure they
    don't win, and the only way to make sure of doing that is to vote for a
    Republican to keep them out.  Any other consideration takes second place to
    that.  Everybody votes for the second-worst choice instead of the best.  If
    I had the power to change the electoral system, the change I'd make first
    (the one I *know* could not go wrong) is to make it mandatory for the
    winning candidate to poll an absolute majority of the votes.  Then people
    could vote for an oddball candidate without the fear that they were letting
    the "enemy" in.  If no candidate gained an absolute majority, another round
    of voting would be held.  Better still, voters would state their preference
    for candidates by placing them in order on the ballot; then there would be
    no need to spend time and money to go through the process again.  A system
    with two well-established parties gives you no realistic alternative but to
    vote for one or the other.  If I had to concentrate my efforts on one risk-
    free idea, I'd push the system of multiple preference voting.

    Message: 81563
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist terms
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:48:11

    I'm sure I've discussed this once before on Apollo.  The reason I don't like
    "politically correct" terminology is not that I'm chauvinistic.  My limited
    experience of women bank managers is in fact that she did a very good job.
    But I have an instinctive dislike of the practice of inserting "she" where
    long tradition and habit leads the reader to expect "he".

    Analyzing the exact cause of this reaction is a bit long and complicated.
    It certainly isn't that I disagree with women's equality, or with the
    necessity of reminding people from time to time that women can do jobs just
    as well as men can, or even better.  I'd summarize it by saying that there's
    a right time and a wrong time to do something.  When people do things at the
    wrong time, it's distracting and therefore irritating.  That's part of it,
    but not quite all.

    Suppose I'm reading a manual that tells me how to operate something, and in
    the middle it says: "The operator must specify the output device she wants."
    Of course the operator can be female as well as male.  But habit and
    tradition in English leads us to expect things to be expressed in certain
    conventional ways.  Good English flows along smoothly and pours out a stream
    of meaning.  The language is necessary to contain the meaning, but it's
    subservient to the purpose of communicating meaning to the listener or the
    reader.  Good English, like any good servant, should be unobtrusive.

    Message: 81564
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (2/3)
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:49:26

    Anything out of the ordinary is noticeable, obtrusive.  If the language has
    bad grammar or a spelling erorr in the middle of a sentence, the reader
    notices it and his attention is distracted from the meaning that the writer
    is trying to express.  In the same way, when I see "she" where convention
    led me to expect "he", my attention is distracted.  I say to myself, "I
    thought the purpose of this book was to tell me how to work this gadget.
    Instead, the writer is using it to push a political position of his (her?)
    own.  Then I start wondering about whether the writer *was* a she or a he,
    and all kinds of things that aren't relevant to the subject at hand.

    I suppose some people reading prose like this might just give the writer a
    silent cheer and go on reading.  It's not that I disagree with the political
    view of the writer.  It's more that I disapprove of the tactic itself.

    To explain why, I must first admit that I myself introduced an irrelevancy
    into a discussion of inflation by mentioning that I "hate political
    correctness".  It's true, I did distract the reader momentarily by touching
    on a different topic.  But this is a matter of style, the communication
    environment and the audience.  If I were writing a formal manual I would
    never have done such a thing, because it takes unfair advantage of the
    audience.  In a face-to-face conversation, or on a computer bulletin board,
    perhaps even in a newspaper editorial, the style is like a chat where the
    most important assumption is that the listener will have some opportunity to
    respond.

    Message: 81565
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (3/3)
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:50:47

    A manual, on the other hand, is a one-way communication where the assumption
    is that the reader will just soak up the facts and use them, without any
    chance to respond or argue back.  Injection of personal opinion is therefore
    unfair.  The reader has to absorb the punch and can't hit back.  On a
    bulletin board he can -- as you have!  :)

    Even that isn't the whole story.  The crux of the matter to me is honesty.
    Facts are facts, and opinions are opinions.  If I make an explicit statement
    of fact as I see it, people are free to contradict it.  If I make an
    explicit statement of opinion, or personal feeling, people are free to
    comment on it.  The key is that the fact or opinion is explicitly identified
    as such.  "I hate 'political correctness.'"  That's a statement of fact
    about my current feelings.  I've stated my position up front, and anyone
    else is free to tell me that their feelings are different, or to try and
    convince me to change my feelings if they can.  All right, I wrote some
    stuff about inflation and my head wandered off for a moment and I said what
    was in my head, which happened to be irrelevant to the main line of thought.
    But I was honest about it.

    Introducing an unexpected personal pronoun, without comment, is to me
    dishonest.  There are no words around it to tell the reader "by the way,
    this happens to be what I think."  It's as if the writer were talking to you
    face-to-face and in the meantime, stuck a dagger of personal opinion into
    your side while you weren't watching.  That's what I dislike.

    Message: 81566
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/confusion
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:52:05

    Hey Bill, I know you were having a jocular dig at me, so I hope you'll
    excuse me for giving you kind of a serious answer.  That's me again, saying
    what's in my head.  I like things that are both funny and serious together.

      > *Why* does that agency manager's personal assistant need a personal
      > assistant HERself?  Answer: it makes HIM feel more important...

    Boy, just for one moment I thought you'd got me , then I realized I wasn't
    confused at all.  The agency manager is assumed to be male.  The personal
    assistant is assumed to be female.  The personal assistant to the personal
    assistant -- God knows, maybe (s)he's transsexual?  Who cares?  Anyway, the
    "him" referred to the agency manager, not to his personal assistant.
    Conventional assumptions again.  The guy at the top has the ultimate yea or
    nay about who gets hired, and the guy at the top gets to feel most important
    when the people working for him are the kind of people who have people
    working for them too.  "I believe my butler's butler/Has appeared on "Face
    to Face" (old line from Flanders and Swann song).  This is a manifestation
    of Parkinson's Law (not to be confused with Parkinsonism, which is entirely
    different).  When the organization grows, the people who feel the most
    benefit are those at the top.  So the people at the top will do their best
    to make the organization grow under them if they can.

    I have this problem with being far too serious.  I must lighten up.  I must
    make a habit of giggling regularly every morning.  Discipline's the answer.

    Message: 81567
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: On the Lighter Side
    Subject: William of Orange
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 02:52:46

                              THE BANK OF ENGLAND

    It was Williamanmary who first discovered the National Debt and had the
    memorable idea of building the Bank of England to put it in.  The National
    Debt is a very Good Thing and it would be dangerous to pay it off, for fear
    of Political Economy.

                                        - Sellar & Yeatman, *1066 And All That*

    Message: 81568
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Fred/congressmen
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 03:13:15

    I think you're perfectly right about reelection being the goal.  There's
    another aspect to it also.  Any organization, such as a business, has a
    "culture", a set of shared values and ways of operating.  People are judged
    on whether they fit into that culture or not, and they usually operate more
    successfully within it if they do fit: if their peers "approve of" them.  So
    anyone newly elected to Congress is soon going to feel subtle pressures to
    start thinking and acting like the other representatives.  A body like this
    has an inertia of its own, and it takes a lot of effort to change it.

    Message: 81569
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: News Today
    Subject: Cliff/Sandy
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 05:15:58

    I hope and pray that Sandy is OK. I'm sure you will keep us informed.

    Message: 81570
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 05:55:54

    Only have time to scan messages this morning, Cliff, but wanted to offer my
    best wishes to Sandy.  Let me know if there's any way I can help out.

    Message: 81571
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: News Today
    Subject: Accident on I-17
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 08:41:20

            *TRUE* story...  (first off, Sandy is okay now)

            EMT Sandy leaves for work at 6:30am for PMT station 7, which is
    located somewhere near Thomas and 39th Street.

            6:45am

            A dog on I-17 causes one motorist to STOP...  The car behind this
    motorist slams on their brakes, hits first car and then skids into lane
    where Sandy driving the 1982 white Dodge Charger with 'SYSOP' plates has to
    brake so as not to hit this car.   The brakes in Sandy's car do stop her
    intime, but behind Sandy is this Ford F-150 pickup truck... who slams into
    her full force rearending the Charger sending it *flying* into the air for
    just a bit, coming down right alongside the cement median divider.  This
    burst the left front tire and ground a little off the left front fender.
    Sandy by the way did have on her seat/lap belt, but made the comment it felt
    like it did not work.  When all cars came to rest, Sandy jumped out with her
    EMT bag in hand and went to all the other cars involved to see if anyone was
    hurt.  Mean while the Ford F-150 driver would look at his big truck and then
    again at Sandy's little car and complained so all could hear that he could
    not understand why the Charger was not damaged more and his truck less.
    They (the Police) changed Sandy's tire for her and placed assorted parts
    that had been torn off the car, into the trunk.

    Message: 81572
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Last/accident
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 08:54:22

            Sorry about that... I almost forgot where I had left off in the
    accident story, so I [U]pdated it to finish it.  I had thought I would be
    right back on it, but got distracted several times.

            Sandy seems fine, except she is very stiff and complaining about a
    few more pains here and there.   I am sure she will be going to see the
    doctor again for one more checkup as they suggested.  Her humor is good
    anyways....  Thanks for the posts

    Message: 81573
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon on phones
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 09:27:46

    Being a person that very rarely has to use a pay phone, I did not know just
    how greedy the phone company had because until the other day when we were
    out in the field and my husband was making a lot of calls. He mentioned how
    he hated it sometimes when he had just so much time to talk. I did not know
    that for your quarter you couldn't talk as long as you wanted to. I wonder
    if it is that way with all pay phones?! Do they just automatically cut you
    off or do they allow you to put another quarter in? -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 81574
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff on Sandy
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 09:40:48

    Please tell Dandy Sandy to feel better quick. What a terrible thing to
    happen. She will be staying home for awhile won't she? -=*) ANN (*=-

    Message: 81575
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 10:52:06

            Sandy WANTS to get back to her job ASAP.  As I believe she fears
    loosing her schedual she worked so hard to get.   But...if she can't
    lift...then she is out.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 81576
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 12:04:01

    I sincerely hope that the bruises and stiffness are short-lived.  Meanwhile,
    I'd glad to hear Sandy is taking it all in good heart.

    Message: 81577
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: War!
    Subject: Sysop CLiff
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 12:22:42

    In the last months I have noticed a particularily distrubing trend
    of yours growing worse. You seem to have lost your integrity
    and have resorted to petty acts of selfish gratification.
    I would like to know why my POst #81504 has been deleted.
    I fail to see where it contained any personal attacks,
    contained vulgar or profane words or even came close to being
    minutely in loggerheads with the ules.

    Have you now resorted to openly silencing opinion that conflicts
    perhaps with your own?
    I think its time you evaluated your position in censoring anyones
    posts...especially when you have been a champion of freedoms of speech
    in the past.

    I fully agree that certain posts that contain indiscriminate material
    should be wiped. But my post had none such. Please respond in
    an adult fashion.

    Message: 81578
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy Sysop
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 13:25:09

    Here's hoping for a speedy recovery and admiration on her "guts" getting ouy
    and helping others...

    Message: 81579
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Mike Carter
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 15:56:40

            Mike...
            Yes, the post was Zapped.  It did not contain profanity, but I will
    be darned if I raise the ((SHIELDS)) to keep out Mark Adkins and he is going
    to find away in though another user.  In my 'BANNED off Apollo' Rules, not
    only are they told not to call Apollo, but they are not to post or have
    their writtings posted.  It is a TOTAL ban.
            The ((SHIELDS)) are up to keep him off... the sad part is, it is
    keeping other non-members off as well, and this makes it totaly unfair if
    his posts still get posted.
            He (Mark) just kept up his nonsence to long.  The posts between Fred
    and Arci are between those two.  It is NONE of Marks business.  Mark was a
    guest who abused his usage of Apollo.  And that is that!

            Mark is gone, let it drop as I am not going to change my mind
    letting him back on.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 81580
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Archi/Fred
    Date: 01/13/92  Time: 17:59:19

            Hey guys... I met Fred at a GT not all that long ago.  I like Fred,
    and thought he was a great addition to Apollo.  I STILL do!  He does not
    have to agree with me, nor I with him.  In fact I respect Fred a lot, and my
    anti FRNs post are not ment to take away any of that respect.   If we all
    agreed, would this not be a most boring BBS.

            Archi seems like a nice guy to me also...  He happens to have some
    of the same feelings about FRNs that Sandy and I have had for a long time.
    This does not make Archi evil as it does not make Fred evil.  I do however
    retain the right to side with whom I wish on any subject.  Bill Burkett is
    another one whom I like but do not agree with on MANY things politically.
    This is ONE reason why he got the job as Cub-SysOp.  I could have found a
    'Yes' man, but I did not want that.  I hoped this would give a fair balance
    to the system.

            Sometimes one has to get dramatic on a BBS to get a point across.
    Sometimes it seems as if this 'breaks' some ule...  But then I suppose it
    could be how you READ the post and with what you take issue with, even if it
    was not ment to be an INSULT.  We could get so silly and say that at anytime
    one does not agree with another..it is an 'INSULT'.  Come-on-guys, get real!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif- Apollo is a DEBATE board!

    Message: 81581
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Linear politics
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 02:37:05

    To prove my earlier point, just a few hours after entering my complaint
    about "one-dimensional politics", the following headline appeared by
    coincidence in the morning newspaper:

         '91 FRESHMEN MORE LIBERAL, RESEARCHERS SAY

    The article sketched a number of findings from the annual UCLA survey of
    student attitudes, including political attitudes.  Political findings
    included such things as the number of students who rate themselves
    "conservative" or "far right", versus those rating themselves "liberal" or
    "far left".  One presumes they could rate themselves somewhere in between --
    as long as they stuck to the officially approved single dimension that says
    government ought to exert lots of control over *something*.  This is a
    perfect example of how "established" procedures perpetuate the existing
    limitation of political choice in people's minds.

    In particular, I'd expect the organizers of this survey to have a vested
    interest in the liberal position.

    Message: 81582
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Mr. Adkins
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 03:33:31

         Message: 79417
         Author: James Matlock
         Category: Question?
         Subject: Ann
         Date: 10/29/91  Time: 18:47:45

         [stuff deleted]  Never fear though: I'll be using James Matlock for the
         foreseeable future, and should I decide to change it (only if I renew
         $tatus) I'll be sure to announce who I am...

    Ah, now we know how long "the foreseeable future" is.  It's ten and a half
    weeks.  Funny how Mark kept going on in the past about free will and being
    responsible, but could never resist his own impulse to mischief.

    I think Mike has a valid gripe though with respect to his own post, since he
    relayed message 81504 from Mark on Saturday night, and we never saw the
    announcement that Mark was kicked off until Sunday night.

    Message: 81583
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Melissa/rap
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 03:34:08

    Interesting about the Public Enemy song.  I didn't realize it wasn't new.
    Goes to show the power of the media.  If something doesn't get publicized,
    it's never noticed.  Or is it that's it's OK to sing something, but if you
    make a movie about it, *then* people get upset?

    Glad your poetry reading went well.  Gonna post some more up here for us?

    Message: 81584
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Little on Mike
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 05:53:39

            I never said "Mike did not have a valid gripe".... etc.

            I took action and THEN announced my action on a need to know basis.
    It would also have bloomed out quicker if not for the fact that my Sunday
    morning was pre-occupied with an other unfolding event on I-17.

