Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #151227 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-10 12:59 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-09-29 15:17 +1000 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 65 participants
Thread has 1285 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1285 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-10 12:59 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 10:21 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-10 10:54 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 11:43 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-10 14:07 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-10 14:00 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 14:05 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-10 15:58 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-11 19:04 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-11 23:29 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-10 12:47 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-10 19:03 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "hqhy" <hqhy@nospam.com> - 2015-09-11 10:21 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-10 21:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-11 12:48 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:05 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-12 13:24 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 04:27 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-12 14:12 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-13 06:51 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-12 21:47 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-12 22:53 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-13 17:46 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-13 17:16 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-14 10:17 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-15 04:48 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-13 21:13 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-14 18:06 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-13 14:20 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:28 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-13 10:54 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-13 21:15 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-13 23:01 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Jim Thomas" <JT@nospam.com> - 2015-09-14 04:18 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-12 19:38 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2015-09-13 12:20 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 21:45 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-13 13:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:30 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-13 17:14 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-14 07:00 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-14 12:50 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 09:13 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-15 13:07 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 04:31 +1000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-14 16:35 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 07:58 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 08:14 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-15 13:16 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-15 10:12 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-15 17:48 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-15 11:51 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-15 16:03 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-15 16:01 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-15 19:29 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 20:13 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-15 20:12 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-16 11:39 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-16 11:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-15 13:07 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-15 06:14 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-15 14:55 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-15 16:05 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-16 12:54 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:27 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-16 14:49 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 10:43 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 19:12 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 11:21 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-16 15:02 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 08:08 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 11:04 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 10:45 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 18:02 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 12:50 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-17 07:33 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-16 10:11 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 13:53 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-16 18:08 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 21:34 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-16 21:15 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 19:17 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:30 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 16:15 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 15:36 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 19:51 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 16:27 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 17:25 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-17 03:58 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-17 07:11 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:58 -0400
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-17 16:35 +0200
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-18 13:19 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-18 09:58 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-18 10:25 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-19 16:29 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-18 19:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-18 18:36 -0500
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-19 03:24 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-09-19 10:06 +0100
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 22:14 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-16 13:40 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-16 16:43 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 10:52 -0700
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-18 11:46 +0000
Re: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95 Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-18 11:54 +0000
Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 18:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-15 14:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-15 19:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions (was: 1973--TI 8 digit electric calculator--$99.95) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-16 08:00 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-16 11:06 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-16 18:38 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Scion <a.b@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-25 13:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-17 09:45 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-17 08:34 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-18 12:35 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-18 11:54 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-18 21:23 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-19 03:24 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-19 11:09 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-19 16:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-19 22:09 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 07:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 10:50 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-20 15:04 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-20 11:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-21 12:36 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:43 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-20 20:03 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-21 07:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "James Harris" <james.harris.1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-21 09:19 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 10:15 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-21 09:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-21 21:33 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-22 11:51 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-21 07:03 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 16:29 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:39 -0500
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-21 10:35 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 13:45 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-21 19:06 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 15:00 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-22 14:01 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 10:29 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-22 15:47 +0100
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 16:27 +0100
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-22 14:28 -0400
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 11:58 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 04:37 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 15:09 -0500
Re: power supplies Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-09-22 18:11 -0700
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-22 22:16 -0400
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 07:37 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 11:06 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-23 16:33 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:26 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 04:37 +0000
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-23 08:32 +0000
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:44 +0000
Re: power supplies "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:17 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 23:35 -0400
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 07:19 +0000
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 23:41 -0400
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-28 09:34 +0000
Re: power supplies Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:29 +0000
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-28 06:28 -0500
Re: power supplies Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:05 +0000
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:07 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 16:09 -0400
Re: power supplies Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-29 07:04 +0000
Re: power supplies Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-28 16:28 +0000
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-28 19:28 +0200
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 16:00 -0400
Re: power supplies rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2015-09-29 06:09 +0000
Re: power supplies Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 08:58 +0000
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:45 +0000
Re: power supplies "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:20 -0500
Re: power supplies Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-23 08:18 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 11:09 -0500
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-23 16:31 +0000
Re: power supplies Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-09-23 11:20 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:45 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:38 -0700
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-23 19:44 +0000
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-09-24 13:35 +0000
Re: power supplies sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-30 18:35 -0400
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-01 13:17 +0000
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-01 08:27 -0500
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-02 13:11 +0000
Re: power supplies scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-02 14:42 +0000
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-02 19:17 +0100
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-02 15:14 -0400
Re: power supplies JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 14:20 -0500
Re: power supplies Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-02 20:15 -0500
Re: power supplies Michele <havana9@bigmailbox.net> - 2015-10-04 23:41 +0200
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-01 13:27 +0000
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-04 14:22 +0000
Re: power supplies "Hanny Z" <hz@nospam.com> - 2015-10-05 03:46 +1100
Re: power supplies Michele <havana9@bigmailbox.net> - 2015-10-04 23:51 +0200
