Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #164962 > unrolled thread

Is it a lost cause?

Started by"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
First post2016-06-13 19:32 +0100
Last post2016-06-28 16:19 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 1000+ — 73 participants
Thread has 1303 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed.

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers | Browse in flat view

Thread has 1303 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.


Contents

  Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:32 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-13 21:02 +0200
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 21:25 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 17:43 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-13 23:05 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:52 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-14 06:39 -0700
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:22 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:54 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-06-14 11:47 -0700
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 14:17 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-06-15 14:03 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 14:18 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-16 12:45 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:52 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:55 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:53 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 13:27 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:41 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 15:05 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 14:09 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:14 -0500
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 19:48 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 20:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 21:29 -0500
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-13 23:07 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 23:02 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:56 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:13 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Darren Salt <newsspam@moreofthespa.m.invalid> - 2016-06-17 03:39 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-17 08:46 +0200
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-13 23:44 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:57 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-14 09:41 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 12:09 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-13 20:14 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 10:54 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:57 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 13:02 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 14:45 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:22 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 19:56 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:30 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-14 10:21 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-15 08:19 -0500
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 19:59 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 23:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:48 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:39 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:56 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-14 09:48 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-14 19:08 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 00:18 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:57 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:05 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:53 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:53 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:24 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 13:03 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:53 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-15 13:10 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 12:28 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-15 15:37 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:19 +0300
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 17:52 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:08 +0300
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-16 12:46 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-17 16:09 +0300
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-17 10:34 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 22:58 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:03 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 20:12 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:24 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 18:07 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 18:06 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:25 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-20 18:25 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-21 16:11 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-21 21:13 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 19:49 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-22 07:33 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 09:04 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-22 09:23 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:40 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-24 18:58 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 03:47 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 23:55 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:03 +0300
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-03 10:20 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:43 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-15 08:27 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 04:38 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-02 14:00 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 08:13 -0700
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 12:09 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 12:36 -0700
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:32 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:49 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 04:54 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:52 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-01 22:17 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:10 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-02 21:35 +0300
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 20:45 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 22:14 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-02 21:42 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:12 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 22:41 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:33 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:45 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:36 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:20 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:38 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 12:03 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:18 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 15:17 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 18:28 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 03:14 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:17 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:53 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:15 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:42 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:51 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:45 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:54 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 12:06 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 19:10 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 20:16 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 22:12 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 21:20 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:15 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-04 11:03 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-05 10:12 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:26 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:33 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:35 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 18:20 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Alan Frisbie <Usenet03_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com> - 2016-07-04 09:16 -0700
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-04 09:01 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 15:54 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:55 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:11 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:01 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:32 +0200
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:47 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-05 17:11 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 21:08 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-06 14:44 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:19 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 13:01 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-04 16:50 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 13:27 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 16:27 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:30 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-03 17:31 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:30 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:57 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-07-03 14:51 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-05 02:49 +1000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-06 01:26 +1000
                                  Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 23:18 +0000
                                    Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) - 2016-07-04 08:24 +0000
                                      Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-04 09:45 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:20 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 16:15 -0400
                            Re: ancient history, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 22:55 +0000
                              Re: ancient history, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 06:35 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-03 11:22 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-03 12:33 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 22:57 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-04 15:47 -0500
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:24 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-05 10:12 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 22:31 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 13:10 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-05 01:47 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 21:56 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 00:44 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 00:55 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:21 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 11:39 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:21 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 13:06 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-03 13:53 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 13:02 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 01:16 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 22:35 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 23:23 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 00:07 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:20 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 13:37 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 22:41 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 13:22 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 10:59 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-04 14:49 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 12:06 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-04 10:00 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-05 01:42 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 08:52 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-05 22:59 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 06:44 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-04 09:45 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:12 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:14 +0300
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:04 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 07:49 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:26 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 21:53 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:33 -0400
                  Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 19:05 +0100
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:05 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 08:30 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 12:03 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 12:35 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:03 +0100
