Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #151227 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-10 12:59 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-09-29 15:17 +1000 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 65 participants
Thread has 1285 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1285 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-10 12:59 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 10:21 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-10 10:54 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 11:43 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-10 14:07 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-10 14:00 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 14:05 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-10 15:58 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-11 19:04 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-11 23:29 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-10 12:47 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 19:03 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "hqhy" <hqhy@nospam.com> - 2015-09-11 10:21 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-10 21:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-11 12:48 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:05 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-12 13:24 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 04:27 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-12 14:12 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-13 06:51 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-12 21:47 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-12 22:53 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-13 17:46 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-13 17:16 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-14 10:17 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-15 04:48 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-13 21:13 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-14 18:06 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-13 14:20 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:28 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-13 10:54 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-13 21:15 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-13 23:01 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-14 04:18 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-12 19:38 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2015-09-13 12:20 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 21:45 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-13 13:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:30 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-13 17:14 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-14 07:00 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-14 12:50 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 09:13 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-15 13:07 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 04:31 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-14 16:35 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 07:58 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 08:14 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-15 13:16 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-15 10:12 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-15 17:48 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-15 11:51 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-15 16:03 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-15 16:01 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-15 19:29 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 20:13 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 20:12 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-16 11:39 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-16 11:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-15 13:07 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-15 06:14 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-15 14:55 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-15 16:05 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-16 12:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:27 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-16 14:49 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 10:43 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 19:12 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 11:21 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-16 15:02 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 08:08 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 11:04 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 10:45 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 18:02 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 12:50 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 07:33 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-16 10:11 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 13:53 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-16 18:08 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 21:34 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 21:15 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 19:17 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:30 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 16:15 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 15:36 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 19:51 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 16:27 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:25 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-17 07:11 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:58 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:35 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-18 13:19 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-18 09:58 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-18 10:25 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-19 16:29 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-18 19:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-18 18:36 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-19 03:24 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-19 10:06 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 22:14 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-16 13:40 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 10:52 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-18 11:46 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-18 11:54 +0000
Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 18:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-15 14:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-15 19:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 08:00 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-16 11:06 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-16 18:38 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Scion <a.b@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-25 13:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-17 09:45 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-17 08:34 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-18 12:35 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-18 11:54 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-18 21:23 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-19 03:24 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-19 11:09 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-19 16:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-19 22:09 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 07:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 10:50 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-20 15:04 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-20 11:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-21 12:36 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:43 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-20 20:03 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-21 07:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 09:19 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 10:15 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-21 09:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-21 21:33 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-22 11:51 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-21 07:03 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 16:29 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:39 -0500
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-21 10:35 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 13:45 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-21 19:06 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 15:00 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-22 14:01 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 10:29 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-22 15:47 +0100
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 16:27 +0100
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-22 14:28 -0400
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 11:58 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 04:37 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 15:09 -0500
Re: power supplies Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-22 18:11 -0700
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-22 22:16 -0400
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 07:37 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 11:06 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-23 16:33 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:26 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 04:37 +0000
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-23 08:32 +0000
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:44 +0000
Re: power supplies "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:17 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 23:35 -0400
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 07:19 +0000
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 23:41 -0400
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-28 09:34 +0000
Re: power supplies Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:29 +0000
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-28 06:28 -0500
Re: power supplies Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:05 +0000
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:07 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 16:09 -0400
Re: power supplies Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-29 07:04 +0000
Re: power supplies Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-28 16:28 +0000
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-28 19:28 +0200
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 16:00 -0400
Re: power supplies rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2015-09-29 06:09 +0000
Re: power supplies Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 08:58 +0000