Re: power supplies jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-05 12:47 +0000
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:29 +0000
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-05 07:16 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-10-05 15:37 +0100
Re: power supplies Whiskers <catwheezel@operamail.com> - 2015-10-05 17:35 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-23 09:53 +0100
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2015-09-23 13:50 +0100
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 20:16 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:46 -0500
Re: power supplies Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-23 12:42 -0500
Re: power supplies Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-23 14:50 -0400
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:51 -0700
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 10:31 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-24 14:18 -0500
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 21:36 +0200
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-24 15:05 -0500
Re: power supplies lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 22:21 +0200
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 13:49 -0700
steam coold, too, was: power supplies danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2015-09-25 02:22 +0000
Re: steam coold, too, was: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-25 07:17 -0700
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 13:44 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 10:36 -0500
Re: power supplies "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-25 10:51 -0500
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 14:10 -0500
Re: power supplies hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-25 12:33 -0700
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-25 15:07 -0500
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-25 20:21 +0000
Re: power supplies Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-26 16:04 -0500
Re: power supplies Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-27 07:01 -0400
Re: power supplies Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 16:42 +0000
Re: power supplies sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-30 18:42 -0400
Re: power supplies Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:14 +0200
Re: power supplies Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 15:43 +0100
Re: power supplies Dave Pitts <dpitts@cozx.com> - 2015-09-23 07:47 -0600
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 20:20 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 15:41 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-22 23:58 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 15:48 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2015-09-24 12:13 +0800
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 11:30 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 21:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 18:10 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:35 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 20:27 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 01:55 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:36 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-21 22:11 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-22 16:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-22 10:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-22 10:46 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-22 17:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-23 06:57 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 08:57 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-22 10:51 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 02:29 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 19:23 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 11:34 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 14:58 -0500
accurate watches, was: Decimal point character and billions danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> - 2015-09-23 20:51 +0000
Re: accurate watches, was: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:49 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 19:01 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 07:47 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 18:52 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 12:14 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 16:00 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 01:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-25 09:07 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-23 14:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-23 14:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 12:55 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-23 16:13 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-24 00:46 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 07:19 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-24 17:50 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-22 10:53 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-23 02:30 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-22 22:12 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-23 06:58 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-22 19:22 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-23 10:14 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-23 10:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-24 07:43 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-23 12:46 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-23 18:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-24 04:05 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-23 22:31 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 15:49 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-24 11:05 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-24 16:30 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-24 08:12 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-24 18:52 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-24 16:02 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-25 01:23 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:28 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:17 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2015-09-22 11:41 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-23 14:46 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-23 17:12 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-23 10:45 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 23:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-21 22:09 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-22 08:25 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-09-22 07:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-20 18:26 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-20 19:34 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 22:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-21 09:16 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:33 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-09-20 15:39 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:31 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-21 21:37 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-20 16:26 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-09-20 21:28 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-21 09:23 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2015-09-20 10:22 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 16:48 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:01 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-20 22:27 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions mausg@mail.com - 2015-09-21 10:28 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-21 16:29 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions mausg@mail.com - 2015-09-21 20:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 21:49 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-09-21 17:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-21 18:03 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2015-09-22 00:45 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-09-20 12:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 15:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 01:20 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions lawrence@cluon.com - 2015-09-21 18:07 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-09-20 18:18 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-20 16:20 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-20 19:23 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-21 10:08 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-21 14:11 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-22 10:48 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-26 17:08 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 13:50 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-28 05:43 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:08 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 10:03 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 10:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 12:36 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-28 09:54 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 13:20 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-28 19:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 15:12 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-28 17:01 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 17:15 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-28 17:05 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-09-28 20:49 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 07:32 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 18:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 03:07 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-29 10:38 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 12:53 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-29 18:15 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-29 12:14 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-09-29 12:24 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-29 20:26 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 12:16 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-01 10:32 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-29 17:32 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2015-09-29 07:47 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 07:36 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-29 13:35 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 10:26 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 17:15 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 11:52 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-30 22:54 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 09:02 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-30 21:59 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-01 14:49 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-09-30 20:09 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-01 05:47 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-10-01 15:13 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 05:40 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 14:34 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 13:45 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-30 11:59 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-30 19:14 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 14:56 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 16:08 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-28 13:30 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 17:12 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-09-29 13:55 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:02 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-28 17:13 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-28 21:22 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-09-29 07:52 +0200
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 07:52 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-02 16:41 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-02 18:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-05 16:10 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-05 16:20 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-06 16:05 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-06 17:17 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-07 08:27 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-07 15:22 -0500
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-10-07 21:42 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-07 18:01 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-08 12:02 +0100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-08 13:19 +0200
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-08 11:41 -0500
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-09 11:25 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-08 07:49 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-09 13:02 +0100
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 10:32 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 18:46 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 15:07 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 20:56 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-09 19:16 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-09 23:59 -0300