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 06:43 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:39 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:40 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:42 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 19:53 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 15:20 -0400
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:50 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-04 16:28 -0500
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:37 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:03 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 21:08 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:13 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 06:36 -0400
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 12:37 +0100
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 13:21 +0100
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:12 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:09 +0200
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 19:52 +0100
                                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 21:11 +0200
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 20:30 +0100
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-06 00:51 +0000
                                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 20:09 +0100
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 20:32 +0100
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-06 00:44 +0000
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 17:05 -0500
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:47 -0400
                                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 20:00 -0500
                                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-05 21:16 -0600
                                      Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:08 +0000
                                        Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                          Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-06 15:01 +0000
                                            Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:49 -0400
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-06 10:45 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:00 +0200
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:46 -0400
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 07:23 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 04:30 -0400
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 10:44 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:34 +0200
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:32 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 19:56 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:52 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:25 +0000
                          Re: stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:10 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:35 -0500
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 17:18 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:05 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:12 +0000
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-07-05 21:49 +0000
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-06 06:12 -0500
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-06 11:21 -0700
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-06 19:41 +0000
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-07 08:35 -0500
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-05 08:51 -0600
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:05 +0100
                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-04 23:04 +0300
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-04 20:35 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:54 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:49 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-04 21:54 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:16 +0300
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:40 -0500
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-05 18:51 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-05 21:08 +0300
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:21 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:28 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 16:38 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:53 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-04 14:52 -0600
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 17:22 -0400
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 16:35 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-13 21:50 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:00 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-13 23:03 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-13 23:37 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 20:43 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:05 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 12:07 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-14 10:20 -0700
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-14 19:16 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-15 08:01 -0500
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 13:06 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-15 14:26 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 03:24 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-07-02 08:43 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:11 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:38 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 07:56 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-02 10:30 -0500
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-07-02 16:50 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 17:21 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 16:58 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 11:52 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:38 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-02 06:23 -0500
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:02 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 06:09 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:01 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:09 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:29 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:30 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 08:57 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 23:14 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 08:36 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 12:46 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:25 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 14:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 22:33 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2016-06-14 23:24 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:02 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 12:02 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 09:38 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:35 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-15 17:36 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:02 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:32 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 17:00 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-18 18:14 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-18 12:25 -0500
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-13 20:11 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:04 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 09:44 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2016-06-14 23:26 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:43 -0500
          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:48 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Darren Salt <newsspam@moreofthespa.m.invalid> - 2016-06-17 03:50 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 10:08 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:42 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:50 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:52 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Luke A. Guest <laguest@archeia.com> - 2016-07-01 20:28 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-01 20:21 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-01 23:10 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-01 22:35 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:35 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:53 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 11:24 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 11:21 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-02 12:39 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:01 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 13:51 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:32 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-02 19:51 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 22:06 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-03 10:41 -0700
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 11:29 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 18:39 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:36 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 18:56 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:14 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-03 15:28 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:23 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-03 17:35 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 19:48 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:01 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 13:17 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-06 01:24 +1000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:29 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 12:09 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-05 17:38 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 18:23 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:30 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 09:02 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:29 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 23:07 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 12:45 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-06 09:05 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 13:52 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2016-07-06 15:43 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 07:37 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 08:51 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 15:09 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 00:26 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:12 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-04 12:47 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:43 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 18:40 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-02 13:09 -0700
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 23:01 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:19 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 00:55 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-03 08:59 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:12 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 08:10 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:22 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 12:24 -0500
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-02 07:05 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 09:14 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 13:00 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:46 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 14:59 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:27 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:17 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:17 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:10 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 16:09 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:18 +0200
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:28 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:53 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:34 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-07 14:45 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 16:27 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-07 11:53 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-07 16:01 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 17:33 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-07 18:13 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 19:30 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:38 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:19 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 14:22 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:30 +0200
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:25 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:20 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-06 21:52 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-08 12:12 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 12:48 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-08 07:30 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-08 09:22 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-08 16:00 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-08 08:43 -0600