            I would rather just forget Mark and not bash him either.  Let's just
    leave him alone as we are not going to suspend the ules....  They still
    apply EVEN when he is not here to defend himself.

            Now.... On to OTHER subjects PLEASE!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 81585
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy Sysop
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 06:17:53

     Glad to hear that you survived the harrowing experience with nothing major.
    Hindsight being what it is (20/20 always), one would think that a dead dog
    would have been a very acceptable alternative, eh? Anyway, it could have
    been much wors, and thank God it wasn't. Take care.

    Message: 81586
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon/Hegel 1/2
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 07:54:00

    GL> Hegel is a gap in my philosophy that I haven't properly filled in
    GL> yet; ...

    HEGEL, 'HAY gul,' Georg Wilhelm Friedrich (1770-1831), a German philosopher,
    was one of the most influential thinkers of recent times.  Like Aristotle
    and Saint Thomas Aquinas before him, Hegel tried to develop a system of
    philosophy in which all the contributions of his major predecessors would be
    integrated.  He did not view different philosophies as so many alternatives
    among which one might shop to find congenial one.  Instead, he considered
    the historical sequence of philosophic ideas as crucial.  He believed that
    various systems represent successive phases in the development of the human
    spirit (see CIVILIZATION [Theories About Civilization]).  Hegel, more than
    anyone else, established the history of philosophy as an important field of
    study.
                                -- WORLD BOOK ENCYCLOPEDIA (1962), Vol. 8

    The Hegelian Formula:  "THESIS + ANTITHESIS = SYNTHESIS.  However things
    currently are in a society, i.e., what is "acceptable" in a society, is the
    Thesis.  A concept or idea or human conduct in opposition to the norm,
    therefore, is the Antithesis.  Allow the two to ferment (controvert, hassle,
    fight) and the result will eventually be the "Synthesis": a new social
    order, a new perception of what is "acceptable" in society, a new "way
    things are."

    Message: 81587
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon/Hegel 2/2
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 07:55:16

    Originally presented by Hegel as an explanation for the dynamics of social
    change, the Hegelian Formula has come to be the instrument of change in use
    by the movers and shakers of the world.  The effectiveness of the Antithesis
    in producing a Synthesis is in direct proportion to the number and
    distribution of outlets and how effective is the control of them.  For
    example, most of the social change of the decade of the sixties came from
    college campuses throughout the nation, and most of the Antithesis which
    caused that change was not random; it was carefully structured and
    controlled and dessiminated from the national Communist fraternity
    organization which has chapters on every major college campus in the
    country.

    Yet, while the Antithesis (anti-Viet Nam war, anti-traditional moral values,
    etc.) was desseminated by those Communist fraternity chapters, and the
    strategy and tactical plans were crafted at the national and/or regional
    levels and fed to those chapters as marching orders, those who actually
    chose the target (the Viet Nam War, or Apartheid in South Africa, for
    example) are neither national nor ideologically Communist.  They are
    INTERnational (mostly in the special jurisdiction of the downtown London
    financial district) and their ideology is neither Communist nor Capitalist;
    their ideology is exclusively political and economic power and they don't
    care how they get it or what political faction is in power so long as they
    control it directly or indirectly.  And they do.

    Message: 81588
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Self-interest
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 07:56:10

    Gordon Little:  "I just recognize the reality that my ex-wife told me years
    ago, and I treasure this simple thought of hers in spite of the fact that we
    couldn't live together: "People do things for their own reasons."  Your
    reasons and her reasons are not my reasons. People pursue their own
    interests, and it's fruitless (counterproductive as well) to hate them for
    doing it.  At the same time, only a fool would fail to recognize that other
    people's interests are often in opposition to our own.  That's a simple fact
    of life."

    Or, as Robert Heinlein said (and is copyrighted by his estate):

    "Never appeal to a man's better nature.  He may not have one.  Appealing to
    his self-interest gives you more leverage."

    Message: 81589
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Communist PBS piece
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 07:57:33

    Did anyone watch the program on PBS channel 8 last night telling the story
    of Peggy and Eugene Dennis?  It was developed from the book "An
    Autobiography of an American Communist."  It should dispel forever any
    question of the involvement in and manipulation of the American Labor
    Movement by Communists in the 20's, 30's, 40's, and 50's.

    It was also a very sad story.  The pursuit of Communism tore this family
    asunder even as Eugene Dennis became and served as head of the American
    Communist Party.  Yet they considered the Party more important than their
    own children.  The revelations of Stalin's murders of thousands upon
    thousands of people almost destroyed the Party, almost destroyed them as
    individuals and as a family, yet they stupidly clung to Communism, forsaking
    all else.

    It was clearly an emotional sympathy piece in support of Communism in
    America, in support of the Communist participation in American labor, in
    support of the destruction of individual values in favor of the beehive
    mentality.  It was clearly also a hit piece against the American authorities
    who tried to stop them.

    The viewer is led to feel very sorry for Peggy and Eugene Dennis.
    Unfortunately, what happened to them is the price for being both wrong and
    stupid, and they were lucky.  Usually stupidity of this magnitude is a
    capital offense.

    Message: 81590
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon/She
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 22:34:00

      It does seem like a mild browbeating when a person whose gender is unknown
    and of no relevence to the subject is referred to as 'she.' Where 'he' has
    always been accepted until recently as meaning he or she when no individual
    is being referred to, 'she' arbitrarily and unneccessarily precludes the
    possibility that the gender could be male. This is of no great consequence
    in itself, but it is jarring. It makes you wonder if you have missed some
    bit of explanation earlier on denoting why the person referred to can only
    be female.  If 'he' can no longer be used to denote indeterminate gender
    then 'she' doesn't make such a good substitute in my opinion.
      If policical correctness demands that it can't be 'he', let it put forward
    a better gender-free pronoun. I don't fault Bill, he has to get published
    and that probably requires being on the cutting edge of social awareness,
    etc.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 81591
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Hegel
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 22:44:21

      I have never read Hegel, but his dynamic of social change sounds like it
    was basically copied by Marx (which I am familiar with) as his own
    'discovery' that social unrest is always a transition between conflicting
    social conditions that carries with it, as its cause, the new social form
    that will emerge. I know I haven't stated this well or used any of the terms
    Marx used, but hopefully you will get the drift of what I am saying anyway.
      It was one of the few things Marx said that actually seemed valid to me.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 81592
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 22:59:05

    I understand also that Marx took Hegel as a starting-point.  The only
    knowledge I'm showing off here is what I just got out of skimming rapidly
    through the encyclopedia.  I always have trouble with encyclopedic summaries
    of philosophical work.  They seem far too high-level.  You grope through a
    fog of Being and Mind and Positive Negativism or something, and by the time
    you get to the end, you think to yourself "now what was all that again?"  I
    guess I should take a sabbatical year and read up on philosophy to round out
    my Cultural Literacy.  I've heard of all these guys but I even get them
    muddled up with one another -- Nietzsche and Superman and Kierkegaard and
    Martin Fried-egg and Martin Hide-and-seek and Schilling and Goetherd?
    Why are they all German?  (All right, I know about Kierkegaard and Sartre.)
    More to the point, why do they all sound so depressing?

    Message: 81593
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Archimedes/Hegel I
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:00:16

    Thanks for the info on Hegel.  Let's see what I could get out of this.

    It may be instructive to look at it metophorically in terms of vectors.  At
    any given time, the Thesis, the general "thrust" of what is acceptable to or
    practiced by a society, might be seen as a vector of some specific magnitude
    pointing in a particular direction.  At the same time, a number of people in
    that society will be dissatisfied with the Thesis (or be victimized as a
    result of it), and therefore seek or construct an Antithesis to oppose it.
    This can be looked at as another vector pointing in a different direction,
    with a magnitude proportional to the strength of the opposition movement.
    When you combine the two together in a vector diagram, you get a new
    resultant vector that's the sum of the two.  This represents the Synthesis.

    If we looked at the diagram edgeways-on, we would see the vectors only in
    one dimension: as two straight lines pointing in opposite directions,
    generally of somewhat different lengths.  It would be as if there were only
    two different ways to go, either left or right.  Seen from this limited
    viewpoint, the only way to oppose the Thesis would be to go head-on against
    it.  The Synthesis seen from this perspective would look like a shortened
    version of the original Thesis: the result of taking that Thesis and doing a
    straight linear subtraction of the Antithesis.  It would seem that Thesis
    and Antithesis were nothing but opposite forces that moderate one another,
    with the Synthesis changing in length from time to time, expanding and
    contracting with the changing fortunes of Thesis and Antithesis.

    Message: 81594
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Archimedes/Hegel II
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:01:23

    But we looked at the diagram properly, from on top, we would see both
    dimensions.  Looked at that way, Thesis and Antithesis would most likely not
    be pointing in exactly opposite directions, but meeting at an angle.  The
    resultant vector, the Synthesis, would be pointing off somewhat to the side.

    Presumably if the people who construct the Antithesis are only interested in
    opposing the Thesis, reducing the overall magnitude of the Thesis, then
    there is a range of different Antitheses that could do that job for them
    equally well.  All would point in slightly different directions, but all
    would be more or less opposite to that of the Thesis.  Now, if somebody else
    has the goal of getting the whole thing moving slowly in quite a different
    direction -- off to the side, say -- and if they can subtly influence each
    choice of successive Antitheses so that each time, the Synthesis moves just
    a little bit in the direction they want -- then over time, provided they are
    very patient, they will gradually gain what they want while the Thesis and
    Antithesis are busy fighting about something else over and over again.

    A sailboat can be made to progress in the opposite direction to the wind by
    tacking from side to side.

    We've seen many different pendulums swing back and forth through history --
    economy, war and peace, politics, religion and so on, but humanity doubtless
    has staggered overall in some general direction.  For example, we know more
    today than we ever did.  Whether we're happier is another question.

    Message: 81595
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (1/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:02:39

    I was almost hesitant to post this, because I don't want to restart an old
    and particularly fruitless line of discussion.  But I thought it was
    interesting from another perspective.

    The UCLA survey on student attitudes covered a number of aspects of student
    views and practices.  The political trend to the left I've already
    mentioned, but it's worth a couple more comments.  First, when people think
    there's nowhere else to go, a swing to the left is perfectly predictable in
    times of economic uncertainty.  When things go wrong, people start looking
    round for someone (meaning government) to take care of them.  Look what
    happened in the thirties.

    The effects of economic uncertainty also show up in the finding that fewer
    students are interested in business careers.  This number dropped from 24.6%
    in 1987, to 18.4% in 1990, and now to 15.6% last year.  With a perception
    that "business" generally is in trouble, and a reaction to the insider
    trading and S&L scandals of the 80s, there is both a nervousness about the
    future of business careers and a moral repulsion to the extremes of some
    business practices.  This reaction too is predictable, besides being
    congruent with the political swing to the left.

    In spite of the apparent leftward trend, materialism is stated to be at an
    all-time high.  75% of students say they're in college chiefly because they
    think it will help them make more money.

    Message: 81596
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (2/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:03:53

    I don't see anything contradictory about this.  We're not looking at the
    idealistic leftism we saw in the 60s, when many people believed that radical
    socialism could transform the world into some kind of utopia, and professed
    (at least) to reject materialism and the "evil" profit motive.  Perhaps it's
    most illuminating to look at leftism as a kind of survival insurance in
    people's minds.  60s leftism sprang from the fear of being engulfed in
    global war, as well as from observing the contrast between those who were
    (and always had been) badly off, and growing prosperity elsewhere.  90s
    leftism springs more from the fear of personal starvation, besides being a
    reaction to the worst excesses of the 80s.  Yet when times are lean, people
    are more acutely aware that material prosperity has its good points.  We
    would be utterly mistaken to suppose that leftism and materialism are
    opposites.  These survey findings are not all good news, but they are both
    consistent and predictable.

    A significant point historically is the relative amount of change in
    opposing political creeds.  Those who considered themselves "far right"
    shrank slowly, from 22.8% in 1989, to 20.9% in 1990, then to 20.3% last
    year.  So most of that shrinkage had already happened by 1990.  Many of
    those who relinquished conservatism did so because of something that
    happened over two years ago: possibly their view of the *past*, of the
    events of the 80s.  However, those who considered themselves "far left"
    increased more this year, from 23.6 in 1989, to 24.4% in 1990, to 25.7% last
    year.  Arguably this increase is due to the worsening economy of *today*.

    Message: 81597
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (3/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:05:20

    Those changes are fairly small, and may not be statistically significant.
    The article noted, though, that the self-designated "far leftists" hit a low
    of 19.7% in 1981 -- and an all-time high of 38.7% only ten years before
    that.  The great swing to the left in the 60s was not due to a decrease in
    conservative beliefs so much as to a huge increase in liberal beliefs.  This
    too is unsurprising.  Conservatism after all is traditional, "conservative"
    by nature if you like.  It has always been there.  The proportion of
    conservatives varies less.  Liberalism on the other hand was in many ways
    new, experimental.  Enthusiasm for an experiment is bound to be volatile, to
    wax and wane along with the triumph or frustration of the moment.

    It's notable also that liberalism has not made much of a comeback today, in
    spite of the economic situation.  This shows that people are cautious, still
    mindful of the failure of many aspects of liberalism.  That's not bad news,
    if it means that people have longer memories than politicians think they do.
    However, I don't doubt that it's a source of disappointment and depression
    to many people.  In the 60s there was a real political excitement -- yes,
    and lots of anger too; but the point was that many people believed they had
    a new direction to go in, a direction that would make the world better.
    Since it didn't work out anything like the way it was meant to, too many
    people today are unable to see just where to go next politically.  Hence a
    great deal of the apathy we find in many voters.

    Most of the survey's other findings are unremarkable.

    Message: 81598
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (4/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:06:31

    A record number of students want to pursue careers in health care.  This
    we'd expect, since health care is an expanding industry with more technology
    to play with, more ways to treat more illnesses, and more people living to
    be older and sicker.  How it will all be paid for is another question.

    Fewer students than ever want a career in the performing arts.  Their
    numbers have been declining since 1975.  I don't know that that's good news,
    but I could make a few guesses at the reasons.  While the performing arts
    can be lucrative, they can also be a fickle source of income, and people
    today are most likely looking for security.  Less interest in the arts may
    go with more materialism, or with the anxiety that a less prosperous society
    is less able to afford the luxuries of entertainment and the arts.

    Fewer students than ever want to pursue a career in law, following a
    downward trend that started in 1988.  I can't lament this fact.  Our society
    wastes far too many resources on litigation, frittering away time and energy
    on fighting within itself instead of doing more productive things.  If it
    were possible to eliminate our waste of effort on contention in its many
    forms, we might all work three days a week and still be a lot richer.

    More than 87% of students agreed that a man has no right to force sex on a
    woman, even if she "leads him on".  This is good news.  Obviously the
    campaign to raise consciousness about this particular aspect of human rights
    is taking effect.

    Message: 81599
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (5/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:07:44

    The result is also at odds with the findings of a high-school survey a
    couple of years ago, where more students disagreed with that statement.  But
    they were younger, perhaps thinking less maturely about the issue.