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-10 12:03 -0700
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-08 11:17 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:28 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 18:29 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-10-08 13:21 -0700
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-10-14 11:41 -0700
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-14 14:45 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 22:02 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-15 03:21 -0300
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-15 08:53 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 13:53 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 11:32 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 10:36 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 18:46 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 15:15 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-09 22:50 +0200
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:06 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 13:49 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-09 14:02 -0700
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-09 14:23 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 15:20 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 20:56 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-09 16:24 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-10 09:16 -0400
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-10 15:00 -0300
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-10 20:11 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-09 16:19 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-09 22:21 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-10 18:32 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-10 21:47 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-12 15:54 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-12 21:39 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-12 19:43 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-12 21:29 -0700
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 16:33 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-13 15:25 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 19:06 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 05:39 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 11:23 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 12:46 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 09:17 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 09:24 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 13:01 -0400
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-10-14 19:04 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 16:20 -0400
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 16:24 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:34 -0700
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-12 17:59 -0500
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-13 02:05 -0300
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-13 18:23 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-13 17:05 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 03:15 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:45 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-13 15:13 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-13 20:52 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 03:29 -0700
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-14 03:45 -0700
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 08:20 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-14 09:56 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 18:21 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 16:16 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 16:50 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-14 21:59 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:05 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 06:43 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 10:58 -0500
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-15 16:41 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-15 17:51 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 18:40 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-15 07:12 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 10:48 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 12:27 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-15 13:40 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 14:21 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-14 10:37 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 15:26 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-13 16:16 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-13 17:57 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 03:15 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-28 13:17 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 14:48 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 12:34 -0700
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:09 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 07:32 -0700
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-28 17:06 -0500
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 01:12 -0300
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 04:47 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 16:34 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 11:11 -0700
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 16:32 -0300
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:31 -0500
Re: rationality Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2015-10-29 14:48 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:29 -0500
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-29 13:55 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:35 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 21:51 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:30 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-30 11:40 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-30 18:00 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-30 23:17 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-31 01:16 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-31 12:07 -0700
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-31 15:16 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-31 21:27 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-01 15:04 +1100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-01 10:07 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-01 16:20 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-02 12:56 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-02 11:26 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-02 05:30 -0600
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-02 13:17 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-02 06:16 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-02 13:55 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 17:34 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-06 12:20 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 14:43 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 20:26 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 10:44 -0800
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 21:28 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 15:55 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:31 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:50 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 07:58 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 11:02 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-06 12:01 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 15:29 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 07:05 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 14:36 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 20:49 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 06:28 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 08:26 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-07 13:53 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 14:18 +0100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:44 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 19:12 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-11 13:31 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-11 17:05 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-12 00:44 +0100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-12 00:53 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-04 23:20 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-05 07:38 +0100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 06:27 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-05 11:03 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 14:00 +0000
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 14:41 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 12:46 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 17:52 -0600
Re: rationality Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-11-06 02:32 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:15 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 10:12 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 10:49 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 12:53 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 14:03 -0500
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-04 20:11 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:33 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-05 22:33 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:30 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 10:43 -0800
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 07:05 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 08:04 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:55 +1100
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-02 13:17 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 09:13 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2015-11-02 16:28 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 10:42 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:12 -0500
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:07 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 14:14 +0100
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 10:17 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 10:24 -0600
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:07 -0800
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-09 12:47 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 15:28 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 17:43 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 18:48 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 20:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 20:32 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 20:54 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:25 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-12 13:59 -0800
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-13 08:02 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-13 06:54 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-13 08:28 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-13 10:32 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-13 15:27 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-16 11:46 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-13 09:21 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 14:44 +1100
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-13 14:09 +0000
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-13 09:32 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 14:47 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-14 01:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-14 09:42 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 20:49 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-14 10:15 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-15 04:49 +1100
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 12:50 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-14 16:58 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-14 16:03 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 12:45 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-16 18:23 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-16 18:23 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-16 20:42 -0500
Re: rationality maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-17 10:42 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 08:01 -0500
Re: historicla archives hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 08:02 -0800
Re: historicla archives Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:49 -0500
Re: historicla archives hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 12:05 -0800
Re: historicla archives JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:44 -0600
Re: historicla archives Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 15:30 -0500
Re: historicla archives Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 22:55 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 10:48 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 11:21 -0800