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-08 14:49 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 18:45 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 17:32 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-08 11:35 -0700
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:51 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-07 07:47 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 23:41 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-09 00:46 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-09 12:51 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2016-07-09 14:07 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 13:05 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-09 14:12 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 14:21 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-09 19:35 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:55 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 10:40 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-09 09:02 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 15:28 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:09 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-10 19:39 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-10 19:29 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-10 21:03 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-10 22:59 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-11 02:35 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-11 09:21 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 01:31 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:35 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-10 14:38 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-07-10 21:29 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 07:25 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-12 07:04 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 11:35 -0500
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-07-12 16:56 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-11 18:25 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 18:00 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 14:13 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-09 15:25 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-09 16:39 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 16:30 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:43 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 21:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-09 18:25 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:53 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-09 20:55 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-10 14:05 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-11 11:32 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 14:04 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 10:00 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 15:58 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 11:38 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-11 13:19 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 09:43 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 22:31 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 14:48 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 15:16 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 11:46 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 17:13 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:50 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:13 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 12:46 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 11:00 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:17 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-12 12:41 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-12 22:09 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 16:23 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:41 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:36 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-12 08:43 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:05 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:56 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 10:52 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 19:44 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-11 13:30 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 21:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-12 00:06 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-12 12:44 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-12 20:23 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 22:49 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 11:44 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-12 16:58 +0100
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:44 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:36 -0500
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 16:12 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-12 13:34 -0500
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 19:40 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 17:31 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:57 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-11 16:01 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:27 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:46 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 18:00 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-11 18:39 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 11:03 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 18:31 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:44 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:59 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-11 20:28 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 07:51 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:14 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 08:31 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-12 12:06 -0400
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:49 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:13 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:04 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-12 17:52 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-13 09:09 +0100
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-13 15:56 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-13 12:43 +0000
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-14 12:18 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 18:16 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 21:57 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-12 13:23 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 19:46 +0100
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-12 19:09 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-13 03:36 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-13 06:38 +0100
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-13 07:23 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-12 20:36 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-07-12 20:48 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-13 06:34 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-13 13:34 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-13 15:46 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:23 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-08 10:56 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-08 19:57 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:49 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:04 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:20 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:43 +0200
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-07-05 19:30 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 20:32 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:19 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:48 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-07 15:25 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-08 11:06 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-10 12:25 -0500
                                Compiler Design was Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 19:21 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 15:30 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 17:36 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-08 20:43 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2016-07-06 00:28 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:32 +0200
          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-02 13:09 -0700
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-03 09:13 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-02 19:20 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rambo <Rambo@thisaintreal.org> - 2016-06-13 20:07 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-13 21:42 +0200
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:43 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:12 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:17 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:31 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:44 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-13 21:25 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:44 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-13 20:29 +0000
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-13 21:48 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 08:11 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:49 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:14 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:23 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:33 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:46 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 10:22 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:36 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 12:01 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 11:59 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-14 12:30 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:21 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 19:51 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-14 15:24 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? colonel_hack@yahoo.com - 2016-06-15 16:30 -0700
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-15 20:07 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 09:38 +0200
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 09:23 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:05 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 10:44 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-16 21:11 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-17 09:00 +0200
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-14 17:07 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 17:14 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:45 +0200
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:34 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:44 +0200
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-15 17:21 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 23:15 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 10:05 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 09:10 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:29 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 09:41 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:42 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:29 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:47 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 06:24 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:37 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:42 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 13:53 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:00 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:20 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Brian Reay <no.sp@m.com> - 2016-06-14 08:35 -0700
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 11:45 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:18 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 15:57 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:03 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:10 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:13 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:37 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:41 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 12:25 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:19 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 15:09 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:02 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:36 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:40 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:09 -0500
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:23 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 13:50 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 17:02 -0500
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:02 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 21:13 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:59 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 22:19 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 23:23 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 10:01 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:40 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 12:19 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:37 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:39 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:10 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:19 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:59 +1000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 17:06 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:15 -0500