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:45 +0000
Re: power supplies "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:20 -0500
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-23 08:18 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 11:09 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-23 16:31 +0000
Re: power supplies Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-23 11:20 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:45 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:38 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:44 +0000
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-24 13:35 +0000
Re: power supplies sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-30 18:35 -0400
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-01 13:17 +0000
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-01 08:27 -0500
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-02 13:11 +0000
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-02 14:42 +0000
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-02 19:17 +0100
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-02 15:14 -0400
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 14:20 -0500
Re: power supplies Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-02 20:15 -0500
Re: power supplies Michele <havana9@bigmailbox.net> - 2015-10-04 23:41 +0200
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-01 13:27 +0000
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-04 14:22 +0000
Re: power supplies "Hanny Z" <hz@nospam.com> - 2015-10-05 03:46 +1100
Re: power supplies Michele <havana9@bigmailbox.net> - 2015-10-04 23:51 +0200
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-05 12:47 +0000
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:29 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-05 07:16 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-10-05 15:37 +0100
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:35 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-23 09:53 +0100
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-23 13:50 +0100
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 20:16 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:46 -0500
Re: power supplies Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-23 12:42 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 14:50 -0400
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:51 -0700
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 10:31 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-24 14:18 -0500
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 21:36 +0200
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-24 15:05 -0500
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 22:21 +0200
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 13:49 -0700
steam coold, too, was: power supplies danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2015-09-25 02:22 +0000
Re: steam coold, too, was: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-25 07:17 -0700
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 13:44 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 10:36 -0500
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-25 10:51 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 14:10 -0500
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-25 12:33 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 15:07 -0500
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-25 20:21 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-26 16:04 -0500
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-27 07:01 -0400
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 16:42 +0000
Re: power supplies sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-30 18:42 -0400
Re: power supplies Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:14 +0200
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 15:43 +0100
Re: power supplies Dave Pitts <dpitts@cozx.com> - 2015-09-23 07:47 -0600
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 20:20 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 15:41 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-22 23:58 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 15:48 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2015-09-24 12:13 +0800
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:30 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 21:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 18:10 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:35 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 20:27 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 01:55 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:36 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-21 22:11 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 16:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 10:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-22 10:46 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-23 06:57 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 08:57 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-22 10:51 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 02:29 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 19:23 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 11:34 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 14:58 -0500
accurate watches, was: Decimal point character and billions danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2015-09-23 20:51 +0000
Re: accurate watches, was: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:49 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:01 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:47 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 18:52 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 12:14 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 16:00 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 01:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-25 09:07 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-23 14:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-23 14:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 12:55 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:13 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-24 00:46 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 07:19 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-24 17:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-22 10:53 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 02:30 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-22 22:12 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-23 06:58 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-22 19:22 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 10:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-24 07:43 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-23 12:46 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 18:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-24 04:05 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 22:31 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 15:49 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-24 11:05 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 16:30 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 08:12 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 18:52 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 16:02 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 01:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:28 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:17 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2015-09-22 11:41 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-23 14:46 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-23 17:12 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-23 10:45 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-21 22:09 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:25 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-22 07:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-20 18:26 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 19:34 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 22:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-21 09:16 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:33 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-20 15:39 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:31 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-20 16:26 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:28 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-21 09:23 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2015-09-20 10:22 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 16:48 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:01 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 22:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions mausg@mail.com - 2015-09-21 10:28 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 16:29 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions mausg@mail.com - 2015-09-21 20:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 21:49 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 17:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-21 18:03 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-22 00:45 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-20 12:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 01:20 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-21 18:07 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-20 18:18 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:20 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-20 19:23 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 10:08 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 14:11 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 10:48 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-26 17:08 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:50 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 05:43 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:08 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:03 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 10:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 12:36 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-28 09:54 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 13:20 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 19:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 15:12 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-28 17:01 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 17:15 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-28 17:05 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 20:49 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 07:32 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 18:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 03:07 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-29 10:38 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 12:53 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-29 18:15 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-29 12:14 