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 13:37 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-17 16:27 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:49 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:41 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-17 11:53 -0800
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-17 12:17 -0800
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 22:59 -0500
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-18 17:18 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-19 09:35 +0000
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-19 14:26 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-19 10:00 -0800
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-20 08:04 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-20 10:16 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-17 19:41 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-17 14:46 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 12:30 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 09:40 -0600
Re: rationality Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2015-11-15 18:09 +0100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 19:06 +0000
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-15 19:35 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-15 20:34 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-15 16:31 -0600
Re: rationality Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-11-15 19:09 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-16 11:38 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-16 10:34 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-16 08:22 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-16 11:36 +1100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-16 08:21 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-15 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-13 14:19 +0000
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-09 14:20 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 18:03 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:09 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 19:54 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 21:27 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 23:34 -0600
Re: rationality - Y2K Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 10:03 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 14:13 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 08:38 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 02:55 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 10:09 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:11 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 12:57 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 12:38 -0600
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-10 03:03 -0600
Re: rationality "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 20:31 +1100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 13:15 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 17:24 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 18:25 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 19:26 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-10 10:30 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-10 11:48 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 11:25 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 11:05 +1100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:31 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 14:34 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-07 13:42 +1100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 23:34 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 00:32 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-07 11:47 +0000
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:03 -0800
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:55 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 15:39 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 11:42 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-11 11:22 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 20:48 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-11 17:24 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-11 09:38 -0500
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-11 20:54 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-11 13:53 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-10 14:13 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-06 21:31 +0100
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-07 13:45 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 11:50 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-07 19:11 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-07 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 20:37 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 00:50 +0100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:40 +0000
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-08 11:37 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-07 18:46 -0800
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:44 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 10:36 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 12:18 +0100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-02 18:47 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 11:10 -0800
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-03 02:46 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 16:34 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 00:45 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 20:33 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-02 13:22 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 12:21 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 12:46 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 13:25 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 11:25 +1100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 10:51 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 17:56 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 18:07 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 13:18 +1100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 07:29 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 13:13 +1100
Re: rationality Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2015-11-02 21:16 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 07:29 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 16:04 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 13:02 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 16:19 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 16:56 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 11:03 -0500
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 11:22 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:12 +0100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:06 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 14:17 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 12:29 -0800
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:13 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-07 21:13 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-08 16:56 +1100
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-08 03:23 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 11:04 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-08 15:33 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 16:45 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-08 14:18 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 22:02 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 09:53 +1100
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-09 08:03 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 00:10 -0600
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 04:22 -0400
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-09 05:47 -0800
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-09 12:31 -0500
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-09 17:43 +0000
Re: rationality tracymnelson@gmail.com - 2015-11-09 10:13 -0800
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-09 17:13 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-09 14:45 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 15:08 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 11:09 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-10 01:19 +0100
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-10 07:57 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-11-10 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2015-11-15 15:48 +0100
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-15 16:28 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-16 14:23 -0600
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-16 12:37 -0800
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-16 15:49 -0600
Re: rationality cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2015-11-16 21:59 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-16 18:36 -0600
Re: rationality Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-17 07:55 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-16 21:07 +0000
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-09 12:55 -0800
Re: rationality "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 22:55 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 19:04 -0400
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 13:15 -0600
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-11-09 16:23 -0400
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-09 16:26 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 09:44 +1100
Re: rationality Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2015-11-09 23:19 +0000
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:50 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-10 00:50 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 20:14 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 14:19 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-12 13:56 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-12 16:53 -0600
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-13 00:41 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-13 19:11 +1100
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-13 09:39 -0800
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-13 18:17 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-14 20:46 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-14 20:35 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-15 10:29 +1100
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-13 17:50 +1100
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-09 14:41 +0000
Re: rationality "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-09 15:14 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-09 16:33 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-09 13:27 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-09 09:22 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 14:59 -0500
Re: rationality Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-11-09 13:42 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-09 18:11 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-10 07:57 -0500
Re: rationality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-09 11:17 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-09 11:58 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-08 08:13 -0500
Re: rationality Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-08 06:44 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 13:37 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-08 16:52 +0100
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-09 14:46 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-10 10:59 +1100
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-08 16:42 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 13:31 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-08 23:52 +0000
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-09 14:41 +1100
Re: rationality Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 08:06 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:53 +1100
Overthrow Chinese Governmen (Was: Re: rationality) mentificium@gmail.com - 2015-11-06 04:59 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 10:52 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:10 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 08:26 +1100
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-04 13:55 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 16:18 -0600
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 18:18 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-07 01:13 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-04 22:22 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-05 17:56 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-06 09:56 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-05 06:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 12:54 -0600
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-06 13:52 +1100