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 19:50 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 19:44 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:55 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 11:49 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:31 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-15 08:27 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:29 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-15 18:20 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:27 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 17:18 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:58 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-06-16 07:38 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 08:59 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:30 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:34 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-16 07:49 -0500
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-17 12:26 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 13:06 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-17 10:44 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-17 13:02 -0500
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 19:36 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 19:33 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-17 20:15 -0500
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 09:55 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:49 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 12:08 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-17 14:10 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-17 20:11 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Steve Hall <sweet_stevie@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-17 19:42 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-17 22:54 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:48 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:07 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:38 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:07 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 11:49 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:10 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:05 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 19:04 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-16 09:37 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-16 18:24 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-17 15:26 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:39 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:36 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-21 17:13 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-21 19:10 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 21:00 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 14:42 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:31 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 13:55 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:12 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:18 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-16 01:47 +1000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:53 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 22:37 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-16 09:49 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:06 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 09:06 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 10:46 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 10:15 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 17:46 +0200
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 17:38 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 16:16 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 17:06 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 17:13 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 17:14 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-19 18:35 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-19 10:05 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:18 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:16 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 06:23 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-20 02:45 -0500
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 09:39 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-19 10:06 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:21 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-06-17 08:03 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 08:07 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 10:23 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-16 01:55 +1000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-18 02:03 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 16:24 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-17 18:53 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-17 20:05 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 12:27 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:29 -0500
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-17 22:35 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 19:54 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 10:15 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 10:32 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:05 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:52 -0700
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 17:32 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-18 17:36 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 09:08 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:47 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 14:26 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 13:59 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:05 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 18:33 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 13:58 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 11:49 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 18:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:53 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 15:37 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:45 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 09:53 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-18 11:02 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 11:13 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:35 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:42 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:47 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:14 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:01 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:27 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:56 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:43 -0700
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:09 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:51 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:20 +0200
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-18 17:51 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:31 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:28 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:51 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:31 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:11 +0200
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 15:57 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 14:59 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-20 11:01 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-20 13:54 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:13 +0300
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 14:40 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 16:56 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:30 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:49 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:03 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:31 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-19 21:49 +0300
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-06-20 07:41 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 05:49 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-19 19:54 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-19 19:55 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:24 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-19 14:13 -0500
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-19 22:12 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-19 19:24 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-20 00:27 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 11:25 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-20 12:10 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 17:24 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 18:29 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 13:37 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-20 00:29 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 06:25 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-20 06:57 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 10:09 +0300
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-20 08:31 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 09:47 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 18:43 +0300
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-06-20 18:09 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 16:15 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-22 15:09 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-20 13:50 -0500
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 05:43 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:07 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:53 -0700
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-20 16:30 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:33 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 19:55 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-21 11:02 -0500
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-21 19:02 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-21 20:30 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-27 13:06 -0700
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 05:29 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-21 11:52 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:16 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 22:55 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:40 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 04:56 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 06:59 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:26 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0200
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 15:57 +0200
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:29 +0200
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-27 13:18 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:16 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 10:17 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 10:29 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-28 11:46 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 13:10 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 14:49 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 18:41 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 15:59 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-28 13:01 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 13:09 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:36 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-29 11:53 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 14:47 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 18:41 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-22 19:02 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 14:02 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-24 12:47 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-24 13:47 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-23 09:08 -0500
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 15:51 +0200
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-23 18:33 +0200
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 15:37 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 20:50 +0100
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-26 20:10 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-26 21:38 +0000
                                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 05:42 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-27 08:33 +0200
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 13:58 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-27 19:05 +0000
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 20:54 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-27 11:37 +0000
                                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 14:10 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-28 14:06 +0100
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-28 14:02 +0000
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-28 14:27 +0000
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:45 +0200
                                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:19 +0000

