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 4 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 50 Next page →
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-15 06:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <21123eac-4fda-4e9a-a138-e9fd2ca7be46@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151372 |
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 7:07:18 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: > I wonder how or why the US changed the billion. They followed the French, who changed it first (then changed it back in 1948). > Thanks. I don't recall hearing the word milliard. Didn't > Britain used to use periods instead of commas to write a > large number, (e.g. 1.000.000 for one million)? No, although Germany and Russia do that, and use the comma for the decimal point. Britain was different, though. Instead of using the period for the decimal point, they used a raised dot in the middle of the character area. The comma was still used to mark off thousands. I think the character is still in Unicode: 1,000,000·00 John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-15 14:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20150915145552.60e5b282dc9069e848bb9990@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #151375 |
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 06:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > 1,000,000·00 That does look nice and proper. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-15 16:05 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.x40euunnmsr2db@dell3100.workgroup> |
| In reply to | #151375 |
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:14:13 +0100, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 7:07:18 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: > >> I wonder how or why the US changed the billion. > > They followed the French, who changed it first (then changed it back in > 1948). > >> Thanks. I don't recall hearing the word milliard. Didn't >> Britain used to use periods instead of commas to write a >> large number, (e.g. 1.000.000 for one million)? > > No, although Germany and Russia do that, and use the comma for the > decimal > point. The comma as decimal divider is quite widespread on the continent, France included. > > Britain was different, though. Instead of using the period for the > decimal > point, they used a raised dot in the middle of the character area. The > comma > was still used to mark off thousands. > > I think the character is still in Unicode: > > 1,000,000·00 > > John Savard Once upon a time, before typewriters, this was so - but the decimal point and the full stop have become conflated now. -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 12:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00051FDCE619DCA5@aca4280e.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #151383 |
Kerr Mudd-John wrote: > On Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:14:13 +0100, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 7:07:18 AM UTC-6, jmfbahciv wrote: >> >>> I wonder how or why the US changed the billion. >> >> They followed the French, who changed it first (then changed it back in >> 1948). >> >>> Thanks. I don't recall hearing the word milliard. Didn't >>> Britain used to use periods instead of commas to write a >>> large number, (e.g. 1.000.000 for one million)? >> >> No, although Germany and Russia do that, and use the comma for the >> decimal >> point. > > The comma as decimal divider is quite widespread on the continent, France > included. So how did people code and key in data? Does this discussion imply that data entry would use the comma instead of a period to denote decimal fractions? >> >> Britain was different, though. Instead of using the period for the >> decimal >> point, they used a raised dot in the middle of the character area. The >> comma >> was still used to mark off thousands. >> >> I think the character is still in Unicode: >> >> 1,000,000·00 >> >> John Savard > > Once upon a time, before typewriters, this was so - but the decimal point > and the full stop have become conflated now. WEre there any typewriters in Europe which had two kinds of periods? /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 14:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mtbqk5$qn6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151433 |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message news:PM00051FDCE619DCA5@aca4280e.ipt.aol.com... > Kerr Mudd-John wrote: ... >> Once upon a time, before typewriters, this was so - but the decimal >> point >> and the full stop have become conflated now. > > WEre there any typewriters in Europe which had two kinds of periods? AIUI manufacturers of typewriters made up their own characters and sets thereof. Of course all typewriters had to include common characters such as letters, digits, and oft-used punctuation but they then had their own ideas (perhaps based on the requirements of their customers) as to what else was needed. It's easy to forget, looking back from this age when so much is standardised and when use of correct characters is important, just how lacking in standards the world was only a few decades ago. IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around the 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L instead. Or maybe it had no zero and a capital O was used, or both. When the result was committed only to paper it did not matter quite so much and the reader could normally tell from the context whether a letter or a digit was meant. While I cannot remember for sure which conflations were necessary on the above typewriter I do remember clearly that in one place I worked in the 1990s the secretary would still type a lower case L instead of a digit 1. James
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 14:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA5176E6C73226makowiecatnycapdotrE@213.239.209.88> |
| In reply to | #151435 |