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-29 12:24 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 20:26 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 12:16 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-01 10:32 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-29 17:32 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-29 07:47 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 07:36 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-29 13:35 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 10:26 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 17:15 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 11:52 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-30 22:54 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 09:02 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-30 21:59 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 14:49 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-09-30 20:09 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-01 05:47 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-10-01 15:13 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 05:40 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 14:34 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 13:45 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 11:59 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-30 19:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 14:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 16:08 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-28 13:30 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 17:12 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-29 13:55 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 17:13 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 21:22 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-29 07:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 07:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-02 16:41 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 18:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-05 16:10 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-05 16:20 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-06 16:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-06 17:17 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-07 08:27 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-07 15:22 -0500
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-10-07 21:42 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-07 18:01 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-08 12:02 +0100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-08 13:19 +0200
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-08 11:41 -0500
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-09 11:25 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-08 07:49 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-09 13:02 +0100
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 10:32 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 18:46 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 15:07 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 20:56 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-09 19:16 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-09 23:59 -0300
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-10 12:03 -0700
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-08 11:17 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:28 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 18:29 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-10-08 13:21 -0700
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-10-14 11:41 -0700
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-14 14:45 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 22:02 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-15 03:21 -0300
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-15 08:53 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 13:53 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 11:32 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 10:36 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 18:46 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 15:15 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-09 22:50 +0200
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:06 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 13:49 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 14:02 -0700
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-09 14:23 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:20 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 20:56 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:24 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-10 09:16 -0400
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-10 15:00 -0300
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-10 20:11 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 16:19 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 22:21 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-10 18:32 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-10 21:47 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-12 15:54 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-12 21:39 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-12 19:43 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-12 21:29 -0700
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 16:33 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-13 15:25 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 19:06 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 05:39 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 11:23 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 12:46 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 09:17 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 09:24 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 13:01 -0400
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 19:04 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 16:20 -0400
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 16:24 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:34 -0700
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-12 17:59 -0500
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-13 02:05 -0300
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-13 18:23 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 17:05 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 03:15 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:45 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-13 15:13 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-13 20:52 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 03:29 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 03:45 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 08:20 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:56 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 18:21 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 16:16 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 16:50 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 21:59 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:05 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 06:43 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 10:58 -0500
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-15 16:41 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-15 17:51 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 18:40 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-15 07:12 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 10:48 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 12:27 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-15 13:40 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 14:21 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-14 10:37 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 15:26 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-13 16:16 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 17:57 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 03:15 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-28 13:17 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 14:48 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 12:34 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:09 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 07:32 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-28 17:06 -0500
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 01:12 -0300
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 04:47 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 16:34 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 11:11 -0700
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 16:32 -0300
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:31 -0500
Re: rationality Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2015-10-29 14:48 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:29 -0500
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-29 13:55 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:35 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 21:51 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:30 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-30 11:40 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-30 18:00 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-30 23:17 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-31 01:16 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-31 12:07 -0700
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-31 15:16 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-31 21:27 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-01 15:04 +1100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-01 10:07 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-01 16:20 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-02 12:56 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-02 11:26 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-02 05:30 -0600
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-02 13:17 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-02 06:16 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-02 13:55 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 17:34 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-06 12:20 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 14:43 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 20:26 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 10:44 -0800