Page 38 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 36 37 [38] 39 40 … 50  Next page →


#165207

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
Message-ID<PM00053550B7A76AEF@aca41e17.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#165099
JimP wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:06:11 +0100, "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339"
> <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Gordon Levi" <gordon@address.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:5m70mbhvvpirotdsuf9646t9vni2u2sgfg@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> You can lament the fact that students are no longer taught how to use
>>> wire spring relays and mercury delay lines as computer memory.
>>
>>Straw Man
>>
>
> You keep saying that as if you knew what one is, but people pointing
> out your errors isn't straw, its a house made of bricks.
>
With no windows.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165113

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 19:50 +0100
Message-ID<njpjlm$ke3$6@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#165087
On 14/06/16 17:06, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "Gordon Levi" <gordon@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:5m70mbhvvpirotdsuf9646t9vni2u2sgfg@4ax.com...
>>
>> You can lament the fact that students are no longer taught how to use
>> wire spring relays and mercury delay lines as computer memory.
>
> Straw Man
>
>
Is that your new moniker?


-- 
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly 
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential 
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations 
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with 
what it actually is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165170

FromGordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 19:44 +1000
Message-ID<2u62mbhcii62bb8nqbpk81unh15qh5r1he@4ax.com>
In reply to#165087
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

>"Gordon Levi" <gordon@address.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:5m70mbhvvpirotdsuf9646t9vni2u2sgfg@4ax.com...
>>
>> You can lament the fact that students are no longer taught how to use
>> wire spring relays and mercury delay lines as computer memory.
>
>Straw Man

Wrong logic terminology too. It was "reductio ad absurdum". You lament
the slow disappearance of some skills that you have that no longer
serve a general purpose. You don't care about the loss of the skills
that the pioneer computer engineers needed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165172

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 10:55 +0100
Message-ID<njr8lo$2t4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165170
"Gordon Levi" <gordon@address.invalid> wrote in message 
news:2u62mbhcii62bb8nqbpk81unh15qh5r1he@4ax.com...
> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Gordon Levi" <gordon@address.invalid> wrote in message
>>news:5m70mbhvvpirotdsuf9646t9vni2u2sgfg@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> You can lament the fact that students are no longer taught how to use
>>> wire spring relays and mercury delay lines as computer memory.
>>
>>Straw Man
>
> Wrong logic terminology too. It was "reductio ad absurdum". You lament
> the slow disappearance of some skills that you have that no longer
> serve a general purpose. You don't care about the loss of the skills
> that the pioneer computer engineers needed.

I cannot make any sense of that. The Straw man was because I had never
mentioned those techniques. Also, there's no evidence at all for
your last sentence, so I wonder what prompted you to say it?

You also conflated two separate linesof discussion, one being
my interest in having low level access via blinkenlights, with the
other, disparate, being a lament that so-called computer scientists
do not understand how their computer works.

Acadaemic education is not, and should not be, about commercial and trade
convenience.

In my day, anyone with a good grounding in assembler programming could be
taken on in ANY computing environment being thought capable of
intelligent self application, but nowadays job interviews get restricted to
the very limited experiences of such so-called computer scientiist
interviewers who only know C, C++ and Linux.



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165180

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-15 11:49 +0100
Message-ID<20160615114915.6709dead6b5c6bcca6b71fcd@eircom.net>
In reply to#165172
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 10:55:00 +0100
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> In my day, anyone with a good grounding in assembler programming could be
> taken on in ANY computing environment being thought capable of
> intelligent self application,

	In your day (and my early days) most programming was not dissimilar
to assembler level programming. These days it is not - clear high level
abstractions, maintainability and testability are the order of the day for
a great deal of programming today. How many assembler programmers can
design a good object hierarchy for example ? How many know the boundaries
of undefined behaviour in C++, or how to get object reference counting
right interfacing between C and Python ?