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-06 10:06 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:09 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 13:37 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-04 16:05 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-04 16:52 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-05 06:37 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:40 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 18:04 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 19:35 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 10:54 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 07:44 -0600
Re: rationality - bridge to somewhere Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-06 09:36 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 12:24 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-06 12:07 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-06 15:29 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-06 12:24 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:52 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 13:06 -0600
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 13:34 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-07 02:18 +0000
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-06 09:00 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-10 17:33 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-11 12:20 +1100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-11 12:41 -0500
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-10 22:49 -0800
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-11 07:46 -0800
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 10:01 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:46 -0500
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-05 12:27 -0800
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:42 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-05 17:48 -0600
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 13:07 -0500
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-03 10:44 +1100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 10:42 +0100
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 10:32 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-06 12:04 -0600
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-02 10:46 -0800
Re: rationality jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-03 12:54 +0000
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-03 10:00 -0600
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-03 11:37 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-03 19:43 +0000
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-03 09:09 -0800
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 13:08 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-03 15:24 -0600
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-03 22:38 +0100
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-03 17:04 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 10:33 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 13:09 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-05 12:22 -0600
Re: rationality Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-05 14:19 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-11-05 16:45 -0600
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-04 02:51 +0000
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-11-04 09:56 +0100
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 08:44 -0600
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-04 14:00 -0600
Re: rationality cmadams@cmadams.net (Chris Adams) - 2015-11-04 16:13 -0600
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-03 19:32 +0000
Re: rationality "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-03 07:18 +1100
Re: rationality Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-01 13:59 -0800
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 11:32 -0600
Re: rationality JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-04 12:57 -0600
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-04 22:38 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-05 10:56 +0000
Re: rationality "78lp" <78lp@nospam.com> - 2015-11-02 12:55 +1100
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 11:48 -0500
Re: rationality "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-04 11:07 -0600
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-04 07:58 -0800
Re: rationality "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-05 13:18 +1100
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 16:27 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 17:19 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-29 18:15 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-29 13:45 -0500
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-29 20:01 +0000
Re: rationality Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-10-29 23:46 -0300
Re: rationality Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-30 04:56 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-30 12:39 +0000
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-29 20:43 +0000
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-29 21:02 -0500
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-29 15:27 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-30 09:42 -0500
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-11-04 10:41 -0500
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-04 19:56 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 11:13 +0000
Re: rationality David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-11-05 11:33 +0000
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-05 14:04 +0000
Re: rationality scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-05 16:13 +0000
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:09 +0000
Re: rationality Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2015-10-14 15:52 -0400
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-13 12:21 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 12:00 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-14 18:21 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-14 13:54 -0500
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-15 17:51 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-14 17:02 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 11:06 +0000
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-15 10:38 -0400
Re: rationality Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-15 18:37 +0000
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 14:15 -0500
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-15 11:10 -0500
Re: rationality Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-14 21:00 -0500
Re: rationality simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-10-16 10:20 +0100
Re: rationality Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-19 13:28 -0500
Re: rationality Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-19 15:18 -0400
Re: rationality hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-20 11:27 -0700
Re: rationality Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-08 10:23 -0400
Re: rationality Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-07 23:55 +0200
Re: rationality Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 05:14 +0000
Re: rationality "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:07 -0500
Re: rationality Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-09 12:02 +0100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-07 20:37 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-08 05:24 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:15 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-08 16:14 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-08 22:57 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions pechter@S20.pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2015-10-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-06 08:32 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-10-03 11:11 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-10-03 15:55 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-04 14:11 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-04 14:50 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-05 12:47 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-05 17:44 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-10-06 13:13 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-10-06 17:52 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Hanny Z" <hz@nospam.com> - 2015-10-06 09:26 +1100
Re: Decimal point character and billions Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-07 20:40 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-10-09 16:12 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-05 16:14 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-10-06 12:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 10:07 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:05 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 10:40 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-09-29 12:35 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-09-29 13:03 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:48 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:17 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-29 17:25 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 09:37 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:06 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-09-29 19:25 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-09-30 02:26 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-09-30 03:35 -0300
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 16:58 +1000
Re: Decimal point character and billions Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-30 06:25 -0400
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:00 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 21:36 -0500
Re: Decimal point character and billions Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-09-30 11:03 +0000
Re: Decimal point character and billions hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-09-28 13:26 -0700
Re: Decimal point character and billions "Sam Thatch" <st342@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 15:17 +1000
Page 44 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 42 43 [44] 45 46 … 50 Next page →
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 06:56 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <1878079939.468503408.264665.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #154054 |
JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 16:40:28 -0600, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> > wrote: > >> On 05-Nov-15 05:37, Peter Flass wrote: >>> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>>> On 04-Nov-15 15:05, Peter Flass wrote: >>>>> At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be >>>>> used to sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and >>>>> more in their 80s these days. >>>> >>>> People live longer, but they aren't necessarily able (or willing) >>>> to work longer. Most candidates are unwilling to reduce benefits >>>> or increase the retirement age for Boomers, most of whom have >>>> _already_ retired or plan to do so in the next few years--and will >>>> vote against _anyone_ who tries to break the promises made to them >>>> decades ago. Since we already have a solution that doesn't require >>>> doing so, why would anyone even consider this option? >>> >>> You phase it in, beginning with people who are ten years or so from >>> retirement. They already did this once when they changed FRA from 65 >>> to 67+. >> >> SS can't even cover benefits for people who are _already_ 67+ from >> existing contributions of those under 67. If we're not willing to cut >> those benefits--which is political suicide--then we have to raise the >> revenues from people currently under 67. >> >> S > > Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their > earmarks, and SS would have no problems. That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many times do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which is paid for "80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 07:44 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <da3p59Fn1rlU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154071 |
"Peter Flass" wrote" > JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their >> earmarks, and SS would have no problems. > > That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many times > do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which is paid > for > "80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. As far as I know that will still go on. The word "earmarks" is reserved for things like the bridge to nowhere that was built in Alaska. The 80% park is just normal government operations. My community got x dollars to revive the economy (in the era of buy and destroy the 4 year old clunkers). We built two signs confirming that fact that a walking trail was, indeed, a walking trail. My very bad guess was that x was around $35,000. 4 year old clunkers might have the wrong number in it, too. The community was around 8K people.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 09:36 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality - bridge to somewhere |
| Message-ID | <n1idpg$6j7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154075 |