On 16 Sep 2015 in alt.folklore.computers, James Harris wrote: > IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around > the 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L > instead. It wasn't just one particular typewriter. That was fairly common in the 1960s on in the USA. It was uncommon to find a typewriter with a numeral 1 (ASCII 0x31). -- Joe Makowiec http://makowiec.org/ Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 10:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <jd3jvatlfrjhe5gtsg564d6j6v9k9u2rbp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #151441 |
On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:49:26 +0000 (UTC), Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> wrote: >On 16 Sep 2015 in alt.folklore.computers, James Harris wrote: > >> IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around >> the 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L >> instead. > >It wasn't just one particular typewriter. That was fairly common in the >1960s on in the USA. It was uncommon to find a typewriter with a numeral >1 (ASCII 0x31). My grandmother bought a Royal Quiet Deluxe mechanical typewriter about 1952. No 1, had to use the lower case l for it. No + either, had to use the / and the - along with backspace to make a + on the paper. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtc68d2pb1@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #151447 |
On 2015-09-16, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:49:26 +0000 (UTC), Joe Makowiec > <makowiec@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> On 16 Sep 2015 in alt.folklore.computers, James Harris wrote: >> >>> IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around >>> the 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L >>> instead. >> >> It wasn't just one particular typewriter. That was fairly common in the >> 1960s on in the USA. It was uncommon to find a typewriter with a numeral >> 1 (ASCII 0x31). > > My grandmother bought a Royal Quiet Deluxe mechanical typewriter about > 1952. No 1, had to use the lower case l for it. No + either, had to > use the / and the - along with backspace to make a + on the paper. There were plenty of tricks used to create missing characters by overstriking: c and / for cents sign, apostrophe and period for exclamation point, etc. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 19:12 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mtcbae$ve2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151453 |
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message news:mtc68d2pb1@news3.newsguy.com... > On 2015-09-16, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: ... >> My grandmother bought a Royal Quiet Deluxe mechanical typewriter >> about >> 1952. No 1, had to use the lower case l for it. No + either, had to >> use the / and the - along with backspace to make a + on the paper. > > There were plenty of tricks used to create missing characters by > overstriking: c and / for cents sign, apostrophe and period for > exclamation point, etc. Indeed and this kind of thing must have even applied even to computer terminals. Various texts I have read on compiler writing have included comments on reassembling input characters from certain input keystrokes. For example, =, backspace and / used in a programming language to indicate not-equals. Compiler input phases were expected to even allow (where <B> means backspace and <S> means space) if z = 52<B><B><B><B>/<S><S><S>0 meaning if z is-not-equal-to 520 Some things about those days were not fun! James
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 11:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <581396a5-c052-44dd-a8c6-6a94c3294397@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151453 |
On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 12:44:48 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > There were plenty of tricks used to create missing characters by > overstriking: c and / for cents sign, apostrophe and period for > exclamation point, etc. Some look perfectly fine, like the two you mentioned. But others looked goofy. One of the nice things of IBM's electric typewriters was the introduction of newer fonts that looked 'cleaner' than the old style typewriter font with its big curly-cues and serifs. Today, Courier looks dated, but in the 1960s it was very modern and sleek. Prestige Elite was another very attractive font. We had some IBM Executive models (non-Selectric) that had a handsome font that looked almost typeset, though it was still fixed width. for years, IBM made a proportional typewriter with a carbon ribbon that gave reports a somewhat better appearance. I think the C&A magazines were done on that kind of machine, as were some manuals. Unfortunately, despite it being proportional, it still has a "typewritten" look to it and does not appear to have been typeset. Back in the 1950s and onward, better quality typewriters had a very even width to the characters, and that gave it a more professional appearance, even if it was done on a manual typewriter. For instance, my old Underwood Standard had a nice look to the copy as compared to my much newer SCM electric portable. The SCM electric portables could not compare in quality to the IBM typewriters, but of course they cost only a fraction of the IBM. I've tossed almost all of my old Teletype output, but I don't think that was the greatest in appearance. Since the TTY 33 had paper tape, we naturally thought of using it as a poor man's word processor. But the all caps output just wasn't very attractive. By the 1970s, many large organizations would type up a document on an IBM with a carbon ribbon, and then reproduce it via offset. This yieled a very high quality output, far more so than mimeo. I think offset technology advanced to the point that making a plate from camera ready copy was easy and inexpensive for large runs. For short runs and small organizations, the spirit duplicator continued in service. For schools and industry informal communications, the lousy quality was adequate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 15:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <d5tekuFoujhU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #151435 |
On 2015-09-16, James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> wrote:
[22 lines snipped]
> IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around the
> 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L instead.
> Or maybe it had no zero and a capital O was used, or both.
Both.