    Without knowing the proportion of males to females in the latest UCLA
    survey, I can't work out what percentage of each sex agreed or disagreed.
    The more men there were, the better the result looks.  If it was half and
    half, then 93.5% of women agreed, but only 80.5% of men -- because the
    report said that men were "three times as likely as women" to disagree.
    This too was predictable.

    Unfortunately the article reported no data on sexual behavior, or on drug
    use.  It did however mention that the number of students who "drink beer" is
    at an all-time low of only 57.3%.  The previous high point was reached in
    1970.  This may not be surprising, in view of a general tendency to lump all
    drugs together and make war on them, and the campaigns against drunk driving
    in recent years.  Whether it's unalloyed good news, I wouldn't like to say.
    On the one hand, if a student's statement that "I drink beer" means "I get
    smashed regularly and frequently", then it is good news.  But since "I drink
    beer" must also include those who drink it moderately, even occasionally, I
    wonder what it means when 42.7% can say (priggishly?) that they never touch
    the stuff.  While it's perfectly OK *not* to drink, I hope we're not seeing
    a certain stuffiness, a rigidity of mind that often goes with hypocritical
    intolerance of *other* people's behavior.  Society doesn't need intolerance.

    Message: 81600
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (6/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:08:55

    Thus far, the survey's findings give no cause for surprise.  Most of them
    are explainable, if not actually predictable.  One discovery, however, is
    very curious.

    Since 1987, more and more students have been smoking cigarettes.

    This is hardly as important as the trend in such matters as politics,
    economics, and attitudes to our fellow woman.  I was a bit reluctant to
    mention the topic, because the last thing I want to do is to stimulate
    another antismoking diatribe.  All the same, I find it very intriguing.

    It's worth drawing a parallel with the arguments Mark and I have had about
    crime in the past, in which he got very angry at my views.  One explanation
    for those arguments is that my intent was to explore the causes of crime and
    possible solutions, while Mark kept reverting to the issue of blame.  He
    seemed very cross with me because I refused to waste time echoing his anger
    at the criminal, preferring instead to *study* the problem.  Similarly, a
    number of people want only to flap their hands and tut-tut at the news that
    cigarette smoking is on the rise again.  To me, it's simply interesting.

    It's interesting because it seems to buck every other trend, and there's no
    obvious cause for it.  The increasing interest in health and exercise (even
    an obsession, to some people) through the 80s has led to a great decrease in
    smoking.

    Message: 81601
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (7/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:10:03

    Cigarettes too have been a victim of the "drug wars" that tend to lump all
    chemical addictives together and label them "evil", even though nicotine
    isn't a mind-altering substance.  The decrease in beer-drinking suggests
    that anti-drug trends are still being followed on college campuses.

    In times when money is tighter, we might expect more people to think of not
    smoking as a useful economy.

    The percentage of smokers is still relatively small: 11.3%.  In one way this
    makes the phenomenon even more curious.  If smokers were a majority, or a
    substantial minority, one might reasonably expect their numbers to fluctuate
    for various reasons.  But when a minority is smaller, majorities often take
    advantage of their greater numbers to be as nasty as they can to the
    minority: to insult them, persecute them, isolate them, or eradicate them if
    they can.  There is no doubt that some antismokers have behaved this way.
    Isn't peer pressure a net force against smoking today?  Why would more
    people want to join a persecuted minority?

    I can hardly believe the increase in smoking is due to the success of
    Camel's "Old Joe" advertising campaign.

    What exactly are we looking at here?  Stress, perhaps?  People are more
    likely to smoke while under stress.  Perhaps the stress of trying to avoid
    other drugs is showing up in increased smoking.

    Message: 81602
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (8/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:11:13

    Many systems are like a lumpy balloon.  You push on a problem lump and it
    goes down, but the pressure makes another lump pop up somewhere else
    instead.

    Maybe someone else has a more plausible suggestion, but the only answer I'm
    left with is that we're seeing the natural and inevitable reversal of a
    trend.  Smoking decreased from 1966 to 1987.  It must be time, so to speak,
    for it to increase again.

    Not that I expect to see smoking increase to its former level, or that I'm
    going to cheer it on.  But this may be another of the pendulum swings that
    compose much of history.  We see slow, periodic alternations between
    depression and prosperity, sexual repression and sexual license, leftism and
    rightism, and -- to take a cue from Orwell -- between war and peace, freedom
    and slavery, ignorance and strength -- the very real strength of knowledge
    and awareness.  Because any social or political system has inertia, the
    pendulum swings too far in a given direction for most people before they
    react to their feelings that it has gone too far.  Their energies take time
    to start pushing it back again.  The pendulum analogy is a perfect one.

    We've seen swings in the American attitude to drinking, ranging from the
    insanity of the Eighteenth Amendment to the commonsense of the Twenty-First,
    the circa-1970 liberalization of "drinking ages" to the growing restrictions
    of the 80s.  We've seen the sexual revolution followed by herpes, then AIDS.

    Message: 81603
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Trends (9/9)
    Date: 01/14/92  Time: 23:12:23

    We've seen the alternative religions and atheism of the 60s followed by the
    fundamentalism of the 80s.  We've seen the "energy crisis" of the 70s with
    its small, sluggish cars and rigidly enforced speed limits, followed by a
    throwing off of some of those restrictions in the 80s.  People only follow a
    trend for so long, then they get fed up with it.

    I predict that many people will give up exercise in the 90s.  It's tiring.

    All the same, few of these trends vanish without a trace.  They all leave
    their mark afterwards.  Environmentalism and the antiwar movement have
    certainly not disappeared.  And the energy business has led to some more
    gas-efficient cars that also perform very well.

    I think Hegel would have had something to say about all this, though I'm not
    sure what.

    I can only see the increase in smoking as a *reaction* -- a rebellion
    against antismokers.  I won't argue that smoking is healthy, even though I
    do it myself, but I do argue that the instinct itself is healthy.  When
    people are pushed too far, they push back.  They react against others trying
    to tell them what to do.  They may not always choose the best way to do it,
    but they do it.  Diversity continues to flourish in life.  And the human
    spirit is always resilient.  I think that's something to cheer about.

    Message: 81604
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Browbeating Dean
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:35:47

    > It does seem like a mild browbeating when a person whose gender
    > is unknown and of no relevence to the subject is referred to as
    > 'she.' Where 'he' has always been accepted until recently as
    > meaning he or she when no individual is being referred to,
    > 'she' arbitrarily and unneccessarily precludes the possibility
    > that the gender could be male.

    If I read this right, you seem to be conflicted, Dean.  When you say the
    browbeating is "mild," are you downplaying it?  And how does this jibe with
    your second statement?

    Message: 81605
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Cliff-Disagreeing
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:36:21

    > Bill Burkett is another one whom I like but do not agree with
    > on MANY things politically.  This is ONE reason why he got the
    > job as Cub-SysOp.  I could have found a 'Yes' man, but I did
    > not want that.

    Right, as always, Cliff.

    > We could get so silly and say that at anytime one does not
    > agree with another..it is an 'INSULT'.  Come-on-guys, get real!

    I enjoy reading John Kolbe's column in the _Gazette_, but I rarely find
    anything quotable.  Here's something he said in a discussion of a legislator
    who's retiring and the changes in Arizona politics that brought it on:

    "A grim aspect of this new politics is its increasing personalization, its
    loss of a sense of humor.  The old image of two lawmakers arguing fiercely
    in debate, and then retiring for a beer together at the corner pub, is as
    quaint as a Norman Rockwell scene."

    Some seem to feel the notion that Apollo's members can disagree amiably is
    just as quaint.  That's too bad.

    Message: 81606
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Disciplining Gordon
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:36:47

    > I have this problem with being far too serious.  I must lighten
    > up.  I must make a habit of giggling regularly every morning.
    > Discipline's the answer.

    I agree.  Even when you're funny, you're serious.  You must be disciplined.
    (Now where's that whip?)

    :^D

    Message: 81607
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon-Inflation
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:37:12

    > I think what you're saying is that you incline more to the
    > "demand-pull" side of the theory: that inflation is caused by
    > too much paper chasing too few goods.

    Yes.  My understanding of what causes inflation is, as you say, "too much
    paper chasing too few goods."  But I don't see that coming from the
    demand-pull theory.

    It comes simply from the money having no backing, freeing government to
    print more whenever it wants.

    Message: 81608
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon-Language
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 09:37:39

    > The reason I don't like "politically correct" terminology is
    > not that I'm chauvinistic.

    Yes, we did discuss this once briefly.

    I still argue that our actions are very much affected by our ways of
    thinking about things and that one of the most important influences on our
    thinking is the language we think in.

    > Suppose I'm reading a manual that tells me how to operate
    > something, and in the middle it says: "The operator must
    > specify the output device she wants." Of course the operator
    > can be female as well as male.  But habit and tradition in
    > English leads us to expect things to be expressed in certain
    > conventional ways.

    It is also habitual, traditional, and conventional to relegate women (and
    other minorities) to certain roles -- roles that no longer apply in real
    life.  I would suggest that our writing, regardless of its context, should
    reflect real life.  This isn't agenda-pushing; it's documentation.

    Message: 81609
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: War!
    Subject: Public Enemy
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 15:16:50

        Chuck D. and Public Enemy are blatant hypocrites.  They also disown King
    and everything he stood for with the release of their new video.

        Remember Professor Griff?  You, know, the one that said in an interview
    with the WASHINGTON TIMES that "Jews are wicked...[and responsible for] the
    majority of wickedness that goes on across the globe."  In particular, he
    said that Jews financed the slave trade and were "responsible for what's
    happening in South Africa" and wondered aloud whether it is a "coincidence
    that the Jews run the jewelry business and it's named JEW-elry?"

        Why didn't Chuck D. break off ties with Griff when he made his
    anti-Semitic views known?  Because racism is of no concern for Chuck D...
    that is...UNLESS...it is BLACKS that are experiencing the prejudice.

        Furthermore, what about Griff calling one of the members of 3rd Bass (a
    rap group on P.E.'s label) a "Jew bastard?"

        "At a June 21st [1990] press conference, Chuck D. announced Griff's
    dismissal from the group but termed Griff a "brother" and refused to
    disassociate himself entirely from his former partner." (Rolling Stone)

        And what about the lyrics on "Welcome to the Terrordrome," where Chuck
    D. raps "Crucifixion ain't no fiction/So called chozen, frozen," and then
    goes on to say that the Jews "got [him] like Jesus?"

    Message: 81610
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: War!
    Subject: Public Enemy
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 15:27:46

        Finally, the "assassination plot" carried out in Public Enemy's video is
    spit in the face to Martin Luther King, Jr. and everything that he stood
    for.  Perhaps Chuck D. and his cronies should read King's "Nonviolence and
    Racial Justice":  "If the American Negro and other victims of oppression
    succumb to the temptation of using violence in the struggle for justice,
    unborn generations will live in a desolate night of bitterness, and their
    chief legacy will be an endless reign of chaos." ("Nonviolence And Racial
    Justice, p. 7, "A TESTAMENT OF HOPE: THE ESSENTIAL WRITINGS AND SPEECHES OF
    MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.," ed. James M. Washington, HarperCollins, New York,
    1986)

         About the video, Chuck D. said at a press conference: "[The video] is
    quite a radical point of view, most people would think, but I feel fine."

         The question is not whether or not Chuck D. feels fine, but whether
    Martin Luther King, Jr. would "feel fine" about having this visual symphony
    of hatred and violence dedicated to his memory.  I believe he would be sick.

    Message: 81611
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/She
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 17:01:29

      I said it seemed like a mild form of browbeating because it doesn't demand
    that the reader accept that form and use it, it only interjects it in a
    strange and slightly disconcerting manner. I don't see any conflict between
    that and the rest of the post, where I voiced my opinion that there should
    be a better way of handling gender-neutral situations than making them
    read as if the gender must be female for some unexplained reason.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 81612
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill/Inflation
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 17:28:34

      I agree that inflation is primarily caused by government increasing (or
    allowing banks to increase) the overall money supply (including credit of
    course). If a price increase or wage increase could lead to inflation
    in an economy based on sound money, we would have had inflation even when we
    were on the gold standard. We did not, not because businesses and employees
    were not interested in higher prices and wages, but because sound money just
    doesn't lend itself to inflation at will. The money just isn't there to back
    anyone's desire when that desire is counter to market value. When the money
    can be created out of nothing wherever there is a desire, it's a different
    story.
      One thing that I believe can cause inflation even in sound money economy
    however, is a big leap in the price of some basic material that adds to the
    cost of virtually everything in the economy, like oil for example. If the
    price of oil jumps because of foreign causes beyond our control, then that
    increase works its way through our whole economy as it gets added to
    transport costs and the cost of everything derived from petroleum.
      That kind of price inflation can be a serious problem, but at least it's
    straightforward and honest compared to the way monetary inflation robs
    everyone while allowing a false image of properity.
      See You Later,
       Dean H.

    Message: 81613
    Author: $ James Taranto
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Wow
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 20:25:32

    This system looks different on a Macintosh.

    Message: 81614
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Archimedes
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 20:56:58

    Lesse. Lots to respond to, so little space to do it in time
    wise. I guess I could engage the warp mouth drive and spew tons of
    text on here but I don't want to be a hypocrite just yet...at least
    not until I reach 70. :-)

    Arch: While I still maintain that I agree that FRN's are pretty
    much worthless, the issuance of gold coin in the current world
    economy wouldn't give you the fix you seek. Gold would, after
    becoming "as common as pocket change", be worth subtantially less
    than it ever has..it would likely become as cheap as silver. Probably
    one of the many good reasons why we aren't using gold coin to this
    date. Still, we disagree about value of labor over time. If someone
    made a computer 45 years ago and charges two million frn's for it,
    the same money today will by a VASTLY superior product. You advocate
    paying the same amount today for a 45 year old computer. Sorry,
    but my point about supply and *demand* comes into play here. There
    just aren't too many businesses in their right mind who'll pay you
    two million to make them a computer using 45 year old technology,
    parts, technical skills and labor either, let alone buying a used
    one for that much. 10 Year old computer scrap runs about 5 cents on
    the dollar at the local scrap yard.                  -See ya

    Mike

    Message: 81615
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 21:03:09

    Cliff: No, my definition of "pissed" at you is far from
    yours. Just because I disagree on your zapping of my post
    doesn't mean I hate you. I just think you have handled the whole
    thing badly. When you get down to the rocks on this issue,
    Mark Adkin's aliases shouldn't be *any* part of the issue because
    a good percentage of your users here use "stupid" nick names,
    something that is to this date still against the letter of the
    Apollo ules. Saying someone is banished from the board just
    because his/her messages were "stupid" is just a another way
    of censoring them. Cliff, you say you support the freedom of speech
    but only when it isnt the speech of "idiots logging in under false
    names and leaving stupid messages". What makes Green laterns, or
    Archimedes, or Apro Poet's false names better than anyone else's?
    As for idiotic messages, that's in the eye of the beholder.

    But when is free speech "free" when anyone can preemptorily shut up
    anyone whom they deem is stupid? As for cowardice, or as you put it,
    COWardice, what's so brave about deleting someone's messages that make
    their opponent's opinions and posts look lame or foolish?
    No Cliff, this board *is* subject to the worst type of censorship....
    you have proven it by kicking someone off soley for their viewpoints
    and at the advice of gossip. DON'T preach judgment to me when you have
    "hung" a man as quickly and as you have.
    -Mike

    Message: 81616
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Daryl on MLK, Jr.
    Date: 01/15/92  Time: 22:15:32

    So, are you going to vote for an MLK Day in Ariz.?  Did you vote for it last
    time?