"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> writes: > "Peter Flass" wrote" > >> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their >>> earmarks, and SS would have no problems. >> >> That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many >> times do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which >> is paid for "80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. > > As far as I know that will still go on. The word "earmarks" is > reserved for things like the bridge to nowhere that was built in > Alaska. That bridge to nowhere has NOT been built. That bridge got famous when Palin declared the bridge to be wasteful government spending. Oddly enough, she was for it before she was against it. For the full story, go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge It's not even a bridge to nowhere. It's a bridge to an airport that would allow further development of "nowhere". -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 12:24 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <915601088.468522952.804832.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #154075 |
Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > "Peter Flass" wrote" > >> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their >>> earmarks, and SS would have no problems. >> >> That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many times >> do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which is paid >> for >> "80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. > > As far as I know that will still go on. The word "earmarks" is reserved for > things like the bridge to nowhere that was built in Alaska. The 80% park is > just normal government operations. My community got x dollars to revive the > economy (in the era of buy and destroy the 4 year old clunkers). We built > two signs confirming that fact that a walking trail was, indeed, a walking > trail. My very bad guess was that x was around $35,000. 4 year old clunkers > might have the wrong number in it, too. The community was around 8K people. > > Some of that money is distributed through regular programs, with funding established and awarded through grants. An "earmark" is one-off funding of a project through language put in a bill by a particular senator or congressman. The "bridge to nowhere", now abandoned, is a particularly bad example, but lots of things that may people consider good things, get funded by earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with a need, for example local museum needs a new roof, representative shepherds the request through the legislative process. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 12:07 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <da48j9Fqv3uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154091 |
"Peter Flass" writes: > Some of that money is distributed through regular programs, with funding > established and awarded through grants. An "earmark" is one-off funding > of > a project through language put in a bill by a particular senator or > congressman. The "bridge to nowhere", now abandoned, is a particularly > bad > example, but lots of things that may people consider good things, get > funded by earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is > supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with a need, > for example local museum needs a new roof, representative shepherds the > request through the legislative process. That museum is great example, because I happen to like museums and I don't see any alternative to government funding. But now I need an explanation as to why the *federal* government should provide a new roof. It means that the people with the best wheeler-dealer get the best results. That will be true on any scale, but why make it such a huge scale? Which clause in the Constitution makes it a legitimate expenditure?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 15:29 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <72382610.468534416.059093.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #154095 |
Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > "Peter Flass" writes: > >> Some of that money is distributed through regular programs, with funding >> established and awarded through grants. An "earmark" is one-off funding >> of >> a project through language put in a bill by a particular senator or >> congressman. The "bridge to nowhere", now abandoned, is a particularly >> bad >> example, but lots of things that may people consider good things, get >> funded by earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is >> supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with a need, >> for example local museum needs a new roof, representative shepherds the >> request through the legislative process. > > That museum is great example, because I happen to like museums and I don't > see any alternative to government funding. > > But now I need an explanation as to why the *federal* government should > provide a new roof. It means that the people with the best wheeler-dealer > get the best results. That will be true on any scale, but why make it such a > huge scale? Which clause in the Constitution makes it a legitimate > expenditure? > > I agree. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 12:24 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1ir4m$17p$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154091 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:915601088.468522952.804832.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >> "Peter Flass" wrote" >> >>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their >>>> earmarks, and SS would have no problems. >>> >>> That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many >>> times >>> do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which is paid >>> for >>> "80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. >> >> As far as I know that will still go on. The word "earmarks" is reserved >> for >> things like the bridge to nowhere that was built in Alaska. The 80% park >> is >> just normal government operations. My community got x dollars to revive >> the >> economy (in the era of buy and destroy the 4 year old clunkers). We >> built >> two signs confirming that fact that a walking trail was, indeed, a >> walking >> trail. My very bad guess was that x was around $35,000. 4 year old >> clunkers >> might have the wrong number in it, too. The community was around 8K >> people. >> >> > > Some of that money is distributed through regular programs, with funding > established and awarded through grants. An "earmark" is one-off funding > of > a project through language put in a bill by a particular senator or > congressman. The "bridge to nowhere", now abandoned, is a particularly > bad > example, but lots of things that may people consider good things, get > funded by earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is > supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with a need, > for example local museum needs a new roof, representative shepherds the > request through the legislative process. > No... the representative adds a rider to a bill that has *nothing* to do with the earmark. Then the earmark rides with the bill into law, because the real subject of the bill was important. If the "request" is so important, let it stand alone on its merits. -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 12:52 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1ispu$7tt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154096 |
On 06-Nov-15 12:24, Charles Richmond wrote: > "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> An "earmark" is one-off funding of a project through language put >> in a bill by a particular senator or congressman. The "bridge to >> nowhere", now abandoned, is a particularly bad example, but lots of >> things that may people consider good things, get funded by >> earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is >> supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with >> a need, for example local museum needs a new roof, representative >> shepherds the request through the legislative process. > > No... the representative adds a rider to a bill that has *nothing* to > do with the earmark. Then the earmark rides with the bill into law, > because the real subject of the bill was important. If the "request" > is so important, let it stand alone on its merits. ISTM you're missing the _point_ of earmarks. I have a bill, but you won't vote for it until I add some funding earmarked to pay for some boondoggle in your district to buy you votes in your next election. Note that "earmarks" were banned years ago, so now rather than paying $100k for a park in your district, I require that the Secretary of Agriculture spend $100k to identify all parks in the country meeting certain qualifications, spend another $100k studying improvements to such parks and then spend yet another $100k to actually making such improvements. By coincidence, the only park that qualifies is the one in your district. This is an earmark in all but name. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 13:06 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1itj1$atd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154098 |
On 06-Nov-15 12:52, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > Note that "earmarks" were banned years ago, so now rather than paying > $100k for a park in your district, I require that the Secretary of > Agriculture spend $100k to identify all parks in the country meeting > certain qualifications, spend another $100k studying improvements to > such parks and then spend yet another $100k to actually making such > improvements. By coincidence, the only park that qualifies is the one > in your district. This is an earmark in all but name. Oh, and then some clever lobbyist notices this provision and creates the American Parks Improvement Association, which "informs" hundreds of cities across the country that if they make some minor changes to their parks (e.g. renaming them, shaving off a few square feet, removing or adding certain amenities), they will qualify for this wonderful new program, so now this $100k earmark has changed into a $100M mess. The lobbyist then pockets 50%+ of these grants as "consulting" fees, plus another 25%+ in kickbacks from the contractors hired to do the work. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 13:34 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1iv8e$ip9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154099 |
On 06-Nov-15 13:06, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 06-Nov-15 12:52, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> Note that "earmarks" were banned years ago, so now rather than >> paying $100k for a park in your district, I require that the >> Secretary of Agriculture spend $100k to identify all parks in the >> country meeting certain qualifications, spend another $100k >> studying improvements to such parks and then spend yet another >> $100k to actually making such improvements. By coincidence, the >> only park that qualifies is the one in your district. This is an >> earmark in all but name. > > Oh, and then some clever lobbyist notices this provision and creates > the American Parks Improvement Association, which "informs" hundreds > of cities across the country that if they make some minor changes to > their parks (e.g. renaming them, shaving off a few square feet, > removing or adding certain amenities), they will qualify for this > wonderful new program, so now this $100k earmark has changed into a > $100M mess. The lobbyist then pockets 50%+ of these grants as > "consulting" fees, plus another 25%+ in kickbacks from the > contractors hired to do the work. And for the truly cynical... The lobbyist, Joe, is my brother. He donates most of the money from this scam to a SuperPAC supporting me--anonymously via a tax-exempt 501c4 corporation. Now that your park has been built, I cancel the program and the SuperPAC markets me as someone who cut $100M in govt waste, and Joe the Parker (as the media has now dubbed him) appears in their ads explaining about how big-govt regulation is killing his park-building business and my small-govt agenda will help him expand, even though he has never actually owned such a business and his only income is now as a paid representative of said SuperPAC. He rakes in millions more, and ends up in rehab and/or jail due to his affinity for hookers and blow, I go on TV and talk about how Jesus has saved Joe, and my SuperPAC uses this all as an example of how I've overcome personal difficulties and can empathize with the plight of the commoners. America: the best democracy money can buy. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-07 02:18 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <W4CdnTwlH-fpwqDLnZ2dnUU78TWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #154096 |
On 06/11/2015 18:24, Charles Richmond wrote:
> "Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:915601088.468522952.804832.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
{snip}
>>
>> Some of that money is distributed through regular programs, with funding
>> established and awarded through grants. An "earmark" is one-off
>> funding of
>> a project through language put in a bill by a particular senator or
>> congressman. The "bridge to nowhere", now abandoned, is a
>> particularly bad
>> example, but lots of things that may people consider good things, get
>> funded by earmarks. The good things are examples of how the process is
>> supposed to work - constituent goes to elected representative with a
>> need,
>> for example local museum needs a new roof, representative shepherds the
>> request through the legislative process.