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 21:28 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 15:55 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:31 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:50 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 07:58 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 11:02 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-06 12:01 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 15:29 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 07:05 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 14:36 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 20:49 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 06:28 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 08:26 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-07 13:53 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 14:18 +0100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:44 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 19:12 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-11 13:31 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-11 17:05 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-12 00:44 +0100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-12 00:53 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-04 23:20 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-05 07:38 +0100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 06:27 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-05 11:03 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 14:00 +0000
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 14:41 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 12:46 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 17:52 -0600
Re: rationality Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-11-06 02:32 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:15 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 10:12 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 10:49 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 12:53 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 14:03 -0500
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-04 20:11 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:33 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-05 22:33 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:30 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 10:43 -0800
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 07:05 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 08:04 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:55 +1100
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-02 13:17 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 09:13 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2015-11-02 16:28 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 10:42 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:12 -0500
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:07 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 14:14 +0100
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 10:17 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 10:24 -0600
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:07 -0800
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-09 12:47 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 15:28 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 17:43 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 18:48 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 20:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 20:32 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 20:54 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:25 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-12 13:59 -0800
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-13 08:02 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 06:54 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-13 08:28 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-13 10:32 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-13 15:27 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-16 11:46 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-13 09:21 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 14:44 +1100
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-13 14:09 +0000
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-13 09:32 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 14:47 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-14 01:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-14 09:42 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 20:49 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-14 10:15 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-15 04:49 +1100
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 12:50 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-14 16:58 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 16:03 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 12:45 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-16 18:23 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-16 18:23 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-16 20:42 -0500
Re: rationality maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-17 10:42 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 08:01 -0500
Re: historicla archives hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 08:02 -0800
Re: historicla archives Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:49 -0500
Re: historicla archives hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 12:05 -0800
Re: historicla archives JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:44 -0600
Re: historicla archives Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 15:30 -0500
Re: historicla archives Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 22:55 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 10:48 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 11:21 -0800
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 13:37 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-17 16:27 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:49 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:41 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 11:53 -0800
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-17 12:17 -0800
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 22:59 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 17:18 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-19 09:35 +0000
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-19 14:26 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-19 10:00 -0800
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-20 08:04 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-20 10:16 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:41 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:46 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 12:30 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 09:40 -0600
Re: rationality Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2015-11-15 18:09 +0100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 19:06 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-15 19:35 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 20:34 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-15 16:31 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-15 19:09 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-16 11:38 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-16 10:34 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-16 08:22 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-16 11:36 +1100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-16 08:21 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-15 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-13 14:19 +0000
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-09 14:20 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 18:03 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:09 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 19:54 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 21:27 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 23:34 -0600
Re: rationality - Y2K Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 10:03 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 14:13 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 08:38 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 02:55 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 10:09 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:11 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 12:57 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 12:38 -0600
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-10 03:03 -0600
Re: rationality "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 20:31 +1100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 13:15 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 17:24 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 18:25 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 19:26 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-10 10:30 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 11:48 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:25 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 11:05 +1100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:31 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 14:34 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-07 13:42 +1100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 23:34 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 00:32 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-07 11:47 +0000
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:03 -0800
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:55 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 15:39 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 11:42 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-11 11:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 20:48 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 17:24 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-11 09:38 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 20:54 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-11 13:53 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 14:13 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 21:31 +0100
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-07 13:45 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 11:50 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-07 19:11 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 20:37 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 00:50 +0100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:40 +0000
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-08 11:37 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-07 18:46 -0800
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:44 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:36 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 12:18 +0100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-02 18:47 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 11:10 -0800
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-03 02:46 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 16:34 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 00:45 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 20:33 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 13:22 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 12:21 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 12:46 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 13:25 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 11:25 +1100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 10:51 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 17:56 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 18:07 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 13:18 +1100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 07:29 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 13:13 +1100