    Message: 81619
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Mike C.
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 00:15:04

            I did not kick Mark off for being stupid, far from it, he is/was
    quite smart.  It was not his posts that caused this to happen, but his
    constant breaking of the ules that I gave him chance after chance after
    chance to redeem himself.

            Mark's use of this board was not a 'RIGHT'.. but a 'PRIVILEGE'

    Message: 81620
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Letter of ules
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 00:22:24

            Here Mike goes again...telling me, a 10 year SysOp veteran how to
    read my rules.  No where does it say you can't have a handle.  In the real
    world many people use pen-names etc.  On Apollo, I want users to use ONE
    name and stick to it.  I do not want them logging in as another user other
    then the user name they selected.  This follows the letter of my rules.
    I wrote them after all.

            I have a problem with God's commandment...  'THOU Shalt not Kill'
    Now let's see...  to follow that to the letter, I assume we can't kill
    plants, bugs, animals of any type.  I mean, that is the LETTER of the LAW.

            As for me doing in Mark so quickly... this has been going on for
    years.... with lots of warnings.  I never do in anyone without explaining
    the rule in question carfully.

            *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

            P.S.  We even had a ote on handles... and what do you know, the
    Pro-Handle people won out...  Accept it, it is *my* board and I accept it.
    There is no ule that states you have to have a handle.  But, whatever you
    choose, that is your USER NAME, and you shalt not falsify that name by using
    another.  Simple... eccept for Mike that is.

    Message: 81621
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/documentation
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 05:18:16

     Why is a gender determination necessary at all in docs? Why not simply "THe
    operator must specify the desired output device."?

    Message: 81622
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: For sale
    Subject: Computer reduced!
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 05:25:30

     I have a Commodore 128, with a 171 disk drive, color monitor, 1200 bd
    moden, joysticks, and Epsom MX80 printer and loads of software, manuals,
    etc. Price reduced to $400, or make a reasonable offer for the whole works.

    Message: 81623
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Dean-Inflation
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:54:34

    > One thing that I believe can cause inflation even in sound
    > money economy however, is a big leap in the price of some basic
    > material that adds to the cost of virtually everything in the
    > economy, like oil for example. If the price of oil jumps
    > because of foreign causes beyond our control, then that
    > increase works its way through our whole economy as it gets
    > added to transport costs and the cost of everything derived
    > from petroleum.

    Agreed.  And though the effects of this type of inflation can linger for
    some time, it's also not the permanent, institutionalized inflation an
    inappropriately growing money supply causes.

    Message: 81624
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Dean-Language
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:55:00

    OK.  I understand your viewpoint better, I think.  It seemed to me you were
    saying using a gender-specific wasn't really so bad, then later saying it's
    not a good thing to do.

    While I tend to believe that a great many communication problems lie in
    ambiguities permitted by the sender, there are times when receivers make
    trouble for themselves.  Using "she" in a general context no more implies
    that an individual MUST be female than using "he" implies the individual
    MUST be male.  That may be how the reader interprets it, but that's not
    necessarily a valid interpretation.

    I still contend the use of either "he" or "she" reflects a changing world --
    especially a changing American work place -- and is, therefore, a good way
    to handle the problem.

    Message: 81625
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Mike on Mark
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:55:31

    > But when is free speech "free" when anyone can preemptorily
    > shut up anyone whom they deem is stupid?

            "Stupid" may have been the word used to describe the posts "Hiro"
    left, but that wasn't the reason Mark was banned, and he knows it.
            Cliff's done a good job of explaining the whys of his move, but let
    me add that it wasn't done on anything remotely resembling a whim.  Cliff
    and Mark, as well as Mark and I, have been in discussion for some time
    regarding his past behavior on Apollo and what was expected of him now and
    for the future.  He pushed the line a couple times, then backed off when we
    told him so.  This time he simply went too far; he did something (posting
    under yet another alias) that he had been told would result in his
    banishment.
            Cliff had no choice but to kick Mark off the system.  I'm not sure I
    would have respected any other decision even if he had made it.
            As far as "free speech" goes, we all use this system only with
    Cliff's permission.  It is his property.  He goes to great lengths to permit
    nearly anything -- so long as it stays within Apollo's quite reasonable
    (IMHO) ules.

    Message: 81626
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul-Language
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:56:00

    > Why is a gender determination necessary at all in docs? Why not
    > simply "THe operator must specify the desired output device."?

            That is one solution to the problem.  Another is to change sentence
    subjects to plurals:  "Operators must specify the desired output device."
    These are both rather passive, however, and will put readers to sleep in
    short order.
            My preference would be to make it a more direct, active sentence:
    "Don't forget that the output device you wish to use must be specified."
    Or, possibly:  "Be sure to specify the output device you wish to use."
            Unfortunately, this doesn't cover cases in which you wish to SHOW by
    example what is to be done, such as in a hypothetical demonstration:  "The
    operator is ready to send the report to an output device.  The output device
    might be a disk drive or a printer, but whatever it is, *he/she* must
    specify which device the program is to use."  (Ugh.  This is pretty rough,
    but I'm not going to spend a lot of time polishing it.)
            It's much more personal, and involves the reader more, to make our
    operator a "real" person.  And I see nothing wrong with occasionally making
    that person female.

    Message: 81627
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Taranto Speaks!
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 07:56:24

    So, James.  What are you doing these days?  Are you in the Valley or calling
    from the Great Beyond?

    Message: 81628
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Dean H. 1/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:27:31

    DH> One thing that I believe can cause inflation even in sound money
    DH> economy however, is a big leap in the price of some basic material that
    DH> adds to the cost of virtually everything in the economy, like oil for
    DH> example. If the price of oil jumps because of foreign causes beyond our
    DH> control, then that increase works its way through our whole economy as
    DH> it gets added to transport costs and the cost of everything derived
    DH> from petroleum.

    AT LAST!  I sincerely appreciate you opening the door and allowing this
    discussion to move forward.  This was the basis of my frustration with Fred;
    I got the distinct impression he didn't want the discussion to reach this
    level because now some of the greatest destructive fallacies of debt-money
    can be revealed.

    First, I agree with everything you said in your post.  Let us now look at
    the next level:  As Bill Burkett pointed out in message #81623:

    BB> Agreed.  And though the effects of this type of inflation can linger
    BB> for some time, it's also not the permanent, institutionalized inflation
    BB> an inappropriately growing money supply causes.

    Yes!  And I would add, more specifically, that when this happens under a
    sound monetary standard we don't wind up owing more money to the banksters

    Message: 81629
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Dean H. 2/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:28:43

    as a result of paying those higher prices.

    Additionally, this so-called "type of inflation" is not inflation at all.
    As previously pointed out, inflation occurs only when the money supply in
    circulation exceeds the value of produced wealth in the community (nation).
    A price increase as a result of dependence upon foreign suppliers is not
    inflation; it is merely the unfettered and undistorted operation of the law
    of supply and demand.  Inflationists like John Kenneth Galbraith (and his
    disciples like Fred and Matlock) like to confuse the issue to their own gain
    by pointing to this sort of thing occurring under a sound monetary standard
    and calling it "inflation," but it is not.  It is a legitimately higher
    price caused by scarcity, not caused by devaluation of the currency or of
    labor.

    But now we get to the REAL significant fact:  In a sound money system, when
    a price increase due to factors outside the economy occurs, the immediate
    result is a TREMENDOUS amount of research and inventive effort which goes
    into finding an improvement in technology which will obviate the price
    increase by utilizing greater efficiency and/or by replacing the dependence
    upon that particular resource with a new technology altogether.  As a result
    of this research and inventiveness there are numerous spin-offs which
    benefit the living standard of everyone, even if the primary goal is not
    achieved.  Much of the huge technological advancement during the 1800's

    Message: 81630
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Dean H. 3/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:29:41

    was the result of specifically this kind of incentive.

    In an unsound monetary system such as ours, on the other hand, there is less
    incentive to find a solution because "who cares?  We'll just inflate the
    money and pass the cost off onto our children."  And thus we remain
    enslaved, not only to the foreign suppliers, but also in our debt to the
    banksters.

    Thus, in a sound monetary standard economy, the law of supply and demand
    (whether naturally invoked by market forces or artificially invoked by
    greedy manipulators) stimulates inventiveness and production and ultimately
    improves the living standard of everyone.  In an unsound monetary standard
    economy all it stimulates is debt, and by extension, the bankster's profit
    margin.

    Message: 81631
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Mike Carter
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:30:48

    MC> Gold would, after becoming "as common as pocket change", be worth
    MC> subtantially less than it ever has..it would likely become as cheap as
    MC> silver.

    What you describe is the definition of "inflation," and would not occur --
    *could* not occur -- unless gold mining became as efficient, for example, as
    printing worthless paper debt-money on a printing press.

    And even if it did occur, it would cause few problems in the economy because
    the medium of exchange (gold) -- even if its value dropped to that of
    pennies -- would still not represent debt as does our paper frns today.  The
    only problem would be that it would be too heavy to carry enough of it
    around.  This is a significant problem, I agree, but it isn't even a patch
    on the problem of carrying around batches of "worthless" paper money, every
    bill of which represents debt in the amount of one U.S. dollar's worth of
    labor that must be repaid by future generations, the repaying of which will
    simply generate more and more debt.

    Regardless of how efficiently gold mining and gold coining became, it could
    never become as big a threat to our survival as a sovereign nation as the
    worthless paper debt-money we use has already become.  Heck, as it became
    forty or fifty years ago.

    Message: 81632
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Mike/Compare 1/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:32:13

    MC> Still, we disagree about value of labor over time. If someone made a
    MC> computer 45 years ago and charges two million frn's for it, the same
    MC> money today will by a VASTLY superior product. You advocate paying the
    MC> same amount today for a 45 year old computer.

    I advocate no such thing.  Our discussion does not involve computers, which,
    like all informal barter mediums *do* devalue over time; our discussion
    involves the merits of a sound monetary standard of intrinsic value which
    does *not* devalue over time.  It seems to me your argument destroys your
    argument; the devaluation (inflation) of frns over time is much closer to
    how your computer analogy works than is gold standard dollars.

    I.e., what is the difference between buying a computer for two million frns
    45 years ago and selling it today, and simply putting that two million frns
    into a desk drawer and dragging it out today?  That two million frns you
    earned 45 years ago to buy that computer with wouldn't buy any where near a
    state-of-the-art computer today.  It would buy a *better* computer, yes,
    because of the improvement in technology, but it would not buy the *best*
    computer today.

    On the other hand, two million gold standard dollars would have bought a
    state-of-the-art computer 45 years ago, and if you put that two million

    Message: 81633
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Mike/Compare 2/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:33:30

    gold standard dollars into a desk drawer and dragged it out today it *would*
    buy a state-of-the-art computer today which would be vastly superior to the
    one you might have bought 45 years ago.  In fact, it would probably buy the
    company that produces that state-of-the-art computer today.

    You see, you are trying to compare apples to oranges.  If you want to make a
    valid comparison, compare how much essential food and shelter you could buy
    with two million frns 45 years ago to how much you could buy with two
    million frns today.  Not much, my friend, by comparison.

    A better valid comparison is this:  compare how much *labor* you could buy
    45 years ago with two million frns to how much labor you could buy today
    with two million frns.  Not much at all, by comparison.  Then compare how
    much labor you could buy 45 years ago with two million gold standard dollars
    to how much labor you could buy today with two million gold standard
    dollars.  Dang near the same amount in terms of man-hours; one heck of a lot
    more in terms of productive output due to improvements in technology and
    training.

    Another example is this:  45 years ago you could buy 40 man-hours of good
    semi-skilled labor for approximately 35 U.S. dollars which, 45 years ago,
    would also buy an ounce of gold on the open market.  Today you can buy 40

    Message: 81634
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Mike/Compare 3/3
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 11:34:30

    man-hours of good semi-skilled labor for approximately 350 frns, and 350
    frns today will also buy you an ounce of gold on the open market.

    Note also that 45 years ago the worker received the full 35 U.S. dollars for
    his week's work.  Today the worker gets robbed of between 15 and 20% of that
    350 frns before he ever sees his pay.  Add to that the higher cost of living
    and you find that if his labor purchased 100% of his needs 45 years ago, his
    labor today purchases less than 50% of his needs.

    You might also consider that while his pay (in numbers, not actual value)
    increased 1,000% in 45 years, his costs have increased between 1,500 and
    1,800% in 45 years -- all of which is the direct result of using debt-money
    and running up the debt to the banksters.  This is why he and his wife both
    have to work today; 45 years ago his labor alone was sufficient to support
    his family.

    Message: 81635
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill/inflation
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 12:09:50

    The significance of too much paper in the "demand-pull" theory is that
    demand has force because it's backed by money.  Too much "money" inflates
    the demand and makes it appear to have more backing than it really does.
    It makes a little demand into a BIG paper tiger, if you like.

    Message: 81636
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Bill/personalization
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 12:11:22

     BB>>"A grim aspect of this new politics is its increasing personalization,
     BB>>its loss of a sense of humor.  The old image of two lawmakers arguing
     BB>>fiercely in debate, and then retiring for a beer together at the corner
     BB>>pub, is as quaint as a Norman Rockwell scene."

    Some British politician said something similar to John Kolbe's thought.
    After describing some violent Parliamentary disagreements of the past, he
    went on to say, in effect, that the reader might get the impression from all
    this bitter argument that Conservatives and Labor MPs hated one another's
    guts, but that wasn't true at all.  This was business, and outside of
    business they were often the best of friends, were dinner guests at one
    another's homes, and so on.  He was discussing events of several decades
    ago, leaving it unclear whether the same atmosphere still existed today.

    Just for one moment I tripped over Kolbe's word "personalization", thinking
    that he should have said "DEpersonalization" instead.  A sense of humor,
    drinking a beer together, all that has a very "personal" flavor to it.
    Isn't their disappearance a *loss* of the personal touch?  Then I realized
    that he did mean what he said: that mere political disagreements were now
    spilling over and making themselves felt in personal relationships.

    My confusion about this suggests that there really are two ways to look at
    it.  There's a complex thought here about the proper roles of politics and
    personal relationships in life, but I don't have time to go into it now.

    Message: 81637
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: gender pronouns
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 12:58:33

    I like to mix he and she occasionally. It wakes up the reader.

    Message: 81638
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Cliff on ules
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 14:22:54

    Here's some facts for you to chew:
    Rule #3 says "Thou shalt not falsify thy name"
    Phone conversation with DPS:
    "Any other name that does not appear on any court certified
     document or birth certificate is considered a false name, alias or
     nickname unrecognized in legal proceedings..."

    So you claim you know law eh?

    NOWEHERE IN YOUR ULES DOES IT SAY:
    You can't login as several users using different names..
    You can use a HANDLE

    So, Judge Cliff, I'll be sure to refrain posting any OPINION
    on your court certified, holier-than-thou ules just in
    case you take it like I'm trying to take over Apollo and
    overthrow its unquestionable management. God forbid that
    I even *suggest* you write your ammended rules down so new
    people can see them...
    Excuuuuuuuuuuuseeee mee for having an opinion. Scratch that,
    excuse Me and my Non-persona wife BOTH for daring to have an
    opinion.