	The skills of an assembler programmer are still relevant, but not
in the mainstream of programming or even in much of OS programming,
they come in at device driver and embedded system level these days.

	I started with those skills, hardware design skills and some higher
level programming skills. Over the years I have kept up to date with the
state of the art in many (but far from all) areas and as a result have
learned to apply the core skills to new areas. Over the years I've worked
in BCPL, C, 4GLs, Smalltalk, C++, Java, Perl, Python, PHP and JavaScript at
least, I've worked on everything from an OS on bare metal from scratch to
highly scalable websites by way of distributed databases.

	Yes someone with skills in assembler language programming can still
get good jobs today, but only by staying up to date in areas where there is
work. The skills of yesterday aren't taught much now because few need them.

	When I started I got work very easily - the detailed skills I had
then would likely not get me a job anywhere today, I would not suggest that
anyone bother learning them.

	If you want to design new computers today then you'll not be
working with logic gates and timing diagrams, you'll be working with high
level modules blocking out the processor structure to run under simulated
loads while you tweak the internal structure for best balance.

	If you want to write kernel code and device drivers you'll be
working in C and be concerned with APIs, interface specifications, thread
safety, deadlocks and so forth.

	Small embedded controllers are about the only things where anyone
works at the level we used to.

	Whatever you want to do from that lot (or the much bigger list I
could have written) the skills you'll need in common with the hardware
designers and low level programmers of the days of yore are the skills of
clear thinking, attention to detail, problem solving and fault tracking.
But you won't be using them the same way we did to design logic boards or
debug assembler code, any more than we used them the same way earlier
engineers used them to design and debug complex electromechanical systems
or even earlier ones to design and debug steam engines.

	The core skills never change, and the able always learn them but
the context changes over the decades and some old hands always wail that the
baby has been thrown out with the bath water and they're never right.

> but nowadays job interviews get restricted
> to the very limited experiences of such so-called computer scientiist
> interviewers who only know C, C++ and Linux.

	There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs these
days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby with
C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A competent
interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team quickly,
someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be considered if
there's nobody ready to go.

-- 
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]


#165187

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-15 11:31 +0000
Message-ID<dscsjqFkqbiU36@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#165180
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:49:15 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> 	There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
> low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs
> these days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby
> with C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A
> competent interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team
> quickly, someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be
> considered if there's nobody ready to go.

What gets me is the adverts for '9 years experience' on a platform that 
has only existed for five years.....!

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165194

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-06-15 08:27 -0400
Message-ID<384230760.487686344.648339.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#165187
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:49:15 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> 
>> There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
>> low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs
>> these days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby
>> with C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A
>> competent interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team
>> quickly, someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be
>> considered if there's nobody ready to go.
> 
> What gets me is the adverts for '9 years experience' on a platform that 
> has only existed for five years.....!
> 

In the case of some software, for example in the early days of NT, I
suspect that this was intended to try to lure away M$ employees who might
actually have had the desired experience pre-release.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165226

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 16:29 +0100
Message-ID<njrs82$d5n$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165187
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dscsjqFkqbiU36@mid.individual.net...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:49:15 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
>> low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs
>> these days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby
>> with C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A
>> competent interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team
>> quickly, someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be
>> considered if there's nobody ready to go.
>
> What gets me is the adverts for '9 years experience' on a platform that
> has only existed for five years.....!

And also when interviewing job candidates how often does 9 years' experience
mean 1 years' experience repeated a furthe 8 times?  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165239

FromMorten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 18:20 +0200
Message-ID<lqb83d-id1.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to#165226
In article <njrs82$d5n$1@dont-email.me>,
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
>news:dscsjqFkqbiU36@mid.individual.net...
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:49:15 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
>>> low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs
>>> these days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby
>>> with C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A
>>> competent interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team
>>> quickly, someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be
>>> considered if there's nobody ready to go.
>>
>> What gets me is the adverts for '9 years experience' on a platform that
>> has only existed for five years.....!
>
>And also when interviewing job candidates how often does 9 years' experience
>mean 1 years' experience repeated a furthe 8 times?  :-)

You could have 9 years of effective experience during 5 years of calendar
time if you just worked a LOT of overtime. The normal number of work hours
in a year is somewhere from 1750 to 1950 depending on country, but the 
year actually contains 8760 hours. If you work 12 hour days 365 days a year
you will have 4380 hours, You could take a month off and still be more
than 100% ahead.