Re: rationality Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2015-11-02 21:16 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 07:29 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 16:04 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 13:02 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 16:19 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 16:56 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 11:03 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 11:22 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:12 +0100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:06 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 14:17 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 12:29 -0800
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:13 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:13 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-08 16:56 +1100
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-08 03:23 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 11:04 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-08 15:33 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 16:45 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-08 14:18 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 22:02 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 09:53 +1100
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-09 08:03 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 00:10 -0600
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 04:22 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-09 05:47 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-09 12:31 -0500
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-09 17:43 +0000
Re: rationality tracymnelson@gmail.com - 2015-11-09 10:13 -0800
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-09 17:13 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-09 14:45 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 15:08 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 11:09 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 01:19 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-10 07:57 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-11-10 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2015-11-15 15:48 +0100
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-15 16:28 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-16 14:23 -0600
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-16 12:37 -0800
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-16 15:49 -0600
Re: rationality cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2015-11-16 21:59 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-16 18:36 -0600
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-17 07:55 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-16 21:07 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-09 12:55 -0800
Re: rationality "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 22:55 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 19:04 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 13:15 -0600
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 16:23 -0400
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-09 16:26 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 09:44 +1100
Re: rationality Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2015-11-09 23:19 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:50 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-10 00:50 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 20:14 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 14:19 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-12 13:56 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-12 16:53 -0600
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-13 00:41 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-13 19:11 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-13 09:39 -0800
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-13 18:17 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 20:46 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-14 20:35 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-15 10:29 +1100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-13 17:50 +1100
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-09 14:41 +0000
Re: rationality "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 15:14 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-09 16:33 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 13:27 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 09:22 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 14:59 -0500
Re: rationality Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-11-09 13:42 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:11 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-10 07:57 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-09 11:17 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-09 11:58 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 08:13 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-08 06:44 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 13:37 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 16:52 +0100
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-09 14:46 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 10:59 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 16:42 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 13:31 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 23:52 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 14:41 +1100
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:06 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:53 +1100
Overthrow Chinese Governmen (Was: Re: rationality) mentificium@gmail.com - 2015-11-06 04:59 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 10:52 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:10 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:26 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-04 13:55 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 16:18 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 18:18 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 01:13 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 22:22 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-05 17:56 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-06 09:56 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-05 06:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 12:54 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:52 +1100
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-06 10:06 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:09 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 13:37 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 16:52 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-05 06:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:40 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 18:04 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 19:35 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 10:54 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 07:44 -0600
Re: rationality - bridge to somewhere Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 09:36 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 12:07 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 15:29 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-06 12:24 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:52 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 13:06 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 13:34 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 02:18 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 09:00 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-10 17:33 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-11 12:20 +1100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:41 -0500
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-10 22:49 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-11 07:46 -0800
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:01 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:46 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 12:27 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:42 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 17:48 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:07 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 10:44 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 10:42 +0100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 10:32 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:04 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 10:46 -0800
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-03 12:54 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-03 10:00 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-03 19:43 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-03 09:09 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 13:08 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-03 15:24 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 22:38 +0100
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 17:04 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 10:33 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:09 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 14:19 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:45 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-04 02:51 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 09:56 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 08:44 -0600
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-04 14:00 -0600
Re: rationality cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-11-04 16:13 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-03 19:32 +0000
Re: rationality "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 07:18 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-01 13:59 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 11:32 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 12:57 -0600
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:38 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-05 10:56 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-02 12:55 +1100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:48 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 11:07 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 07:58 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-05 13:18 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 16:27 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 17:19 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-29 18:15 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-29 13:45 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 20:01 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 23:46 -0300