>>
>
> No... the representative adds a rider to a bill that has *nothing* to do
> with the earmark. Then the earmark rides with the bill into law,
> because the real subject of the bill was important. If the "request" is
> so important, let it stand alone on its merits.
>
Earmarks need their own bill where we can keep an eye on them. Call it
the PORK2016 (Provision of Occasional Revenue and Kit 2016).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-06 09:00 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n2gp3b5etfuomiflmtcohkhenf41io9hhc@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #154071 |
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 06:56:24 -0500, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 16:40:28 -0600, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 05-Nov-15 05:37, Peter Flass wrote: >>>> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>>>> On 04-Nov-15 15:05, Peter Flass wrote: >>>>>> At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be >>>>>> used to sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and >>>>>> more in their 80s these days. >>>>> >>>>> People live longer, but they aren't necessarily able (or willing) >>>>> to work longer. Most candidates are unwilling to reduce benefits >>>>> or increase the retirement age for Boomers, most of whom have >>>>> _already_ retired or plan to do so in the next few years--and will >>>>> vote against _anyone_ who tries to break the promises made to them >>>>> decades ago. Since we already have a solution that doesn't require >>>>> doing so, why would anyone even consider this option? >>>> >>>> You phase it in, beginning with people who are ten years or so from >>>> retirement. They already did this once when they changed FRA from 65 >>>> to 67+. >>> >>> SS can't even cover benefits for people who are _already_ 67+ from >>> existing contributions of those under 67. If we're not willing to cut >>> those benefits--which is political suicide--then we have to raise the >>> revenues from people currently under 67. >>> >>> S >> >> Stop the congress critters from siphoning off funds for their >> earmarks, and SS would have no problems. > >That always sounds good, and I think it's a good idea, but how many times >do you read about some local amenity, such as a new park, which is paid for >"80% by the federal government." People like that stuff. They probably don't know where Congress is getting the money to pay for that. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-10 17:33 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <proto-DEC60C.17333110112015@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #153976 |
In article <n1e239$u05$1@dont-email.me>, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 04-Nov-15 15:05, Peter Flass wrote: > > Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote: > >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>> On the other hand, anyone who thinks the system can continue with > >>> no changes is either clueless or lying. > >> > >> For me raising the income limit of SS taxes is the least painful. > > > > I would agree, but most people who know say that the current system > > is a delicate balance between what people pay in and what they get > > out. If you raise the income limit and don't raise the top benefit > > That's not how it works. Every dollar of additional "covered wages" > increases your retirement benefits--by less than the increased payroll > tax revenue. This is automatic and has been the case every time the cap > has been increased. All we're talking about here is raising the cap > (much) faster than inflation; the end result would not change. It is a > solid plan that benefits everyone--and it would make SS solvent for > _decades_ into the future. > > > At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be used > > to sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and more in > > their 80s these days. > > People live longer, but they aren't necessarily able (or willing) to > work longer. Most candidates are unwilling to reduce benefits or > increase the retirement age for Boomers, most of whom have _already_ > retired or plan to do so in the next few years--and will vote against > _anyone_ who tries to break the promises made to them decades ago. > Since we already have a solution that doesn't require doing so, why > would anyone even consider this option? > > S Politicians do what their bosses (the big donors) demand. -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-11 12:20 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <dafjekFn2t9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #154324 |
"Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message news:proto-DEC60C.17333110112015@news.panix.com... > In article <n1e239$u05$1@dont-email.me>, > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > >> On 04-Nov-15 15:05, Peter Flass wrote: >> > Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote: >> >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> On the other hand, anyone who thinks the system can continue with >> >>> no changes is either clueless or lying. >> >> >> >> For me raising the income limit of SS taxes is the least painful. >> > >> > I would agree, but most people who know say that the current system >> > is a delicate balance between what people pay in and what they get >> > out. If you raise the income limit and don't raise the top benefit >> >> That's not how it works. Every dollar of additional "covered wages" >> increases your retirement benefits--by less than the increased payroll >> tax revenue. This is automatic and has been the case every time the cap >> has been increased. All we're talking about here is raising the cap >> (much) faster than inflation; the end result would not change. It is a >> solid plan that benefits everyone--and it would make SS solvent for >> _decades_ into the future. >> >> > At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be used >> > to sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and more in >> > their 80s these days. >> >> People live longer, but they aren't necessarily able (or willing) to >> work longer. Most candidates are unwilling to reduce benefits or >> increase the retirement age for Boomers, most of whom have _already_ >> retired or plan to do so in the next few years--and will vote against >> _anyone_ who tries to break the promises made to them decades ago. >> Since we already have a solution that doesn't require doing so, why >> would anyone even consider this option? > Politicians do what their bosses (the big donors) demand. Not when they will get the bums rush at the ballot box if they do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-11 12:41 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <proto-877F5D.12414511112015@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #154332 |