-- mrr


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165225

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 16:27 +0100
Message-ID<njrs5r$ct5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165180
You seem, with a great deal of sesquipedalian prolix,  to be agreeing with
me that starting out as an assembler programmer
made you a good candidate for picking up skills in other areas.

For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?

There you go, then.

QED


"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160615114915.6709dead6b5c6bcca6b71fcd@eircom.net...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 10:55:00 +0100
> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> In my day, anyone with a good grounding in assembler programming could be
>> taken on in ANY computing environment being thought capable of
>> intelligent self application,
> In your day (and my early days) most programming was not dissimilar
> to assembler level programming. These days it is not - clear high level
> abstractions, maintainability and testability are the order of the day for
> a great deal of programming today. How many assembler programmers can
> design a good object hierarchy for example ? How many know the boundaries
> of undefined behaviour in C++, or how to get object reference counting
> right interfacing between C and Python ?
> The skills of an assembler programmer are still relevant, but not
> in the mainstream of programming or even in much of OS programming,
> they come in at device driver and embedded system level these days.
> I started with those skills, hardware design skills and some higher
> level programming skills. Over the years I have kept up to date with the
> state of the art in many (but far from all) areas and as a result have
> learned to apply the core skills to new areas. Over the years I've worked
> in BCPL, C, 4GLs, Smalltalk, C++, Java, Perl, Python, PHP and JavaScript 
> at
> least, I've worked on everything from an OS on bare metal from scratch to
> highly scalable websites by way of distributed databases.
> Yes someone with skills in assembler language programming can still
> get good jobs today, but only by staying up to date in areas where there 
> is
> work. The skills of yesterday aren't taught much now because few need 
> them.
> When I started I got work very easily - the detailed skills I had
> then would likely not get me a job anywhere today, I would not suggest 
> that
> anyone bother learning them.
> If you want to design new computers today then you'll not be
> working with logic gates and timing diagrams, you'll be working with high
> level modules blocking out the processor structure to run under simulated
> loads while you tweak the internal structure for best balance.
> If you want to write kernel code and device drivers you'll be
> working in C and be concerned with APIs, interface specifications, thread
> safety, deadlocks and so forth.
> Small embedded controllers are about the only things where anyone
> works at the level we used to.
> Whatever you want to do from that lot (or the much bigger list I
> could have written) the skills you'll need in common with the hardware
> designers and low level programmers of the days of yore are the skills of
> clear thinking, attention to detail, problem solving and fault tracking.
> But you won't be using them the same way we did to design logic boards or
> debug assembler code, any more than we used them the same way earlier
> engineers used them to design and debug complex electromechanical systems
> or even earlier ones to design and debug steam engines.
> The core skills never change, and the able always learn them but
> the context changes over the decades and some old hands always wail that 
> the
> baby has been thrown out with the bath water and they're never right.
>> but nowadays job interviews get restricted
>> to the very limited experiences of such so-called computer scientiist
>> interviewers who only know C, C++ and Linux.
> There is a lot of that, it reflects the relative lack of jobs for
> low level programmers today. In fact ITYF that most programming jobs these
> days are JAVA or HTML/CSS/JavaScript, followed by python/perl/ruby with
> C/C++ trailing behind and Assembler way down in the noise. A competent
> interviewer is looking for someone they can drop into the team quickly,
> someone who has to learn the tools first is only going to be considered if
> there's nobody ready to go.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165241

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-15 17:18 +0100
Message-ID<20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net>
In reply to#165225
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> You seem, with a great deal of sesquipedalian prolix,  to be agreeing with
> me that starting out as an assembler programmer
> made you a good candidate for picking up skills in other areas.