    Message: 81639
    Author: $ Mike Carter
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: ules
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 14:26:20

    I have always thought Cliff's ules were simple, honest and
    quite reasonable. Nothing has changed there except that we now
    find he likens them to the 10 Commandments issued by the Holy
    Father. How quaint.  All I *suggested* to Cliff was that he
    may want to post the rules about handles and multiple logins.
    Personally *I* could care less about Mark's banishment. I
    think the stated reasons aren't in themselves unreasonable, just
    that this discrepancy between the written ules and the
    rules that aren't written down keeps popping up. Simple, except
    that is, for Cliff, who despises being questioned.

    Gimme a break.

    Message: 81640
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Pronouns
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 19:05:34

    So what is wrong with that great genderless third-person singular pronoun?

    No, I'm not talking about "it" - I'm talking about "one".

    "Before running the program, one must choose the printer appropriate to
    one's desired quality of output"

    Works well in many languages, even English -- though most of us have
    forgotten about it.

    Message: 81641
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Mike
    Date: 01/16/92  Time: 19:12:15

    Surely over the past five or more years you've seen Cliff explain that
    handles are allowed, as long as it sticks.  Surely you've seen this more
    than once.

    Message: 81643
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/personal
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 06:28:59

     Well, if instructions are to be made more personal, therefore more
    interesting, how about the personal pronoun, "you"? As in "whatever it is,
    YOU must specify which device" etc.
     At least the gender specific problem is thus eliminated, and the feminists
    hopefully appeased,if that's possible.

    Message: 81644
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: ules/Cliff
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 07:39:34

    I have refrained from making any comment on the banishment of Mark Adkins
    and his alter egos, and upon the current flak Cliff is taking, because I
    have a perceived bias: Adkins and his alter egos and I have had serious
    conflicts in the past about his approach to discussion if people didn't
    immediately bow down and nominate him for the center of attention.  However,
    in view of the recent controversy, which seems to be getting unnecessarily
    acrimonious, I now feel it is necessary to speak up.

    Cliff, I support your decisions and see nothing unreasonable or excessively
    judgmental about what you have done.  Had you decided the other way I still
    would have supported your decision.  I see nothing whatever you have done in
    your enforcement of the ules which meets the criteria of which you have
    been accused in recent messages.  I feel the acrimonious attacks have been
    unwarranted and beyond any relationship to the facts.  Just thought you
    would like to know.

    Message: 81645
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Beau-Pronouns
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 07:46:44

    > So what is wrong with that great genderless third-person
    > singular pronoun?  ["one"]

    It's boring; stilted.  Much, much worse than "he" or "she."  One never uses
    the word in everyday conversation unless one is making fun of one's
    superiors.  And business writing is becoming more and more like conversation
    all the time.

    Message: 81646
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon-Inflation
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 07:47:12

    > The significance of too much paper in the "demand-pull"
    > theory...

    Well, if you say so.  It still seems to me like a minor overall effect.

    Message: 81647
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 07:47:39

    > My confusion about this ["personalization"/"depersonalization"]
    > suggests that there really are two ways to look at it.

    It strikes me as one of those wonderful paradoxes of language and thought
    that reveals more about ourselves than simple, straightforward words would
    allow.

    Message: 81648
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Paul-You
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 07:47:58

    Not a bad idea -- when it fits.

    Message: 81649
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Beaus/pronouns
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 08:12:55

    Or better yet, get rid of the pronoun:
    "Choose the printer whose quality is appropriate before running the
    program."

    Message: 81650
    Author: $ Melissa Dee
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Public Enemy
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 08:36:28

    Daryl brought up some good points.  I have a hard time feeling sympathic to
    a group that refers to THEMSELVES as "n1gg@r$".  I hate that word.  There
    was an interesting "A Different World" last night that dealt with the racial
    issue, but both sides.  It was very well done, even if it was slanted to the
    pro-black side.  I liked that it showed the black kid had a part in the
    prejudice, using myths like blacks are better in sports, to his advantage
    and then getting upset by the white kids using some of the stereotypes
    against them.  When the black kids cried victim, he wasn't totally innocent.

    Message: 81651
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Public Enemy
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:21:56

    I liked Daryl's post also.  There's nothing like "telling it like it is".

    Message: 81652
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist language
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:22:58

    There's a difference between what happens in real life and the abstract
    images of life that we form in our thoughts; and another difference between
    those abstract images and the language conventions we use to represent them.
    In each case there's a definite time lag between changes in external reality
    and the corresponding changes in how we represent that reality.

    A person's sex is often irrelevant, but it's an irrelevancy that refuses to
    go away.  Somebody pointed out that a person's sex is the first thing we
    notice about them, and the last thing we forget.  When we form a mental
    image of a person in some context, we arbitrarily assign them to one sex or
    the other without consciously thinking about it.  In our thoughts, we have
    to pick one or the other; we have no choice.  If it's a truck driver,
    usually our mental image will be male.  If females start displacing males in
    the trucking business, it will take a while for our mental habits to change.
    Even then, there's no pressing reason for those habits to change at all if
    over 50% of truckers are still male.

    Language is more conservative still.  We still talk about "knights in
    shining armor" and "reinventing the wheel" and other things from hundreds of
    years back, use ancient (and inappropriate) spellings, and so forth.
    Language takes a long while to catch up to modern realities.

    Message: 81653
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (2/5)
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:23:53

    While reality does work its way into language, it's normally slowed down by
    a process of filtration.  When a choice of pronoun startles the reader, he
    realizes that somebody must have deliberately circumvented that filtration
    process, otherwise the effect wouldn't be so jarring.  Changes in language
    normally *follow* changes in reality, in their own time, at a comfortable
    pace.  If the change seems abnormally fast, *uncomfortably* fast -- if the
    change even appears to be *leading* reality at times -- then he knows that
    somebody must be pushing an agenda.

    This is quite a lot of words attempting to explain a feeling, but the
    feeling is real and needs explaining.  Dean obviously has it too.  It's
    worth comparing the effect of the "she" pronoun in language with something
    quite different: a photograph.  If you saw the early Macintosh manuals, you
    may have noticed that every single picture showed a male user.  There were
    no women users at all.  This struck me as remarkably sexist, which was all
    the more surprising when many of the pictures showed users in a college
    environment.  Photographs do show reality literally, if selectively, and it
    would have been far better to include women as well as men.

    One difference between a photograph and language is that photography forces
    us to observe everything visible, while language only sketches in the
    essentials.  A picture or diagram showing a person pressing a button may
    also show a hand, a sleeve, a watch, maybe even the color of the wallpaper.

    Message: 81654
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (3/5)
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:24:51

    A written description includes none of these things, because they make no
    difference to how we operate something.  When we read, we form images from
    the words we're reading, and we fill in the other details for ourselves if
    necessary.  We're used to reading "he", and we've accepted through custom
    that "he" doesn't really "mean" anything about a person's sex in certain
    contexts.  When "she" is forced on us, it seems like an invasion of that
    image-territory that we thought was a blank slate reserved entirely for our
    own use.  Someone's barging in and drawing things on *our* slate!

    I know what this kind of change is trying to achieve, but I think it's
    politically unwise when it annoys people for no real gain.  In the battle of
    the sexes, it's an attack from an unexpected quarter.  It's as if a truce
    had been agreed on the battlefield, and then one of your factories behind
    the lines was hit by a sneak missile attack.  "Oh, the truce was only meant
    to cover the ground forces.  It's not our fault if you didn't expect to be
    vulnerable from the air as well."  But an argument like that will get
    hostilities going again.

    I agree with Dean's other points.  Usage says that "he" can mean "he or
    she", but in our minds, "she" is only used in speaking of a female.  It's
    reasonable enough for the female sex to demand to be included along with
    males, but in the reader's mind the writer seems to be *replacing* men with
    women.  This looks like both an unreasonable and a threatening demand.

    Message: 81655
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (4/5)
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:25:47

    Deborah Tannen ought to have something to say about the competitive aspects
    of that demand, but she fell foul of a similar mistake herself.  In her
    book, subtitled "Women and Men in Conversation", she repeatedly spoke of
    "women and men" in that order.  We're more used to the order "men and
    women".  "Women and men" isn't such a glaring difference, and it's often
    preferable in some sentences; but just about every occurrence of this phrase
    in her book put "women" first.  Tannen would have been better advised to use
    a more equal mixture of the two orders.  She of all people knows that men
    are more sensitive to the competitive aspect of messages than women are, and
    more likely to be annoyed by anything that could be interpreted as an
    aggressive move.

    This is where a lot of women go wrong in trying to gain equality.  They step
    forward and make a claim to some territory that they think is their fair
    share.  In women's minds, they think they're going to stop when they get
    their fair share; but in men's minds, all they see is that they're under
    attack.  When you're attacked, either you defend yourself and win, or you do
    nothing and lose.  Many women don't understand masculine thinking enough to
    see this point.  If they did, I think more of them would avoid irritating
    men with niggling things like replacing "he" with "she" when it doesn't even
    gain them anything of real value.

    Again, as Dean mentioned, the only real answer to the language problem is a
    new set of pronouns and possessives.

    Message: 81656
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/sexist (5/5)
    Date: 01/17/92  Time: 12:26:51

    This is a far more radical language change than using a different word
    already in existence, though paradoxically it could be more acceptable in
    the long run because it offers peaceful coexistence instead of continuing a
    cold war.  Since it has been proposed before, I don't know if the reason it
    failed was simply that it is so radical, or that it's hard to find suitable
    gender-free substitutes for "he/she", "him/her", "his/her", and "his/hers".
    You could put almost any made-up words in there ("blarg", "glurg", "quock",
    and "flum"), but they have to look something like the way we expect English
    pronouns and possessives to look.  Someone suggested "te", "tim", and "tis",
    but that didn't fly, perhaps because "tim" and "tis" are too obviously
    modeled on the masculine forms.  We've also seen people using "hir".
    Orthographically it's an equal mixture of "his" and "her", or "him" and
    "her", but phonologically it's indistinguishable from the feminine form
    "her" (unless they pronounce it "heer").  How about modeling something on
    the neuter form?  "Te", "tit", and "tits"?  No, I think women would object
    to that.  They might suspect that somebody was making fun.  Better get out
    the alphabet blocks and toss them up in the air again...

    Being on the "cutting edge of social awareness" must really be more like
    getting thrust unwillingly into the front line.  No matter what you write,
    somebody's bound to find some reason to complain about it!

    Message: 81657
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: In search of
    Subject: New posts
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 00:53:46

    Good Lord!  NOTHING new on Apollo for over twelve hours?  Was there a crash
    or something?

    Message: 81658
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 11:50:13

    I commented the other day that it was interesting that Archimedes and I
    could agree on so much while continuing to disagree on so much.  It seems
    you and I have a very similar situation.

    I agree with virtually everything you said in your posts.  --  Except for
    the premise you build on and the conclusion you reach.

    It would appear that your sensitivity to seeing "she" used generally (it's
    not really any more a "unisex" usage than "he" is; it's merely specific in
    the other direction) is greater than most of the folks I've run into.  I do
    not believe that the majority of readers find this as disturbing or
    offensive as you seem to.  Maybe you feel you've been attacked by a writer
    when she (!) uses a pronoun you hadn't expected, but others seem to simply
    pass it by.

    Your arguments boil down to one point, Gordon:  You wish to see the status
    quo maintained.  Or perhaps just the image that it is being maintained.
    That surprises me.

    Message: 81659
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Bulletins
    Subject: Beware! (1 of 15)
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 13:51:25

            Just kidding .......

    This is the only post. I heard so much about all these LONG posts .....
    thought I would join the crowd.

    Now, to see how many skipped my '1 of 15' post ......

    For all those who thought enough of me to bother ..... I give you one free
    ride to any hospital of your choise in this valley --- FREE.

    For all those who thought not enough of me to hit the 'skip' button ....
            you will be run over as I go Code 3 taking that user who won their
            free ambulance ride because
                                            "they cared".

            Sandy Sysop the Gimpettet
                    or just call me Queen G

    Message: 81660
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 16:09:42

    I read it twice, Sandy.  Do I get two free rides?

    [By the way, I hope you're feeling better and not a member of the Gimpettes
    for long.]

    Message: 81661
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:38:25

    I was quite disappointed there weren't 14 more posts.  It was just getting
    interesting.

    Hope you're looking after yourself and staying off that heel...

    Message: 81662
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/status quo 1/4
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:40:57

     BB>>Your arguments boil down to one point, Gordon:  You wish to see the
     BB>>status quo maintained.  Or perhaps just the image that it is being
     BB>>maintained.

    Ah, thanks for the straw man.  Now, where are my matches?  Here they are...

    If by the "status quo" you mean I'd like to keep women at home where they
    "belong", or in some inferior position, I think the opinions I've expressed
    here in the past are sufficient contradiction of that.  Furthermore, if it
    were true, I'd never have complained about the male-only pictures in that
    early Mac manual and called them "sexist".  I think that also covers the
    idea that I think documents ought to preserve the image of the status quo.

    As for being attacked by a writer who used a pronoun I hadn't expected, the
    truth is that I'd object a lot less to a writer who did that if her(!) main
    purpose in writing was to attack men.  The topic of sexism would then be out
    in the open and up for discussion, rather than putting in these little
    covert reminders of the sex war.

    Tannen, for example, was *not* out to complain about sexism, but wrote some
    very sensible and constructive books to help the two sexes understand one
    another instead of unwittingly antagonizing one another.  That's why I
    thought the disproportionate use of "women and men" was a subtle *mistake*
    on her part, and one that she might well be glad to reconsider.

    Message: 81663
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Status quo (2/4)
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:41:54

    My argument isn't against changing the status quo.  My argument is against
    particular *methods* of changing the status quo.  I don't think I'm alone in
    finding the pronoun substitution an irritant, since Dean found the same
    thing; and I thought Green's remark was telling also.  He said he liked to
    throw a "she" in there from time to time because it "wakes up the reader".
    This is quite true; it does.  But we have to ask what mood people are in
    when they're treated to a "rude awakening".  Does it help relations overall,
    or does irritation make people defensive?

    For this reason I'm also arguing against the *efficacy* of such methods of
    changing the status quo.  Suppose we say the use of "he" to mean both sexes
    has discriminated against women by pushing them into the background.  I
    don't believe the remedy for that is to get out the big stick that we
    euphemistically called "affirmative action" (read "reverse discrimination")
    and start putting "she" in instead.  That's just a continuation of the same
    old war, only this time we're giving an advantage to the other side.  I
    don't think the ultimate goal is to continue the war, while giving both
    sides an equal supply of armaments.  I think the ultimate goal is peace.

    In a broader sense, we can see what happens when the oppression of one group
    by another is countered by giving more weapons to the oppressed group.  Laws
    *against* racial discrimination have met with some opposition, but haven't
    aroused anywhere near as much hostility from white people as things like
    "quotas" and busing.