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-30 04:56 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-30 12:39 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-29 20:43 +0000
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-29 21:02 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:27 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-30 09:42 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 10:41 -0500
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-04 19:56 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 11:13 +0000
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 11:33 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 14:04 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-05 16:13 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:09 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-10-14 15:52 -0400
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-13 12:21 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 12:00 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 18:21 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 13:54 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-15 17:51 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-14 17:02 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 11:06 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 10:38 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 18:37 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 14:15 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:10 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-14 21:00 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-16 10:20 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-19 13:28 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 15:18 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-20 11:27 -0700
Re: rationality Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-08 10:23 -0400
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-07 23:55 +0200
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 05:14 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:07 -0500
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-09 12:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-07 20:37 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 05:24 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:15 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:14 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-08 22:57 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions pechter@S20.pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-10-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-06 08:32 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-03 11:11 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 15:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-04 14:11 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-04 14:50 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-05 12:47 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-05 17:44 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-06 13:13 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-06 17:52 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Hanny Z" <hz@nospam.com> - 2015-10-06 09:26 +1100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-07 20:40 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 16:12 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-05 16:14 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-06 12:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 10:07 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:05 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 10:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 12:35 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 13:03 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:48 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:17 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 17:25 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 09:37 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:06 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-29 19:25 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-30 02:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-30 03:35 -0300
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:58 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-30 06:25 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 21:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-30 11:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-28 13:26 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:17 +1000
Page 31 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 29 30 [31] 32 33 … 50 Next page →
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 12:47 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <5adb0528-715b-4aff-86d4-3f6973cdf0fe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #154155 |
On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 12:07:25 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote: > Actually, "fiat" is not a non-emotional adjective. It has a meaning, and thus is > a highly pejorative thing to say of a currency. It means that those pieces of > paper are only supposed to be money because someone said so. > And history has shown that even rulers with great coercive power at their > disposal have been frustrated in their plans by the realities of economics. By the above definition, the US Dollar is a 'fiat currency'. The government says so, and so far it is accepted. I believe the reason it is accepted is because the world sees the US Government and US economy as basically strong and responsible. They accept it is not perfect, but see it is the best game in town compared to the others--all things considered. What worries me is the massive and ever-increasing amount of US debt. What happens when creditors will no longer buy this debt? Everyone will be in trouble. Another worry is the return of inflation. We had 20% inflation before, and there's no reaosn it won't happen again. Senior citizens really suffered since they're dependent on bank savings and fixed pensions and aren't in a position to increase their wealth. Unfortunately, BOTH political parties are simply too weak to come to terms iwth excess debt. The Republicans talk, but then want massive increases in defense, which is very expensive. the Democrats have never seen a social program they didn't like.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 15:28 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <dachfrFu2diU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154237 |
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > Unfortunately, BOTH political parties are simply too weak to > come to terms iwth excess debt. The Republicans talk, but then > want massive increases in defense, which is very expensive. the > Democrats have never seen a social program they didn't like. I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 jeeps. And I just discovered that Firefox can search photocopies. Amazing! It may be just an illusion but it's a darned nice illusion to have.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 17:43 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1ravo$ue3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154241 |
On 09-Nov-15 15:28, Osmium wrote: > <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >> Unfortunately, BOTH political parties are simply too weak to come >> to terms iwth excess debt. The Republicans talk, but then want >> massive increases in defense, which is very expensive. the >> Democrats have never seen a social program they didn't like. > > I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted > price of a Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry > battalion had 22 jeeps. Good question, but that ain't nothin' compared to the F-35. The Pentagon has blown quarter _trillion_ dollars so far, more than the cost of _every F-16 ever made_, and we don't even have _one_ prototype that can manage to beat an F-16, which costs 1/6th as much per unit as the latest projections for the F-35. And those projections climb every year, so expect it to cost at least twice as much by the time it's finally in service--and then well have zero pilots with operational experience on the handful of planes we'll get, compared to thousands of F-16s and trained pilots. That's a program the Pentagon _wants_ to keep, so if _they_ consider other programs wasteful, we can't even imagine how bad they must be. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 18:48 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <dact7mF2bcpU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154253 |
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > On 09-Nov-15 15:28, Osmium wrote: >> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>> Unfortunately, BOTH political parties are simply too weak to come >>> to terms iwth excess debt. The Republicans talk, but then want >>> massive increases in defense, which is very expensive. the >>> Democrats have never seen a social program they didn't like. >> >> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted >> price of a Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry >> battalion had 22 jeeps. > > Good question, but that ain't nothin' compared to the F-35. > > The Pentagon has blown quarter _trillion_ dollars so far, more than the > cost of _every F-16 ever made_, and we don't even have _one_ prototype > that can manage to beat an F-16, which costs 1/6th as much per unit as > the latest projections for the F-35. And those projections climb every > year, so expect it to cost at least twice as much by the time it's > finally in service--and then well have zero pilots with operational > experience on the handful of planes we'll get, compared to thousands of > F-16s and trained pilots. > > That's a program the Pentagon _wants_ to keep, so if _they_ consider > other programs wasteful, we can't even imagine how bad they must be. I agree, it's a real boondoggle. As I understand it, the goal is to do everything but fly backwards. Just the cost of the spare electronics modules required would probably bankrupt a small country.. But there is an underlying assumption in this sub-thread that the Republicans do the defense thing and the Democrats do the social thing. I would like to point out the Republicans just came to power 11 months ago. So the 250B spent on the F-35 so far and mentioned above was funded by the Democrats, either partially or wholly. Furthermore, there were no veto overrides in the last few years which means that Obama agreed with the plan too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 20:37 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1rhkn$gf5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154261 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: > "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > >> On 09-Nov-15 15:28, Osmium wrote: >>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: >>>> Unfortunately, BOTH political parties are simply too weak to come >>>> to terms iwth excess debt. The Republicans talk, but then want >>>> massive increases in defense, which is