--
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 40th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 08:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <75b66341-f7e8-475b-aa3c-e16000955321@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151435 |
On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 9:27:20 AM UTC-4, James Harris wrote: > It's easy to forget, looking back from this age when so much is > standardised and when use of correct characters is important, just how > lacking in standards the world was only a few decades ago. Actually, manual typewriter keyboards were pretty-well standardized, at least within a country. What varied by brand was the paper handling levers, how to set margins, etc. > IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around the > 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L instead. From the 1950s and earlier, that was standard for most typewriters. Also, the exclamation point was omitted, one had to type a ', backspace, then a . Neither were a big deal to a typist. In the 1960s, newer machines, such as the popular SCM portables, included 1! and =+. I'm suprised =+ wasn't included earlier as they are commonly used symbols and not easily mimicked by other keys. Indeed, in looking over old documents in bitsavers, many manuals and reports were typewritten, and when it was necessary to enter a math symbol, it was hand drawn. > Or maybe it had no zero and a capital O was used, or both. When the > result was committed only to paper it did not matter quite so much and > the reader could normally tell from the context whether a letter or a > digit was meant. Zero and letter O were always separate keys, yet the appearance was the same. I believe the influence of computers inspired typewriter makers to give them different appearances. As an aside, in the US, the British pound sign was mimicked by upper L and the dash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 11:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mtc3s2$1ec$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #151445 |
On 9/16/2015 10:08 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > In the 1960s, newer machines, such as the popular SCM portables, > included 1! and =+. > > I'm suprised =+ wasn't included earlier as they are commonly used > symbols and not easily mimicked by other keys. Not that hard. For the =, roll the platen down a tiny bit and type -, backspace, roll the platen up a tiny bit and type -. For +, type a - and manually add the vertical stroke with a pen (many office typewriters had ribbon guides with a notch to brace a pen against, then rock the platen up/down to mark). The thing is, most ordinary text very seldom uses either of those characters, so a slight inefficiency in typing was acceptable. > Indeed, in looking over old documents in bitsavers, many manuals > and reports were typewritten, and when it was necessary to enter a > math symbol, it was hand drawn. Sure. It wasn't practical to have a typebar for every unicode character. That was true in the daisywheel era, too. >> Or maybe it had no zero and a capital O was used, or both. When >> the result was committed only to paper it did not matter quite so >> much and the reader could normally tell from the context whether >> a letter or a digit was meant. > > Zero and letter O were always separate keys, yet the appearance was > the same. I believe the influence of computers inspired typewriter > makers to give them different appearances. > > As an aside, in the US, the British pound sign was mimicked by > upper L and the dash. And the dollar sign was often "S" + "/", just as the cent sign was "c" + "/", most typewriters didn't have a $ or ¢ character. Your keyboard probably still doesn't have the latter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 10:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20c777d7-813e-47ca-b6ea-526537289bfa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151448 |
On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 12:05:10 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote: > > Indeed, in looking over old documents in bitsavers, many manuals > > and reports were typewritten, and when it was necessary to enter a > > math symbol, it was hand drawn. > > Sure. It wasn't practical to have a typebar for every unicode > character. That was true in the daisywheel era, too. Well, not every formula character were in general use, but + and = were widely used. Dash and slash looked lousy. Platen roll could look uneven. Later typewriters had half-line indents on the platen, making sub- and super-scripts cleaner. When I had to do homework reports in high school and college, I found my old 1950 Underwood Standard to be a pain since it didn't have those characters. I would ink them in, but it looked lousy. A secondary consideration was when a document had to be mimeographed. Mimeograph stencils were designed to take a typewritten impression. While one certainly could handwrite on them with a special stylus, it came out looking lousy. Many examples of this can be seen on old bitsaver reports, where handwritten formulas look very coarse. (Spirit duplication didn't have this problem since it used a different kind of stencil that wasn't cut). > And the dollar sign was often "S" + "/", just as the cent sign was "c" > + "/", most typewriters didn't have a $ or ¢ character. Your keyboard > probably still doesn't have the latter. While c and clash were easy for cents, I believe old typewriters did have a cent key. My SCM portable has one. In the old days, before inflation factors of ten, far more products were in cents and the mark was commonly used. Cent also appears to be an EBCDIC punched card character (12-2-8). I don't recall if it appeared on the 029. I must admit when I use an old typewriter I still do a double take at the @ key, which was standard. I never used it in my early days, indeed, I really only noticed it as an email address much later on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtddot32qjb@news7.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #151459 |