	Up to a point you have to pick up the skills before you can be
hired to use them. Nobody will hire you for skills you cannot demonstrate.

	I'm also observing that the skills of an assembler programmer on
simple hardware are not going to match any job requirements today, so those
skills would be terrible ones to learn now.

	You must start with something that is current when you start, and
stay up to date.

> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?

	None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
the job after being hired for the skills I already had.

> There you go, then.

	Where ?

-- 
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]


#165252

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-15 20:58 +0100
Message-ID<njsc10$akk$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165241
"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>
> None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
> the job after being hired for the skills I already had.

QED

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165278

FromAndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com>
Date2016-06-16 07:38 +0100
Message-ID<YPr8z.159012$803.26674@fx07.fr7>
In reply to#165252
On 15/06/2016 20:58, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>
>> None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>> the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>
> QED
>
Not really.
Once you have graduated you are shown to have a level of ability to 
learn and since university learning entails quite a degree of 
self-teaching and independence then switching to an allied subject 
should be possible without formal training.
Learning one language and switching to another is a lot simpler than 
learning from scratch especially if it shares a lot of paradigms.

I was university-trained on 6502 (which was easy for me as I used to 
have an Acorn Atom), z80 and pascal but made the switch to 68000 and C 
quite easily as there was a lot of cross over.
I opted to take a formal course on C++ to understand the object oriented 
language parts and then moved from C++ to Java and now python for 
playing with the pi.

Andy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165281

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-16 08:59 +0100
Message-ID<20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net>
In reply to#165252
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
> >
> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
> 
> QED

	You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for someone
on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to volunteer if
it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
application as something I had experience in.

	Rinse and repeat for thirty odd years and you wind up with a list
like the one I posted. Fail to keep up with changes in your field and you
wind up in middle management or out of work bemoaning the lack of
opportunity for skilled people.

-- 
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]


#165291

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-16 11:30 +0100
Message-ID<njtv4m$r3m$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165281
"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>
>> QED
>
> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for 
> someone
> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to volunteer 
> if
> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
> application as something I had experience in.

You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
in assembler can fit in anywhere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165295

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#165291
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>
>>> QED
>>
>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>> someone
>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to volunteer
>> if
>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>> application as something I had experience in.
>
> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
> in assembler can fit in anywhere.

Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
layers.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165302

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-16 13:34 +0100
Message-ID<nju6cv$ju9$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165295
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>>
>>>> QED
>>>
>>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>>> someone
>>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to 
>>> volunteer
>>> if
>>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>>> application as something I had experience in.
>>
>> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
>> in assembler can fit in anywhere.
>
> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
> layers.

I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165307

FromAndy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com>
Date2016-06-16 07:49 -0500
Message-ID<slrnnm582o.kda.andyl@azaal.plus.com>
In reply to#165302
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:34:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
>>
>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

So how does knowing assembler (any kind) help you write and optimise SQL? 
Help you design a relational object model?

-- 
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
   - Douglas Adams

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165389

From"Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date2016-06-17 12:26 +0100
Message-ID<op.yi68qtwomsr2db@dell3100.dlink.com>
In reply to#165302
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:34:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339  
<no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...

>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

When everybody around you acts as a 5 year old child, ask yourself, "Do I  
project myself as an arrogant know it all?"

[fu afc only]

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#165395

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Message-ID<PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#165302
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>>>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>>>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>>>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>>>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>>>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>>>
>>>>> QED
>>>>
>>>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>>>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>>>> someone
>>>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>>>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to
>>>> volunteer
>>>> if
>>>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>>>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>>>> application as something I had experience in.
>>>
>>> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
>>> in assembler can fit in anywhere.
>>
>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.


Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
out your thinking style yet.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 38 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 36 37 [38] 39 40 … 50  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers


csiph-web