    Message: 81664
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Status quo (3/4)
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:43:02

    These latter actions may have short-term advantages, but in the long run
    they only perpetuate the war of race against race.  It's interesting to see
    that in South Africa, where whites have subjugated blacks for so long, we
    will probably see a black government oppressing a white minority before this
    decade is done.  This is what Arthur C. Clarke predicted over thirty years
    ago, but I'm not convinced that persecution of whites is any better than
    persecution of blacks.

    Going back to writing, it's quite possible to even things out by sprinkling
    an equal mixture of "he" and "she" liberally all over the page.
    ("Liberally" seems a good choice of adverb!)  That might work in a way, but
    the problem I see with it is that sex isn't really *relevant* to a great
    deal of writing, for just the same reason that no writer would bother
    telling the reader to push the button with the *right* hand unless there
    were some good reason for doing so.  As I mentioned in my piece on the
    Computer SIG, there's meaning implicit in almost anything we write: not only
    in the words themselves, but in the word order, in the choice of one synonym
    over another, in what we include and in what we omit.  Some of that meaning
    may be there unintentionally.  But I also think we should bear in mind how
    the reader might interpret what we say, what he might think is our reason
    for saying it, and how he's likely to react.  Even if we mix up our "he" and
    "she", it *reminds* the reader of the war.  Do we really want to do that, if
    doing so might only perpetuate the war?

    Message: 81665
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Status quo (4/4)
    Date: 01/18/92  Time: 17:43:31

    As a final counter to the idea that I'm fighting to preserve the status quo,
    I've actually suggested that the ultimate solution is a set of gender-free
    pronouns and possessives, although it's a radical change.  The best service
    we could do is to invent an acceptable set and push for their use.  The ones
    I already mentioned have problems of their own.  Anyone wanna be in the
    vanguard of this movement?  How about "shey", "shim", and "shis"?  Anyone
    have any other suggestions?

    Message: 81666
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon - "Heel"
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:34:38

    > Hope you're looking after yourself and staying off that heel...

    Gordon I will not tolerate you speaking of Cliff in this way.  :)

    Message: 81667
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 1/4
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:35:40

    > Ah, thanks for the straw man.  Now, where are my matches?

    Ha!

    > As for being attacked...

    That is exactly the problem!  You feel threatened by the notion of women --
    even unseen, hypothetical women -- appearing in business literature.  That
    to me reveals a deep-rooted sexism that cannot help but reveal itself in the
    work place and elsewhere.

    > Tannen, for example, was *not* out to complain about sexism...

    I cannot defend Deborah Tannen.  If she, as you claimed consistently used
    "women and men," she is, indeed, as sexist as the next fellow.  (!)

    Message: 81668
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 2/4
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:36:07

    > Does it help relations overall, or does irritation make people
    > defensive?

    Only those who have something to be defensive about.  If, in fact, a large
    proportion of readers are put off by reading "she" where traditional usage
    would have used "he," I suspect just as many readers are encouraged by its
    use.  In reality, most readers don't care at all.

    > I don't believe the remedy for that is to get out the big stick
    > that we euphemistically called "affirmative action" (read
    > "reverse discrimination") and start putting "she" in instead.
    > That's just a continuation of the same old war, only this time
    > we're giving an advantage to the other side.

    Now it's my turn to thank YOU for the straw man.

    I've never encouraged or espoused any sort of reverse discrimination.  All I
    suggest is that it's quite proper and acceptable to the majority of readers
    for writers to scatter "he" and "she" about freely.

    Message: 81669
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 3/4
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:36:31

    > ...the problem I see with it is that sex isn't really
    > *relevant* to a great deal of writing, for just the same reason
    > that no writer would bother telling the reader to push the
    > button with the *right* hand unless there were some good reason
    > for doing so.

    Has anyone but you suggested bringing sex into things when it isn't
    appropriate?  That's TWO of your straw men to my one.

    > ...I've actually suggested that the ultimate solution is a set
    > of gender-free pronouns and possessives ... How about "shey",
    > "shim", and "shis"?  Anyone have any other suggestions?

    In his _On_Writing_Well_ (a VERY good book, BTW!) William Zinsser says:

    Message: 81670
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 4/4
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 07:36:50

    "The pedants, of course, have other solutions.  they have proposed various
    unisex pronouns, deriving from Nordic or Angle-Saxon roots that only they
    have dug up, which they claim would fall easily into our speech if we just
    started teaching them in our schools and writing them in our writings.  One
    of their typical candidates is "thon," a third-person pronoun that applies
    to either gender and has a handy possessive ("thons") and reflexive
    ("thonself").  Maybe I don't speak for the average American, but I very much
    doubt that thon wants that word in thons language or that thon would use it
    thonself.  This is not how language changes."

    I agree!

    Message: 81671
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy Free Ride
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 09:59:25

    OK, if I get run over by a herd of wild children driving boom boxes, I will
    ask for you.

    Message: 81672
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/One
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 12:12:04

    One should use to learn "one" more often in conversation.

    Message: 81673
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Mr Archi
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 13:49:38

            You, of all people! You, the one trying to right the wrongs!
    You, who selflessly use your precious time and energy to educate the masses!

    You dare try to take advantage of an 'injured' Sysopette on 'Happy Pills'.
    In other words, the answer is "NO!"

    Message: 81674
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon (2 of 15)
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 13:59:26

            Now, for the ambulance ride ......
    I will arrive at the accident sight. There I will assess the Accident scence
    to be sure all is safe (for me, that is). I will then approach the injured
    party (you, of course). I will identify myself and ask if can help you.
    I then will check to make sure your airway is patent, you are breathing, and
    you have a pulse. I will then ask you your 'chief complaint'.
            A Secondary survey will then be performed. This starts with taking
    vitals (Blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, capillary refill,
    motor sensory of extremities, temp., Level of Consciousness). I now check
    your head and neck out by slowly moving my fingers through your hair,
    carressing every inch and slowly and gently moving my fingers to your hair
    line where a gentle massage is felt as I check for fractures. The contour of
    your face is stroked and touched ...........

    Message: 81675
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: News Today
    Subject: Birth announcement
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 14:36:11

    On 19th January 1992, to Chilly Willy and Cactus Flower:

        A daughter at 09:41, 7 1/2 oz., black and white like her mom.  This one
        insisted on burrowing up around mom's butt after she was born.  Had to
        keep showing her there was nothing to drink there, and she should be
        looking elsewhere.  I think she really wanted to play big sister and
        greet her younger brothers and sister as they came out.

        A son at 10:02, 7 1/2 oz., black like his mom's brother.  Had to pull
        the caul off this little guy's head so he didn't smother.  If you're
        born in a caul, doesn't that make you a witch?  Or is it just good luck?

        A son at 10:35, 7 1/2 oz., reddish black (we think) like his dad.  This
        was the feisty one of the bunch.  He insisted on coming out butt first.

        A daughter at 11:10, 7 1/4 oz., black and white, but with more black so
        at least we can tell her and her sister apart.  Both just as cute.

    Congratulations to Flower for her good timing, doing it on a Sunday morning.
    Mom and babies all doing fine, except that mom had just a momentary tummy
    upset.  Natural childbirth is a great way for humans to have babies too, but
    I think eating the afterbirth is better left to Shih-Tzus.

    Message: 81676
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/19/92  Time: 20:18:57

            Gordon, just to let you know how much I really do keep up on this
    board ..... I thought you were talking about your daughter.
            Cliff informed me otherwise.

    Message: 81678
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Sandy SysOp
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:15:04

    I *knew* your story would get even better as it went along!  Are there more
    checks on blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, and Level of
    Consciousness?  They ought to be watched carefully, otherwise they could all
    go through the roof...

    Oh BTW, I'm not sure if I mentioned our dog before on the board, so I don't
    think you missed anything.  We had quite a parade of well-wishers through
    the house today.  Most of them were female.  Most of them were under ten.
    It was a lot of fun.

    Message: 81679
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (1/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:16:27

     BB>>You feel threatened by the notion of women -- even unseen, hypothetical
     BB>>women -- appearing in business literature.  That to me reveals a deep-
     BB>>rooted sexism...

    It's all rooted in unconscious fear and hatred of my mother, a terrifyingly
    powerful figure who smothered me from infancy on.  Ever since I was a boy
    I've been frightened of women.  I'm even frightened of my daughter, and
    she's only eight.  I've tried to hide this fear and loathing all my life...

    I was going to go on in this vein of heavy sarcasm, but I seriously don't
    think I need to do any more than stand upon my record, while warming my
    hands in the blaze.  I hope the heat doesn't melt the record.  They're only
    made of plastic...

     BB>>I cannot defend Deborah Tannen.  If she, as you claimed consistently
     BB>>used "women and men," she is, indeed, as sexist as the next fellow. (!)

    Ah, here you really have got me!  I did indeed fail to see that this was
    "sexist".  I don't want to bash Deborah Tannen, because on the whole she did
    a very creditable job.  I think the lesson here is that somebody must have
    almost convinced me (and possibly Dr. Tannen too) that when men try to gain
    an ascendancy over women, that's "sexism", but when women try to gain an
    ascendancy over men, it isn't.  Clearly they can't have it both ways.

    Message: 81680
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (2/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:17:33

    I don't know where this contradictory idea came from, but to me it proves
    more strongly that someone, somewhere, is trying to continue the war in the
    guise of peace.

     BB>>In reality, most readers don't care at all [about the use of "she"]

    How do we know that?  Has anybody done a survey?  Lots of people keep their
    gripes to themselves, unless they're asked.  It may be significant that two
    out of three people commenting on the topic who aren't professional writers
    (Green, Dean and myself) said they felt they were being hit over the head.

     BB>>I've never encouraged or espoused any sort of reverse discrimination.

    I agree, you haven't.  But this wasn't a straw man; I wasn't specifically
    accusing you of doing so.  To explain why, I'd better tie it in with...

     BB>>Has anyone but you suggested bringing sex into things when it isn't
     BB>>appropriate?  That's TWO of your straw men to my one.

    If nobody was concerned with the topic of sex in writing, then why on earth
    would anyone bother changing "he" to "she"?  "He" has been perfectly
    serviceable for centuries.  If it ain't broke, why fix it?  Only because
    somebody insisted on "bringing sex into things".

    Message: 81681
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (3/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:18:47

    Words don't just have a literal meaning; they're also very evocative.  They
    hook onto little ideas and feelings in our skulls and drag them up to the
    surface.  They do this with varying degrees of power, depending on the
    context.  An unusual word is more eyecatching; it has more power than a run-
    of-the-mill word.  When we read "he" in a context where gender doesn't
    matter, it's "usual and customary", as the doctor would say about his fees.
    We don't think much about the sex of the person referred to.  It might be at
    the back of our mind, but we know that "he" isn't meant to exclude women.
    In these contexts, the power of the word "he" to denote a male person and
    exclude female persons has been largely eroded.  The word "she", however,
    retains its full power to denote a female person and exclude male persons.
    When we read "she", a woman comes fully to the forefront of the mind.

    If there's a mixture of "he" and "she" in the text, "she" is noticeable,
    whereas "he" isn't.  So the reader ends up with the *feeling* that reverse
    discrimination is being practiced, even when the mixture is an equal one.
    At the very least the reader knows that quotas are in effect, and *why* they
    are in effect; and none of this has anything to do with the subject at hand.

    Moreover, the constant switching between "she" and "he" keeps the reader
    conscious of the issue of sex.  It can't fade decently into the background
    when it's continually being stirred up.  This is why I say that even when
    reverse discrimination or irrelevant discussion of sex is not consciously
    intended, many readers are inclined to feel otherwise.

    Message: 81682
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (4/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:20:00

    We know why this is happening.  Somebody has been indulging in activism.
    They've picked up the well-worn and comfortable word "he" and held it up at
    arm's length as if it were something the cat dragged in, saying "Look!
    Sexism!" when nothing of the kind was ever meant.

    Surely any writer must realize that sex *has* been made into an issue in
    many kinds of writing where it never was before.  Can it really be possible
    to mix up "he" and "she" automatically, without even thinking about the
    implications of sex?  Isn't the writer now obligated to install an extra
    counter at the back of the brain that says "let me see, I've used "she" a
    few times recently, so now it's time to give the guys a chance"?  Isn't sex
    just another unwanted issue that the writer is now forced to worry about?

    And if you're looking for a *genuine* reason why this he-she business
    irritates me, it isn't just how I feel when I read it.  It's also because I
    have to bother my head with this irrelevant rubbish when I write something
    that's going to be read by a critical audience -- which sometimes happens.

    I'm sure William Zinsser knows a lot about Writing Well, but if he says the
    artificial introduction of new words "is not how language changes", he's
    only telling us half the truth.  If he thinks the likes and dislikes of the
    average speaker will keep a new word forcibly out of the language, he hasn't
    been noticing everything that's going on.

    Message: 81683
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (5/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:21:16

    I have to go so far with Zinsser as to agree that most change in a language
    takes place quite spontaneously, according to some mystic consensus among
    its ordinary speakers.  It's very difficult for academics to influence the
    finer points of usage among those ordinary speakers.  Language purists can
    jump up and down about bad grammar and spelling and ignorance of vocabulary,
    while the common man goes on his way with his "ain't got none" and his "me
    and him snuck outside" and his chaise "lounge" and his "nucular" weapons.

    However, there's a big difference in the way new *vocabulary* enters the
    language.  Here people are eager to grab at anything new, perhaps because it
    sounds clever, or it shows they're keeping up with the latest trend, or just
    because anything novel is interesting and relieves tedium.  Here too, people
    do regurgitate what they see and hear in the mass media.  Let something once
    become a buzzword, and suddenly everybody is using it.  If it's state-of-
    the-art, people like its look and feel.  How about "political correctness"
    itself?  How many people knew what the word "ecology" meant twenty years
    ago, and how many could spell "environment"?  These aren't new words, of
    course; but they are new to the common man.  A long while ago, I suppose few
    people knew what the word "alibi" meant.  Today people use it all the time,
    although many of them obviously still haven't a clue what it means.

    A woman in the *Reader's Digest* said she told her husband he was "selecting
    too many fried foods" in a self-service cafeteria.  Why did she say this to
    him?  Do we really "select" foods in a cafeteria, or do we just "take" them?

    Message: 81684
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Bill/sexism (6/6)
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 02:22:32

    Is this customary English, or was she imitating the vocabulary in all those
    healthy-eating articles we read in the newspaper?  I've also been offered a
    "beverage" on many occasions when I'd far rather have had a plain old
    ordinary drink.  How did this pompous word get into common usage?  It had to
    be because some anti-alcohol nut was agitating to do away with the demon
    "drink".  It certainly wasn't part of the natural process of spontaneous
    language change.

    So I think a new set of pronouns would stand an excellent chance of success.
    Novelty alone would encourage people to pick them up, apart from the broad
    sympathy with the reason for using them.  Our task isn't the difficult one
    of getting the guy in the street to use them in everyday conversation -- not
    to start with.  It's only necessary to get professional writers and
    journalists and the mass media to start using them, and that's a lot easier.
    Writers imitate one another all the time, they have guidelines that they
    follow, and they think about why they're writing something.  If that weren't
    true, we wouldn't be seeing all this "she" and "her" sprinkled all over the
    place.  I can't justify including that novelty in Mr. Zinsser's spontaneous
    ideas of "how language changes".  It's artificial and forced.