very expensive. the >>>> Democrats have never seen a social program they didn't like. >>> >>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted >>> price of a Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry >>> battalion had 22 jeeps. >> >> Good question, but that ain't nothin' compared to the F-35. >> >> The Pentagon has blown quarter _trillion_ dollars so far, more than the >> cost of _every F-16 ever made_, and we don't even have _one_ prototype >> that can manage to beat an F-16, which costs 1/6th as much per unit as >> the latest projections for the F-35. And those projections climb every >> year, so expect it to cost at least twice as much by the time it's >> finally in service--and then well have zero pilots with operational >> experience on the handful of planes we'll get, compared to thousands of >> F-16s and trained pilots. >> >> That's a program the Pentagon _wants_ to keep, so if _they_ consider >> other programs wasteful, we can't even imagine how bad they must be. > > I agree, it's a real boondoggle. As I understand it, the goal is to do > everything but fly backwards. Just the cost of the spare electronics > modules required would probably bankrupt a small country.. > > But there is an underlying assumption in this sub-thread that the > Republicans do the defense thing and the Democrats do the social > thing. I would like to point out the Republicans just came to power > 11 months ago. So the 250B spent on the F-35 so far and mentioned > above was funded by the Democrats, either partially or wholly. > Furthermore, there were no veto overrides in the last few years which > means that Obama agreed with the plan too. I agree, despite the rhetoric from the right about the Democrats trying to destroy the country and other outrageous claims, there's not a big difference. Here's a chart showing where the campaign contributions from Lockheed go: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/lockheed-over-the-years.png (About 60% to Republicans.) -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 20:32 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1rkre$q88$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154261 |
On 09-Nov-15 18:48, Osmium wrote: > But there is an underlying assumption in this sub-thread that the > Republicans do the defense thing and the Democrats do the social > thing. I would like to point out the Republicans just came to power > 11 months ago. The Dems haven't had control (60 votes) of the Senate since 1979. The Reps have had control of the House since 2011 (58 months ago), and all but 4 years since 1995. > Furthermore, there were no veto overrides in the last few years which > means that Obama agreed with the plan too. No, it just means that he wasn't willing to veto the entire defense spending bill because certain parts of it were bad. Lots of really bad stuff gets passed because it's attached to such "must-pass" bills. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-09 20:54 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <dad4iuF3tetU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154269 |
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > On 09-Nov-15 18:48, Osmium wrote: >> But there is an underlying assumption in this sub-thread that the >> Republicans do the defense thing and the Democrats do the social >> thing. I would like to point out the Republicans just came to power >> 11 months ago. > > The Dems haven't had control (60 votes) of the Senate since 1979. > > The Reps have had control of the House since 2011 (58 months ago), and > all but 4 years since 1995. > >> Furthermore, there were no veto overrides in the last few years which >> means that Obama agreed with the plan too. > > No, it just means that he wasn't willing to veto the entire defense > spending bill because certain parts of it were bad. Lots of really bad > stuff gets passed because it's attached to such "must-pass" bills. It's like talking to Rod, except the sentences are longer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-10 11:25 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1t96l$7o8$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154270 |
On 09-Nov-15 20:54, Osmium wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >> On 09-Nov-15 18:48, Osmium wrote: >>> Furthermore, there were no veto overrides in the last few years >>> which means that Obama agreed with the plan too. >> >> No, it just means that he wasn't willing to veto the entire >> defense spending bill because certain parts of it were bad. Lots >> of really bad stuff gets passed because it's attached to such >> "must-pass" bills. > > It's like talking to Rod, except the sentences are longer. If that's the only difference you see, your critical reading skills could use some additional development. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-12 13:59 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <79059b0b-5914-44a0-bb57-a01fe5af9144@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #154241 |
On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: > I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a > Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 > jeeps. OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a good job for a lot less money. Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 08:02 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <slrnn4b68r.8r0.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #154434 |
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: > > >> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a >> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 >> jeeps. > > OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm > sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive > vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a > good job for a lot less money. That's exactly what the British Army thought when they tested Humvees... They bought a load more Land Rovers instead :-) -- Stan Barr plan.b@bluesomatic.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 06:54 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <uanb4bphv777g4u23vp28dlbg43vqu1ikm@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #154434 |
On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: > > >> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a >> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 >> jeeps. > >OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >good job for a lot less money. > >Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. > The jeeps are also far more vulnerable to enemy fire. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 08:28 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <damaboFe2fmU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154449 |
"JimP" wrote: > On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >> >> >>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price >>> of a >>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had >>> 22 >>> jeeps. >> >>OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >>sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >>vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >>good job for a lot less money. >> >>Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >>jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. >> > > The jeeps are also far more vulnerable to enemy fire. Well, there you go. It's like buying a Hi_Fi setup, you can spend a huge amount of money but that one is only 20% better than the one that is 1,000 times cheaper. IMO the Humvee and the F-35 are poster boys for a government run amok. Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex , and it happened. I found the price for a Humvee, $220,000 for the current armored, kind of, ones. I wasn't able to find the price of a WW II jeep but I would be astonished if it was more than $1,000. It looks like my guess of 50:1 was too high considering inflation. search: <how much does a humvee cost>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 10:32 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <87pozdg378.fsf@lhwserver.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #154454 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: > Well, there you go. It's like buying a Hi_Fi setup, you can spend a > huge amount of money but that one is only 20% better than the one that > is 1,000 times cheaper. > > IMO the Humvee and the F-35 are poster boys for a government run > amok. Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex , and > it happened. > > I found the price for a Humvee, $220,000 for the current armored, kind > of, ones. I wasn't able to find the price of a WW II jeep but I would > be astonished if it was more than $1,000. It looks like my guess of > 50:1 was too high considering inflation. > > search: <how much does a humvee cost> the original Humvee went out w/o armor. soldiers in the field were then welding all sorts of non-approved stuff, then approved uparmored vehicles were few and late. original $70k, uparmor package $146k https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humvee but relatively ineffective against IEDs ... coveted were MRAP vehicles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRAP the Iraq war is poster child for gov. run amok ,,, from recent discussion in military group 8 Of The Worst Military Leaders In History https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/8-of-the-worst-militaryleaders-in-history.html The other factor is you get no-bid contracts outsourced to certain for-profit companies (made in response to Rumsfield quote: "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want") chief of staff replaces CIA director that would go along with Team B analysis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_B chief of staff (74-75) then becomes SECDEF 75-77, and then SECDEF again 2001-2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld when chief of staff becomes SECDEF, is replaced by assistant, assistant then is SECDEF 89-93 and VP 2001-2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney another "Team B" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz Iraq justification supposedly based on WMDs last decade, cousin of white house chief of staff Card ... was dealing with the Iraqis at the UN and was given evidence that WMDs had been decommissioned, provides informatoin to cousin Card, Powell and others, then gets locked up in military hospital .... "EXTREME PREJUDICE-- The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq" http://www.amazon.com/EXTREME-PREJUDICE-Terrifying-Story-Patriot-ebook/dp/B004HYHBK2/ they find the decommissioned WMDs tracing back to US in the 80s http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war in the iran/iraq war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War ... but it gets classified for a decade. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0 How Private Contractors Have Created a Shadow NSA; A new cybersecurity elite moves between government and private practice, taking state secrets with them (also references oil rig company that was transformed into one of the largest defense contractors after former SECDEF and future VP becomes CEO, including no-bid contracts in Iraq) http://www.thenation.com/article/how-private-contractors-have-created-shadow-nsa/ there was recent article about paid tens of billions including how the company got paid for each convoy that went out ... and they were sending out empty convoys and convoys sent out with little or no escort through hostile country. search: cheney halliburton criminal vp in the 80s (and former cia director that approved "team b" analysis) claims he knew nothing about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair because he was fulltime administration point person deregulating financial industry ... creating S&L crisis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis along with other members of his family http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis#Silverado_Savings_and_Loan and another http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE0D81E3BF937A25753C1A966958260 Later a son, presides over the economic mess, 70 times larger than S&L crisis. relatively minor contribution Lehman's Gift To Jeb Bush For Funneling Pension Money: A $1.3 Million Consulting "Job" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-19/lehmans-gift-jeb-bush-funneling-pension-money-13-million-consulting-job mentions process to preserve F22 program no matter how bad, even making things worse http://nypost.com/2009/07/17/cant-fly-wont-die/ then F22 was replaced with larger & more profitable F35 program ... continuing same process. posts mentioning military-industrial complex http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submisc.html#military.industrial.complex -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 15:27 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <532168817.469139023.036374.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #154454 |
Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > "JimP" wrote: > >> On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price >>>> of a >>>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had >>>> 22 >>>> jeeps. >>> >>> OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >>> sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >>> vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >>> good job for a lot less money. >>> >>> Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >>> jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. >>> >> >> The jeeps are also far more vulnerable to enemy fire. > > Well, there you go. It's like buying a Hi_Fi setup, you can spend a huge > amount of money but that one is only 20% better than the one that is 1,000 > times cheaper. > > IMO the Humvee and the F-35 are poster boys for a government run amok. > Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex , and it > happened. > > I found the price for a Humvee, $220,000 for the current armored, kind of, > ones. I wasn't able to find the price of a WW II jeep but I would be > astonished if it was more than $1,000. It looks like my guess of 50:1 was > too high considering inflation. The armor makes all the difference. Before the army started shipping them with extra armor the troops were welding on their own. Then they saw the need for armoring the bottom to protect against IEDs. > > search: <how much does a humvee cost> > > ' -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-16 11:46 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <proto-26D021.11464816112015@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #154454 |
In article <damaboFe2fmU1@mid.individual.net>, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > I found the price for a Humvee, $220,000 for the current armored, kind of, > ones. I wasn't able to find the price of a WW II jeep but I would be > astonished if it was more than $1,000. It looks like my guess of 50:1 was > too high considering inflation. Yes, but consider the cost of medical care for injured soldiers and the flack the military gets for getting its employees killed. -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 09:21 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n24v1p$u6o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154449 |
On 11/13/2015 6:54 AM, JimP wrote: > On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >> >> >>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a >>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 >>> jeeps. >> >> OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >> sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >> vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >> good job for a lot less money. >> >> Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >> jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. >> > > The jeeps are also far more vulnerable to enemy fire. > Jeeps are not really suited to an army of occupation, since there is no "behind the lines".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-14 14:44 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <danp1dFpnp9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154455 |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message news:n24v1p$u6o$1@dont-email.me... > On 11/13/2015 6:54 AM, JimP wrote: >> On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:59:53 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price >>>> of a >>>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had >>>> 22 >>>> jeeps. >>> >>> OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >>> sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >>> vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >>> good job for a lot less money. >>> >>> Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >>> jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. >>> >> >> The jeeps are also far more vulnerable to enemy fire. >> > Jeeps are not really suited to an army of occupation, Must be why none of them were ever used in europe or japan after they had surrendered. > since there is no "behind the lines". They are even more useless in trench warfare.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 14:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <cam1y.72458$yo1.38255@fx23.iad> |
| In reply to | #154434 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: >On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: > > >> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a >> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 >> jeeps. > >OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >good job for a lot less money. One must consider many factors, when comparing the Willys MB or Ford GPW vehicle with a more modern Humvee. Amongst which is the fuel used; with Humvees, which burn diesel, the army logistics tail becomes somewhat simpler as they no longer need to stock gasoline. > >Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. And you know this, how? The Humvee gets around 13MPG, while the Willys MB was in the 15MPG range. Not a big difference. Having only one fuel type in the logistics train obviates the drop in MPG. The Humvee also was able to replace other, less fuel efficient vehicles for some purposes (e.g. towing capacity is closer to a deuce and a half).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-13 09:32 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n24vmr$2na$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154452 |
On 11/13/2015 8:09 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: >> On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >> >> >>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price of a >>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had 22 >>> jeeps. >> >> OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >> sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >> vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >> good job for a lot less money. > > One must consider many factors, when comparing the Willys MB or Ford GPW vehicle > with a more modern Humvee. Amongst which is the fuel used; > with Humvees, which burn diesel, the army logistics tail becomes > somewhat simpler as they no longer need to stock gasoline. That's not a good reason, because it wouldn't be a big deal to drop a small diesel into a jeep. Hey, these days the military could probably get a great bulk deal on slightly used VW engines. > >> >> Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >> jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. > > And you know this, how? The Humvee gets around 13MPG, while the > Willys MB was in the 15MPG range. Not a big difference. Nothing got great mileage in 1941. There's no reason why a jeep-sized vehicle today shouldn't get quite good mileage. Land Rover can get 57.7mpg with a diesel vehicle that's larger than the old jeeps. > > Having only one fuel type in the logistics train obviates the > drop in MPG. > > The Humvee also was able to replace other, less fuel efficient > vehicles for some purposes (e.g. towing capacity is closer to > a deuce and a half). The Humvee does win on towing capacity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-14 14:47 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <danp7cFpounU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154456 |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message news:n24vmr$2na$1@dont-email.me... > On 11/13/2015 8:09 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: >>> On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 4:28:30 PM UTC-5, Osmium wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I wonder how many jeeps you could get for the inflation adjusted price >>>> of a >>>> Humvee? I'll start the speculating at 50:1. An infantry battalion had >>>> 22 >>>> jeeps. >>> >>> OMG, I visited a military base and saw Humvees in use. While I'm >>> sure there are legitimate military uses for such an expensive >>> vehicle, I'm also sure the old Jeep, modernized, could do a >>> good job for a lot less money. >> >> One must consider many factors, when comparing the Willys MB or Ford GPW >> vehicle >> with a more modern Humvee. Amongst which is the fuel used; >> with Humvees, which burn diesel, the army logistics tail becomes >> somewhat simpler as they no longer need to stock gasoline. > > That's not a good reason, because it wouldn't be a big deal to drop a > small diesel into a jeep. Hey, these days the military could probably > get a great bulk deal on slightly used VW engines. Not a chance. >>> Also, the military usually has to bring along its own fuel. The >>> jeep was more fuel economical than a Humvee. >> >> And you know this, how? The Humvee gets around 13MPG, while the >> Willys MB was in the 15MPG range. Not a big difference. > > Nothing got great mileage in 1941. There's no reason why a jeep-sized > vehicle today shouldn't get quite good mileage. Land Rover can get > 57.7mpg with a diesel vehicle that's larger than the old jeeps. > >> >> Having only one fuel type in the logistics train obviates the >> drop in MPG. >> >> The Humvee also was able to replace other, less fuel efficient >> vehicles for some purposes (e.g. towing capacity is closer to >> a deuce and a half). > > The Humvee does win on towing capacity. And bullet proofness.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 31 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 29 30 [31] 32 33 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web