On 2015-09-16, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 12:05:10 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote: > >>> Indeed, in looking over old documents in bitsavers, many manuals >>> and reports were typewritten, and when it was necessary to enter a >>> math symbol, it was hand drawn. >> >> Sure. It wasn't practical to have a typebar for every unicode >> character. That was true in the daisywheel era, too. > > Well, not every formula character were in general use, but + and = > were widely used. Dash and slash looked lousy. Platen roll could > look uneven. Many texts recommended using the "variable" knob to move the platen to adjust vertical spacing. This made it almost impossible to return the platen to its original position, putting the rest of the line out of alignment. I could never understand why this technique was recommended, when the ratchet release would let you adjust the platen but find your original position again afterwards. > Later typewriters had half-line indents on the platen, making sub- > and super-scripts cleaner. My little Olivetti portable could be set for single, 1 1/2, and double spacing. It was quite handy. > When I had to do homework reports in high school and college, I found > my old 1950 Underwood Standard to be a pain since it didn't have those > characters. I would ink them in, but it looked lousy. > > A secondary consideration was when a document had to be mimeographed. > Mimeograph stencils were designed to take a typewritten impression. The ribbon control had three settings: red and black raised the ribbon to the appropriately coloured portion, while the "stencil" setting kept the ribbon from rising at all, allowing the typebar to cut into the master. > While one certainly could handwrite on them with a special stylus, > it came out looking lousy. Many examples of this can be seen on old > bitsaver reports, where handwritten formulas look very coarse. I remember that. It was ugly. > (Spirit duplication didn't have this problem since it used a different > kind of stencil that wasn't cut). You could even get different colours; I once produced a 3-colour document that way. (Spirit duplication sounds sort of metaphysical, doesn't it?) >> And the dollar sign was often "S" + "/", just as the cent sign was "c" >> + "/", most typewriters didn't have a $ or ¢ character. Your keyboard >> probably still doesn't have the latter. > > While c and clash were easy for cents, I believe old typewriters did > have a cent key. My SCM portable has one. In the old days, before > inflation factors of ten, far more products were in cents and the mark > was commonly used. Good point. Many typewriters had a cents sign, but it was one of those keys whose location wasn't standardized. > Cent also appears to be an EBCDIC punched card character (12-2-8). > I don't recall if it appeared on the 029. It did. (Google for "IBM 029", find an image of the keyboard, and look over the R.) The only character on the keyboard that didn't have a glyph was 0-2-8. > I must admit when I use an old typewriter I still do a double take > at the @ key, which was standard. I never used it in my early days, > indeed, I really only noticed it as an email address much later on. Other nonstandardized keys were for fractions, typically 1/2 and maybe 1/4. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00051FF19B376D3D@aca20644.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #151476 |
Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2015-09-16, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote: > >> On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 12:05:10 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote: >> >>>> Indeed, in looking over old documents in bitsavers, many manuals >>>> and reports were typewritten, and when it was necessary to enter a >>>> math symbol, it was hand drawn. >>> >>> Sure. It wasn't practical to have a typebar for every unicode >>> character. That was true in the daisywheel era, too. >> >> Well, not every formula character were in general use, but + and = >> were widely used. Dash and slash looked lousy. Platen roll could >> look uneven. > > Many texts recommended using the "variable" knob to move the platen > to adjust vertical spacing. This made it almost impossible to return > the platen to its original position, putting the rest of the line > out of alignment. I could never understand why this technique was > recommended, when the ratchet release would let you adjust the platen > but find your original position again afterwards. <snip> You learned how to use the variable knob; it wasn't difficult to realign the platen. If you were really a klutz w.r.t. this one, what you did was type everything and do the variable knob work before taking the page out. However, that reduced your speed dramatically. WPM was graded; you did not get an A for 30 WPM. WPM was the number of words you could type in a minute minus the errors. If your speed was measured to be 70 WPM but you made 20 errors during that measurement, your WPM rating would be 50 WPM. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 18:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtev89124j1@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #151500 |