    What we need is, most of all, *consensus* on which new words to use; but
    support from segments of the written media is equally important.  If we had
    those two things, I think a new set of pronouns would take off like
    wildfire.  Or like a burning straw man.

    Message: 81685
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Beau's One
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:31:48

    > One should use to learn "one" more often in conversation.

    Perhaps, one way or another, one will.

    Message: 81686
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon's New Babies
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:32:06

    Congratulations to mother and father.  And grandparents Gordon and Jane,
    too!

    Message: 81687
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 1/3
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:37:47

    > ...when men try to gain an ascendancy over women, that's
    > "sexism", but when women try to gain an ascendancy over men, it
    > isn't.  Clearly they can't have it both ways.

    I guess this one didn't get sufficiently incinerated.  Where is the Wicked
    Witch of the West you need her?  I'm not advocating ascendancy; only
    fairness.

    > It may be significant that two out of three people commenting
    > on the topic who aren't professional writers (Green, Dean and
    > myself) said they felt they were being hit over the head.

    Make that two our of four; I've been commenting, too.  And one of your two
    indicated he felt the browbeating was mild.

    > If nobody was concerned with the topic of sex in writing, then
    > why on earth would anyone bother changing "he" to "she"?  "He"
    > has been perfectly serviceable for centuries.  If it ain't
    > broke, why fix it?

    Well, let me comment on this in tandem with the following remark:

    Message: 81688
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 2/3
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:38:11

    > Words don't just have a literal meaning; they're also very
    > evocative.  They hook onto little ideas and feelings in our
    > skulls and drag them up to the surface.

    First of all, you've taken my "concerned with sex" statement out of context
    entirely.  You brought up the question of why a specific gender should be
    mentioned without a clear need any more than one (That's for you, Beau!)
    should mention pushing a button with the right hand when the left will do
    just as well.  I agreed that it shouldn't.

    Now, for the main event.  A person's sex, as you've noted, is one of the
    initial things we notice when we meet him or her for the first time.  When
    it's necessary to bring a hypothetical person into a piece of writing, the
    writer is introducing that person to the reader.  I believe it's helpful to
    make that person a real as possible.  If the people we invent for business
    writing are to be real they must reflect the real work place.  Therefore, a
    sizable number of those people should be explicitly female.

    Message: 81689
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language 3/3
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:38:46

    I'm glad to see you recognize the evocative and connotative power of words.
    --  That is words except for "he."  This particular word, you insist carries
    with it, in a general sense, no sexual baggage (You know.  The suitcase
    you'd just as soon they NOT x-ray at the airport.).  How can this be?  If
    "she" carries such strong and disturbing images with it, how can "he" be so
    connotation free?

    The answer, of course, is that it is not and cannot.  It ain't broke?  Are
    you sure?

    Message: 81690
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: News Today
    Subject: In Other News...
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 06:39:23

    Is this really the most interesting thing we have to talk about?

    How is it that a large majority of those surveyed nationally still feel it's
    the President's job to do something about the economy?  Why don't they rag
    on Congress for the economic mess?  Why don't they see how President Bush
    has tried to be accommodating and cooperative with the Democratic majority
    in Congress only to have George Mitchell and Thomas Foley grind his face
    into the mud?

    How can the federal government continue to justify such huge defense
    expenditures?  Why are we so reluctant, now that we supposedly have no major
    enemies, to pull back our troops and put them to work on the serious
    problems we have here at home?

    Why can't Arizona elect a decent Governor?  How is it that every
    non-appointed Governor we get turns out to be bum and a crook?  Or is it
    just Republican Governors?  Should we have voted for Terry Goddard instead?

    Message: 81691
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: last
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 07:07:51

    Aaah!  Cut to the quick!

    Message: 81692
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Politics
    Subject: What?
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 09:40:08

            No comments on Senator DeeWeeinies 15% FLAT tax rate proposal?
    A flat $4000.00 deduction PER member of the family.  $25% for all earnings
    over 100,000.00.  Cut the IRS in HALF.  The Tax form the size of a post
    card.

            No comments?

    Message: 81693
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: (s)he
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 10:46:55

    I've read all of Bill Burkett's messages and I still think it's rude to use
    feminine pronouns for people of unknown gender.

    Message: 81694
    Author: $ Green Lantern
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Flat Rate
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 12:51:44

    Income tax. I'm fer it.

    Message: 81695
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: In search of
    Subject: bass guitar
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 16:17:29

    If anyone here knows where I can borrow or rent a bass guitar for a couple
    months, please leave me mail here.

    Message: 81696
    Author: $ Sandy SysOp
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: (s)he
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 16:49:10

            I have not read all of Bill Burkett's messages and I do think it is
    rude to use male pronouns for people of unkown gender.

    (this message comes from a female)

    Well ..... Gordon, where are these 'new' pronouns you were talking about?
    I need one for someone of unkown gender as I am sure the pronoun 'it' is
    out.

    Message: 81698
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Peter's tired rant
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 20:14:04

    Just give it up, no one is listening.

    Message: 81699
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: 15%
    Date: 01/20/92  Time: 20:20:50

    That would have reduced my 1989 tax bill.

    Message: 81700
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Sandy
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 00:58:30

    "Shey", "shim", and "shis"?  Open to suggestions...

    Message: 81701
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill (1/2)
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 00:59:44

     BB>>I'm not advocating ascendancy; only fairness.

    I'm sure that's true.  My comments aren't aimed at your motives, Bill.
    They're aimed at a specific practice, and what I'm trying to say is that
    sometimes an audience doesn't receive things the way they were intended.  It
    falls into the great category of things we call "communication problems".

    OK, two out of four people felt annoyed.  Now Michael made that three out of
    five.  Knock off a bit for a "mild" browbeating; that's two and half out of
    five.  Even if the objectors were a minority, I'd still be concerned about
    something that annoyed a *significant* minority.  Otherwise we might use
    that thinking to excuse other things that "only" annoyed a minority.

     BB>>I believe it's helpful to make that person as real as possible.

    I think there's a separate issue here.  When we write about what people do,
    it's often clearer to focus in on a specific example of a person and talk
    about that person.  A hypothetical individual, but a "definite" person.
    When we do this, we create a character from our imagination and we fill in
    details, like a specific name and job.  "Sue is a sales manager."  It
    doesn't matter who and what the person is; it could be "Ted is a draftsman"
    who also needs to know how to use our product.  The detail is there only to
    make the person real in the reader's mind.  When we invent "definite"
    people, we should certainly mix their identities to reflect reality.

    Message: 81702
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill (2/2)
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 01:00:52

    This is the same as my observation about the Mac manual, where pictures show
    "definite" persons.  With a definite person we have to be concerned with
    sex; we have no choice.  In many text passages, though, we're not going to
    that trouble of inventing a fictitious character.  We're only concerned with
    the human being at large: with an "indefinite" person.  This is where the
    problem area lies.

    I don't say the word "he" carries no implications of gender.  What I do say
    is that in this context of the indefinite person, its gender implications
    are far weaker than those of "she".

    As a kind of indefinite pronoun, I don't think "he" is broke.  The most I'd
    say is that it's a bit bent and rusty in places.  Some people point out that
    it still works, while others keep shouting about its creakiness.  The real
    trouble is that there is no ideal solution to satisfy everybody, not a
    solution that's also painless.  We can write gender-free English with our
    present words if we want to, but if we do it consistently it gets a little
    wordier, or a little clumsier, or a little less clear and direct.  Then the
    reader suffers.  Or else we offend some people by using "he" all the time,
    or a different lot of people by calling an indefinite person "she".  That's
    why I suggest the only ultimate way out is a radical one.

    Oh, thanks for your baby congrats.  Now I'm trying to decide whether I
    should grow my beard again to fit the Grandfather image.

    Message: 81703
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Symington etc.
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 01:02:05

    I'm sure we shouldn't have voted for Goddard instead.  I'd far rather see
    personal integrity in a politician, but given Hobson's choice between a
    crook who steals a few people's money and an "honest" zealot who steals
    everyone's, I'll take the crook.  One reason for this is that the damage
    done by the crook is usually limited and repairable, and there's a chance of
    bringing him to book for it.  You can never do this with the zealot, and the
    damage he does can take decades to repair.

    I must have missed Senator Weenie's tax cut proposal.  Sounds interesting.
    The difficulty with tax cut proposals is forcing government to make the
    necessary spending cuts to accommodate them.  Too often the form of these
    proposals gets accepted, while the content is gutted.  25% somehow magically
    gets bumped up to 45% in the interest of making the result "revenue
    neutral".  We need proposals to remain strongly "revenue negative".  This
    was part of the trouble with the tax "reform" that was the great non-event
    of the eighties.

    "Revenue" can be a slimy word because it's used to try to delude people into
    looking at losses upside-down.  Some newspapers in the past have annoyed me
    by discussing the effects of tax changes in terms of revenue all the time,
    and speaking of "revenue losses".  This is weasel wording.  A "revenue loss"
    is not a loss at all.  The money doesn't vanish down the drain.  But it
    wouldn't be right to call it a "gain" for the people either.  It's
    *re*gaining money that was rightfully theirs all along.

    Message: 81704
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Flat tax proposal
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 05:42:14

    Sounds good to me, but 10% would be even better. THen force government to
    live within it's means,beginning with congressmens' salary cuts and zero
    based expense accounts that call for an accounting of every dollar spent.

    Message: 81705
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Michael/guitar
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 05:44:06

    Glendale Music Center usually has instruments for rent. You might try them.

    Message: 81706
    Author: $ Paul Savage
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Peter
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 05:51:52

     Peter, I think you are beating a dead horse. The Mark Adkins by any name
    issue is old news. It is history, done, over with. It seems that you are
    standing alone out in left field with a hockey stick in your hands.
     Cliff did what he thought was the best thing for the good of ALL Apollo
    users. He did not ask for a vote. He did not ask for comments. He acted as
    the sysop and the owner of this system and all of it's equipment.
     It seems to me that, whether we agree or not, the very least we can do is
    respect Cliff and his wishes so far as his property is concerned. Since you
    are so vehemently opposed to his operation, might I suggest that you start
    up a BBS of your own, run it any way you see fit, and walk a mile in
    Cliff's shoes before
    you continue your harrassment of him.

    Message: 81707
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: For sale
    Subject: Pewter Star Ship
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 10:33:56

            The Franklin Mint Pewter 1701 Enterprize Star Ship from Star Trek.
    This is a model of the original TV series Enterprise.  From Franklin Mint
    this would cost $207.75 total.
            Now, I have one for sale at $125.00!!!!!

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    Message: 81708
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Gordon-Language
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 12:51:05

    Well, it seems we've come to an impasse on this topic.  I find little to
    argue with in your most recent posts except for the notion that "he" is less
    offensive than "she."  It is just as clear to me that "he" is offensive to a
    great many readers as it apparently is to you that it is not.

    And I wouldn't put too much stock in the number of Apollonians who have
    expressed agreement with you.  I believe they are most likely being
    persuaded by your accent rather than your arguments.  :^D

    Message: 81709
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon on Goddard
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 12:51:31

    Well put re Goddard.  You know, I don't recall him standing for much of
    anything except the Gran Prix, Square One and the northeast location for the
    Desert Sky Pavilion.

    What amazes me about the Symington affair is the poll that indicated
    something like 40% of Arizonans feel he should resign.  40%!  How did these
    folks come to this conclusion?  Perhaps a more important issue is why was
    the question asked in the first place?  And why doesn't the media give more
    details on these surveys:  How large the sample was and whether it was
    statistically significant; the margin of error; what, exactly, was asked;
    who paid for the survey?

    I've followed the news -- its presentation as well as it content -- closely
    for years.  It seems to me increasingly shallow and biased.  Not biased
    against any particular political view, but biased toward the so-called
    "human interest" aspects of stories and the most sensational possible
    interpretations of events.

    Very disturbing.

    Message: 81710
    Author: $ Bill Burkett
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Flat Tax
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 12:51:46

    I heard only a brief report of Senator DeConweenie's flat tax proposal, but
    it sounded like it was a flat tax in name only.  There sure seemed to be an
    awful lot of exceptions.  Perhaps I'll call his office and see if I can get
    a copy.

    Message: 81711
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Flat rate
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:06:36

    Cliff> No comments on Senator DeeWeeinies 15% FLAT tax rate proposal?
    A flat $4000.00 deduction PER member of the family.  $25% for all earnings
    over 100,000.00.  Cut the IRS in HALF.  The Tax form the size of a post
    card.

    I hadn't heard of it, but I don't trust DeConnivingcini any further than I
    could swing a baseball bat.  In politics, "the more noble-sounding the
    proposal, the more nefarious the purpose."

    I am opposed to the proposal as described above.  I am opposed to ANY "tax
    reform" which falls short of restoring Constitutional taxation.  ANY tax
    system, however reformed, which allows wages to be taxed is flatly illegal
    under the U.S. Constitution.  [This is my opinion based upon my research.  I
    do not give legal advice.]  Additionally, any "reform" of this illegal
    system does nothing but reinforce the falsehood that a tax on individual
    wages is legally enforceable and gives weight to the politician's argument
    that "the people supported it," when in fact the people are supporting the
    lesser of existing evils out of sheer desperation and ignorance of the
    Constitution.

    I wish people would stop falling for these "easy way out" schemes.  There is
    no "easy way out."  There are only "easy ways further in" and one way --
    only one way -- out:  RESTORE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT.

    Message: 81712
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: MLK 1/3
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:08:15

    So much for Martin Luther King Jr.'s purported doctrine of non-violence.
    When people cannot espouse their viewpoint, however warped and hateful, on
    the courthouse steps or the steps of the Captol Building without being
    pelted with rocks and bottles and threatened with bodily harm by an unruly
    mob, the mob's commitment to individual civil rights must be questioned.

    I am adamantly opposed to a paid Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.  Though I
    don't think we need a holiday honoring Civil Rights leaders (we have the
    Fourth of July holiday already; anything additional would seem both
    superfluous and a little too ideologically specific), I would nonetheless
    support a general holiday honoring those who have fought for individual (not
    collective) rights.  I would do so, frankly, as a sop to those who think we
    need to honor them more than we do already, not because *I* think we need to
    honor them more.  And I would do this reluctantly, because I don't think we
    can afford another paid holiday.

    I am opposed to a specific Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday for the simple
    reason that the supporters of it are lying about it:  it is not for the
    purpose of honoring Civil Rights, nor is it for the purpose of honoring a
    man who fought for Civil Rights.  It is for the purpose of honoring the
    alleged 'right' of LEGAL PLUNDER which developed out of the Civil Rights
    Movement.  It would stand as a memorial to LEGAL PLUNDER for all time, a
    rallying point not against bigotry, but against any suggestion that

    Message: 81713
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: MLK 2/3
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:10:01

    government is and must be prohibited from robbing us all for the benefit of
    a few.  It would stand as a monument to Socialism and as a clarion call to
    Communism.

    I honor Martin Luther King, Jr. for making us think about the stupidity and
    hatefulness and self-destructiveness of bigotry.  I also despise him for
    being either a Communist or a Communist fool; for accepting the support and
    counsel of Communists, for inaugerating an entire racial culture of
    ideological Communism, for preaching the doctrine of collectivism instead of
    individual liberty and responsibility, for demanding legal plunder instead
    of the opportunity to produce, for advocating equality of results instead of
    equality of opportunity.