On 2015-09-17, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> Many texts recommended using the "variable" knob to move the platen >> to adjust vertical spacing. This made it almost impossible to return >> the platen to its original position, putting the rest of the line >> out of alignment. I could never understand why this technique was >> recommended, when the ratchet release would let you adjust the platen >> but find your original position again afterwards. > > You learned how to use the variable knob; it wasn't difficult > to realign the platen. If you were really a klutz w.r.t. > this one, what you did was type everything and do the variable knob > work before taking the page out. However, that reduced your speed > dramatically. WPM was graded; you did not get an A for 30 WPM. > WPM was the number of words you could type in a minute minus > the errors. If your speed was measured to be 70 WPM but you made > 20 errors during that measurement, your WPM rating would be 50 WPM. My point was not whether you could learn to work around the problems with the variable knob, but that it was silly to waste time doing so when the ratchet release worked so much better. To me, the use of the variable knob was for initial alignment. Once you got that right, you could count on the ratchet to ensure that the alignment stayed right. Using the variable knob after you were set up wrecked all that (unless you reached a part of a form that required different alignment). -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 12:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c2161c6d-fcfd-4c06-ab83-741569a24ab7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151518 |
On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 2:03:01 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > To me, the use of the variable knob was for initial alignment. > Once you got that right, you could count on the ratchet to > ensure that the alignment stayed right. Using the variable > knob after you were set up wrecked all that (unless you reached > a part of a form that required different alignment). correct. But as mentioned, a lot of people didn't understand the difference between the two controls, and used one when they should've used the other. Often times a pre-printed form would not be 6 lines to the inch, so it was necessary to adjust the platen for every line of the form.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-17 07:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6a081b5e-eebb-4f07-b1df-50cc8a805e48@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #151476 |
On Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 12:00:06 AM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > Many texts recommended using the "variable" knob to move the platen > to adjust vertical spacing. This made it almost impossible to return > the platen to its original position, putting the rest of the line > out of alignment. I could never understand why this technique was > recommended, when the ratchet release would let you adjust the platen > but find your original position again afterwards. When we took typing class, we were taught the difference between the two releases, and when to use each. But lots of people never learned the difference, and used the wrong one. Part of the learning curve from the typewriter to PC was learning substitutes for when we moved the platen, such as for subscripts and superscripts or overlaid characters. I liked MS-Word having an automatic footnoter, that was easy to use; and I think it even resequenced the existing footnotes if you inserted a new one mid text. It also could be used manually. Early in the PC era I learned about the alt+numpad to generate a special character (even in DOS), but it seems a lot of people aren't aware of that. MS-Word included a special character font which covered most situations, and later versions added more characters, such as wingdings. (I still miss my dot-matrix* printer.) > My little Olivetti portable could be set for single, 1 1/2, and > double spacing. It was quite handy. Yes, I liked 1½ ** line spacing--kept the copy from looking too tight, but didn't waste space. Important for the pica (10 char/inch) typeface. > The ribbon control had three settings: red and black raised the ribbon > to the appropriately coloured portion, while the "stencil" setting > kept the ribbon from rising at all, allowing the typebar to cut into > the master. I always wondered if my old dot matrix printer could cut a mimeo stencil (and at what quality) if I took out the ribbon cartridge. But by the time I got my PC set up mimeo was pretty much gone so the issue was moot. (Back in high school we had two mimeograph machines and they were kept busy, as well as spirit duplicators). > Other nonstandardized keys were for fractions, typically 1/2 and > maybe 1/4. I think most typewriters had 1/2 and 1/4 ½ ¼. A few may have had more. Fractions were was one of the challenges with early PCs in DOS mode. Lots of people simply accepted the slash, e.g. 5/16. I believe some early IBM tab machines could be ordered with a special character set that had fractions instead of other puncutation, this may have been for stockbrokers. * Also the name of a character played by Joan Rivers in Spaceballs. ** alt 171 yields 1/2, and alt 172 yields 1/4. Also, alt 248 yields the degree symbol.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mtc68c0pb1@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #151435 |
On 2015-09-16, James Harris <james.harris.1@gmail.com> wrote: > It's easy to forget, looking back from this age when so much is > standardised and when use of correct characters is important, just how > lacking in standards the world was only a few decades ago. Things are getting better - but we have a long way to go. Vendors have to be dragged kicking and screaming toward any standard which they themselves didn't invent - there's just too much money to be made if you can lock users into a proprietary standard. > IIRC one particular typewriter which was probably made in or around the > 1960s did not have a number 1. One had to type a lower case L instead. > Or maybe it had no zero and a capital O was used, or both. When the > result was committed only to paper it did not matter quite so much and > the reader could normally tell from the context whether a letter or a > digit was meant. Maybe the O and zero - back then few typewriters had a 1 key and it was a standard taught in typing classes to use lower-case L instead. > While I cannot remember for sure which conflations were necessary on the > above typewriter I do remember clearly that in one place I worked in the > 1990s the secretary would still type a lower case L instead of a digit > 1. Old traditions die hard. I still see lots of people (and organizations) who insist on using upper case only. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web