    I honor Rosa Parks, too, for having the courage to refuse, under threat of
    draconian legal penalties, to give up her seat on a bus to a white man.  (My
    wife figures Rosa was just having a bad day and decided not to take any more
    crap, but that's irrelevant -- she stuck by her guns and it took *courage*,
    a lot more courage than most American sheeple exhibit when faced with
    government-backed social or political oppression.)  In my view her act was
    an act in support of individual rights and she should have her name
    inscribed upon the roll of freedom fighters right beside Martin Luther King,
    Jr.  There are many others whose acts of courage in support of *individual*
    rights have made us think and question the validity both of

    Message: 81714
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: MLK 3/3
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:11:33

    our motives and the motives of government, and such thinking is always good.

    So if we *have* to honor something or someone with a holiday, let us honor
    our inherited and unalienable rights secured to us by the Constitution of
    the United States and let us honor those who have fought for recognition of
    those *individual* rights.  Let us honor ALL those who have advanced the
    cause of *individual* rights.  And let us reject those who would cynically
    and with a hidden agenda hold up one man, a collectivist, a Communist, or at
    the very least one of those fools Lenin called "useful idiots," as a desired
    symbol for the present and future ideology of America.

    I don't identify much with Julian Sanders, but he is right about one thing:
    None of the suggestions above are or ever will be acceptable to the majority
    of MLK holiday supporters parading through downtown Phoenix or downtown
    Denver.  I offer this fact as further indication of their hidden agenda.  It
    is not their objective to get us to support *rights* (if it were,
    hate-mongers like the KKK would have just as much right to speak as they
    do).  It is their objective to get us to support their *ideological*
    *agenda*, and they are going to get us to support it if they have to ram it
    down our throats.

    Message: 81715
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Zealotry
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:12:51

    Gordon: "I'd far rather see personal integrity in a politician, but given
    Hobson's choice between a crook who steals a few people's money and an
    "honest" zealot who steals everyone's, I'll take the crook.  One reason for
    this is that the damage done by the crook is usually limited and repairable,
    and there's a chance of bringing him to book for it.  You can never do this
    with the zealot, and the damage he does can take decades to repair.

    Uh, what is an "'honest' zealot" and how does such an individual steal
    everyone's money differently than the crook?  Why can you never bring him to
    book for it?  Why does the damage by the "honest" zealot take decades to
    repair, compared to the crook?

    Sorry, Gordon, but that paragraph left me wondering who and what you were
    talking about.  Are you casting Terry Goddard in the role of the "honest"
    zealot?  If you are I won't quibble, I suppose, but it seems to me the
    appellation (appears to) fit someone like Mecham or Charles Keating better.

    And then again, what's wrong with an "honest" zealot in government who
    really is a zealot about being, and requiring, honesty?

    Message: 81716
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Gordon/Tax Reform
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:14:54

    Gordon:  "We need proposals to remain strongly "revenue negative".  This was
    part of the trouble with the tax "reform" that was the great non-event of
    the eighties."

    Well, yeah, that's true.  But the biggest trouble with the tax reform of the
    eighties was that it was written by the IRS and signed off by a Congress
    that didn't bother to read it.  However, it did add a layer of bureaucracy
    to the IRS which their victims may use in self-defense with some success
    (Form 911 and the Taxpayer's Protection Act, for example).

    The problem with all these tax "reforms" and wasting time trying to get a
    "revenue negative" tax reform, etc., is that all such programs miss the
    point and send people off spinning their wheels instead of addressing the
    root problem.  You can't have "revenue negative" taxation because if the IRS
    takes less money out of the economy than the FED prints up, you get
    inflation.  All questions of who gets taxed and how much are a red herring
    designed to divert attention: as long as we have an illegal debt-based
    monetary system, the IRS MUST rob the economy of practically everything the
    FED prints up, else inflation goes hyper.

    WE NEED TO RESTORE LAWFUL MONEY, not waste time trying to figure out how to
    make a fraudulent and unlawful system work or how to avoid paying the
    INEVITABLE penalty fraudulent money exacts from us (higher taxes and
    eventual bust).

    Message: 81717
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Paul/Tax Reform 1/2
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:16:50

    Paul Savage:  "Sounds good to me, but 10% would be even better. THen force
    government to live within it's means, beginning with congressmens' salary
    cuts and zero based expense accounts that call for an accounting of every
    dollar spent."

    Wouldn't work.  I support what you say, but the objective is reducing taxes.
     As long as the FED prints up worthless paper money and lends it into the
    economy as debt-money, taxes cannot be reduced without triggering inflation.
     And the farther along the current road we travel, i.e., the more money that
    is printed up and lent into the economy, the higher taxes are going to get.
    If they are ever reduced significantly, inflation is going to take off.
    When taxes get to the point that we simply can no longer pay them, inflation
    is going to take off anyway.

    The *only* alternative under this monetary system is out of our hands:  When
    the FED lowers the interest rate to near zero, and the economy does not
    restart, then people are not borrowing money so the FED is not printing
    money, so what taxes there may be is simply removing money from the economy
    -- the economy stops dead in its tracks.

    Either alternative results in starvation, food riots, anarchy, martial law,
    terrorism, totalitarianism, and ultimately war -- war against anyone, for
    any reason or no reason, so long as it gets the economy moving again.

    Message: 81718
    Author: $ Archi Medes
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Paul/Tax Reform 2/2
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:17:31

    That is the inevitable price which must be paid for pursuing a fraudulent
    monetary policy.  There is no help for it short of kicking the FED out and
    restoring lawful money.  Period.

    Message: 81719
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Arch's system
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 13:33:21

    OK, let's grant that the situation is as you say it is, and that it should
    be as it says it is.  Do you or any of your co-researchers have a plan to
    convert the situation from one to the other?

    Message: 81720
    Author: $ Fred Smith
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill B/Slimington
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 15:59:30

    I've seen nothing shallow in the coverage of Slimington's current and former
    doings.  In fact, for as complicated as  the subject of the developments,
    and limited partnerships, and loaning vs investing, and a myriad of other
    details I think they have done an excellent job of putting the info out in a
    clear and concise format.  The RTC lawyers said it best when the
    characterized Slimington as "blatantly self-dealing".  He is nothing but a
    smart version of Mecham.

    Message: 81721
    Author: $ Michael James
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill Burkett
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 16:32:36

    My opinion that it's rude and distracting to use feminine pronouns for
    people of unknown gender goes back to the first time I encountered one.
    Your arguments only confirm my belief that this ungrammatical practice is
    intended to distract ("wake up") the reader with issues that are usually
    irrelevant to the content.

    Message: 81722
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Bill/she
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 17:19:48

      I did not support Gordon because of his accent. I supported his position
    because it has also been my own position since first exposed to the use of
    'she' where no delineation of gender was called for. I probably wouldn't
    have said anything about it on my own because it isn't a big issue to me,
    but I didn't want to let Gordon think he was alone when we was not.
      See You Later,
        Dean H.

    Message: 81723
    Author: $ Dean Hathaway
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Japan
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 17:27:56

      Unfortunately some of the Japanese have reacted to Iacocca's shrill,
    self-serving, rants and given his ilk exactly the kind of ammunition they
    dreamed of with the recent statements demeaning American workers. The
    Japanese buy as much from America, per capita, as we buy from them. Since
    our economy is twice as big as theirs they would have to buy twice as much
    per capita for the trade to be balanced. Rather than admit this, and further
    admit that maybe we should be trying to sell the Japanese something other
    than cars, which they make so well themselves, Iacocca throws his weight
    around and tries to get the American government to force his cars down
    Japan's throat. If that doesn't work he wants a holy war. He sounds
    amazingly like Hitler when he speaks of the Japanese.
      See You Later,
       Dean H.

    Message: 81724
    Author: $ Beauregard Dog
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Iaccoca/Japs
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 19:57:32

    He *is* of that generation...

    Message: 81725
    Author: $ Gordon Little
    Category: Politics
    Subject: Archi/zealots
    Date: 01/21/92  Time: 23:51:21

    Somebody who really was a zealot about honesty would be an honest zealot
    without the quotation marks.  Nothing wrong with that.  I was talking about
    an "'honest' zealot" (in quotes) who steals everybody's money by calling it
    "taxes", and does it with apparent sincerity because it's all in the name of
    "income redistribution" or "social justice" or whatever today's socialist
    buzzword is.  It doesn't matter that most of the money doesn't end up in his
    personal pocket; we're still the losers.  And outside of a revolution, I've
    never seen a politician brought to book just for taxing a country to death,
    as long as it was all done through the accepted mechanism of government.

    Message: 81726
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Vote
    Subject: by Fred Smith
    Date: 01/22/92  Time: 00:30:35

    You've no doubt heard something of the Recent visit to Japan by Bush and
    friends to talk to the Japanese about the situation regarding auto imports.

    How serious a problem do you think the Auto Import "problem" from Japan
    and the rest of the foreign countries is?

    [A] It's blown way out of proportion!  It's not a big deal at all. I'm not
        concerned.

    [B] It's a bit of a problem for the U.S. but I can live with it.

    [C] It's one of the basic problems confronting our country today. I think
        something should be done about it one of these days.

    [D] Given the $40 Billion trade deficit it causes, it's just about the
        biggest problem the U.S. faces. I think we need action NOW!!

    Message: 81727
    Author: $ Apollo SysOp
    Category: Vote
    Subject: Last
    Date: 01/22/92  Time: 00:36:21

            That last post was the new [V]ote question uploaded by Fred Smith.
    You can find the [V]ote in the [M]ain menu.  Please consider Fred's poll
    question and cast your [V]ote.
            As always, what YOU [V]ote for is totaly private... I don't even
    know what you select.

    *=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SysOp *=*  <-clif-

    P.S. Fred also uploaded another question that will follow this one.

    Public Bulletin Board command:EQ

    You chose Question?

    Subject:Dog & Savage

    Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
     1:     You both mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
     2:from the last few days and saw no post by Petrisko. Maybe it scrolled by me?
     3:
     4:     Or maybe Cliff has done a little "housecleaning" since Petrisko was
     5:last on. :)    :)    :)
     6:
     7:

    Edit command:S

    Saving message...
    The message is 81728

    Public Bulletin Board command:E$

    You chose $tatus users only

    Subject:Mark Adkins

    Enter a line containing only an <*> to stop
     1:Mark is a very good devil's advocate.  He is intelligent.  If he got under
     2:your skin then perhaps you learned a little something even if it was to
     3:bolster your original argument.
     4:
     5:        Out of all of the users on this board I have the most reason to be
     6:mad at Mark Adkins but I find it is easier and wiser to forgive.  I am an
     7:atheist.
     8:
     9:        I think the rule about doing an occasional log-in under an alias is
    10:both fun and funny.  Some of my favorite posts were from mystery users.
    11:Some damn good messages came about from those unknowns.  This rule reminds
    12:me of the security guards (rent-a-cops) who like to think up stupid rules so
    13:they have something to enforce.  I can't see harm in it.
    14:
    15:It is part of BBSing, a part of the fun.  Now the shields are UP and have
    16:been.  Pity.
    17:
    18:I guess people think it camp to call themselves Xtians but cannot back it up
    19:in thought OR action.
    20:
    21:I have a friend who has been trying to get on and post but to no avail.  I
    22:think he lost interest in it and the last time he spoke to me he said
    2 lines left
    23:he was going to try another board.        Rod
    1 line left
    24:end

    Edit command:L1

     1:Mark is a very good devil's advocate.  He is intelligent.  If he got under
     2:your skin then perhaps you learned a little something even if it was to
     3:bolster your original argument.
     4:
     5:        Out of all of the users on this board I have the most reason to be
     6:mad at Mark Adkins but I find it is easier and wiser to forgive.  I am an
     7:atheist.
     8:
     9:        I think the rule about doing an occasional log-in under an alias is
    10:both fun and funny.  Some of my favorite posts were from mystery users.
    11:Some damn good messages came about from those unknowns.  This rule reminds
    12:me of the security guards (rent-a-cops) who like to think up stupid rules so
    13:they have something to enforce.  I can't see harm in it.
    14:
    15:It is part of BBSing, a part of the fun.  Now the shields are UP and have
    16:been.  Pity.
    17:
    18:I guess people think it camp to call themselves Xtians but cannot back it up
    19:in thought OR action.
    20:
    21:I have a friend who has been trying to get on and post but to no avail.  I
    22:think he lost interest in it and the last time he spoke to me he said
    23:he was going to try another board.        Rod

    Edit command:S

    Saving message...
    The message is 81729

    Public Bulletin Board command:UIP

    Message to update (81470-81729):81728

    Edit command:L1

     1:     You both mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
     2:from the last few days and saw no post by Petrisko. Maybe it scrolled by me?
     3:
     4:     Or maybe Cliff has done a little "housecleaning" since Petrisko was
     5:last on. :)    :)    :)

    Edit command:E1

     1:     You both mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
    Find text:     You both
    Replace text:You two

     1:You two mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
    Find text:

    Edit command:L1

     1:You two mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
     2:from the last few days and saw no post by Petrisko. Maybe it scrolled by me?
     3:
     4:     Or maybe Cliff has done a little "housecleaning" since Petrisko was
     5:last on. :)    :)    :)

    Edit command:S

    Saving message...
    The message is 81728

    Public Bulletin Board command:T

    Caller # 167453 (3 today)
    It is now 01/22/92  02:56:27
    You have been on 56:17
    Message range is (81470-81729)
    The SYSOP is out
    Shields 100 %
    *=* Please ote *=*

    Public Bulletin Board command:RC81728-

    Press  to abort

    Message: 81728
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Dog & Savage
    Date: 01/22/92  Time: 02:45:12

    You two mentioned a "tired rant" by Peter. I just scanned the messages
    from the last few days and saw no post by Petrisko. Maybe it scrolled by me?

         Or maybe Cliff has done a little "housecleaning" since Petrisko was
    last on. :)    :)    :)

    Message: 81729
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: $tatus users only
    Subject: Mark Adkins
    Date: 01/22/92  Time: 02:55:27

    Mark is a very good devil's advocate.  He is intelligent.  If he got under
    your skin then perhaps you learned a little something even if it was to
    bolster your original argument.

            Out of all of the users on this board I have the most reason to be
    mad at Mark Adkins but I find it is easier and wiser to forgive.  I am an
    atheist.

            I think the rule about doing an occasional log-in under an alias is
    both fun and funny.  Some of my favorite posts were from mystery users.
    Some damn good messages came about from those unknowns.  This rule reminds
    me of the security guards (rent-a-cops) who like to think up stupid rules so
    they have something to enforce.  I can't see harm in it.

    It is part of BBSing, a part of the fun.  Now the shields are UP and have
    been.  Pity.

    I guess people think it camp to call themselves Xtians but cannot back it up
    in thought OR action.

    I have a friend who has been trying to get on and post but to no avail.  I
    think he lost interest in it and the last time he spoke to me he said
    he was going to try another board.        Rod

    Public Bulletin Board command:G

    Goodbye, Rod Williams
    You were on 56:58

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