In article <dafjekFn2t9U1@mid.individual.net>, "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> wrote: > "Walter Bushell" <proto@panix.com> wrote in message > news:proto-DEC60C.17333110112015@news.panix.com... > > In article <n1e239$u05$1@dont-email.me>, > > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > > > >> On 04-Nov-15 15:05, Peter Flass wrote: > >> > Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote: > >> >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >>> On the other hand, anyone who thinks the system can continue with > >> >>> no changes is either clueless or lying. > >> >> > >> >> For me raising the income limit of SS taxes is the least painful. > >> > > >> > I would agree, but most people who know say that the current system > >> > is a delicate balance between what people pay in and what they get > >> > out. If you raise the income limit and don't raise the top benefit > >> > >> That's not how it works. Every dollar of additional "covered wages" > >> increases your retirement benefits--by less than the increased payroll > >> tax revenue. This is automatic and has been the case every time the cap > >> has been increased. All we're talking about here is raising the cap > >> (much) faster than inflation; the end result would not change. It is a > >> solid plan that benefits everyone--and it would make SS solvent for > >> _decades_ into the future. > >> > >> > At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be used > >> > to sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and more in > >> > their 80s these days. > >> > >> People live longer, but they aren't necessarily able (or willing) to > >> work longer. Most candidates are unwilling to reduce benefits or > >> increase the retirement age for Boomers, most of whom have _already_ > >> retired or plan to do so in the next few years--and will vote against > >> _anyone_ who tries to break the promises made to them decades ago. > >> Since we already have a solution that doesn't require doing so, why > >> would anyone even consider this option? > > > Politicians do what their bosses (the big donors) demand. > > Not when they will get the bums rush at the ballot box if they do. Doesn't matter, most voters are ill informed or misinformed. Or they get a cushy job working for the entity they shoved money at. -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-10 22:49 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <87mvulav45.fsf@lhwserver.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #153958 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > I would agree, but most people who know say that the current system is a > delicate balance between what people pay in and what they get out. If you > raise the income limit and don't raise the top benefit people will see the > system less as an insurance system (which is the way it was sold > originally) and more of a welfare system. This would decrease the support > for SS and lead to other programs down the road. > > At least raising the retirement age has some logic that could be used to > sell it, since fewer people are dying in their 60s and more in their 80s > these days. Baby boomer (bubble) generation is four times as large as the previous generation and twice as large as the following generation. As long as baby boomers are working, there was more money going into the SS Trust Fund than being paid out in benefits (building reserve for baby boomers' retirement). However, congress has been "borrowing" the money in SS Trust Fund to pay for other things. As baby boomers retire ... the amount paid into the SS Trust Fund will significantly drop and benefits significantly increase (more going out than coming in). This will require that congress raise taxes on the following generation to pay back the amount that has been looted from the trust fund ... in order to pay back the missing money (currently $2.8T) from the trust fund. Some in congress will propose all sorts of alternatives ... so that the missing money won't have to be replaced (via increased taxes on the following generation, increasingly being spun as old people taking from the young ... when it is actually having the young replace the congressional financial manipulation). There is actually two parts, increased new taxes: 1) replace the funds looted from the Trust Fund to cover the baby boomer benefits 2) pay for spending that had previously been covered by looting the Trust Fund. This has (mythical) Trust Fund good until 2034 ... but that is based on the $2.8T actually exists somewhere ... as opposed to have to be raised by increasing taxes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund Looking at it from different point of view, throwing paygo under the bus in 2002 allowed $6T reduction in tax revenue and $6T increase in spending (CBO report 2003-2009; total Federal debt has now exploded to $18T with interest pushing half trillion) ... and the economic mess with over $27T in securitized loans (because of lack of regulation) can be viewed as somewhat independent activity (happening concurrently) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAYGO Need to cut spending by around $1T/annum and eliminate the tax loopholes sold to wealthy and corporations increasing taxes by $1T/annum ... returning to PAYGO fiscal responsible balance budget (before congress dropped PAYGO and went crazy selling tax loopholes and increasing spending in 2002). However, it also needs increasing taxes by approx. another $.5T/annum to cover the debt interest payments and increasing taxes by approx $.5T/annum for paying off the exploded debt (@$.5T/annum take 36yrs to clear). Total increase in taxes then is $2T/year (combination of eliminating the tax loopholes sold to wealthy and corporations, paying off tax debt created after dropping PAYGO, and interest payments on the tax debt). -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-11 07:46 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <87mvuk4jzi.fsf@lhwserver.localdomain> |
| In reply to | #154337 |
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes: > Looking at it from different point of view, throwing paygo under the bus > in 2002 allowed $6T reduction in tax revenue and $6T increase in > spending (CBO report 2003-2009; total Federal debt has now exploded to > $18T with interest pushing half trillion) ... and the economic mess with > over $27T in securitized loans (because of lack of regulation) can be > viewed as somewhat independent activity (happening concurrently) > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAYGO re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#54 rationality the majority party in congress in the 90s was major factor behind PAYGO ... then a completely different party using the same name in 2002 threw PAYGO under the bus and savaged the budget. -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-05 10:01 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <5d592b1d-64a3-4d53-828a-b646f1ee8f13@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #153915 |
On Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 11:03:48 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: > If we don't do anything the system will go broke. #3 is the least painful, > especially since people can always retire early with reduced benefits > before the full retirement age. I agree that privatization is a stupid > idea. > > On the other hand, anyone who thinks the system can continue with no > changes is either clueless or lying. There are two broad parts to "Social Security". One is the basic benefit for the elderly; that fund is not in terrible shape and could be fixed with minimal adjustments. The other side is health care for the elderly. That is in very bad shape, especially with fewer younger workers supporting increasing older retirees. Compounding the problem is that people are living longer but not better, so people needs lots of very expensive operations and health care. Another big issue is that health care costs jump substantially EVERY year. Both of those issues need to be dealt with.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-05 13:46 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <n1g82h$6gv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #154017 |
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 11:03:48 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: >> If we don't do anything the system will go broke. #3 is the least painful, >> especially since people can always retire early with reduced benefits >> before the full retirement age. I agree that privatization is a stupid >> idea. >> >> On the other hand, anyone who thinks the system can continue with no >> changes is either clueless or lying. > > There are two broad parts to "Social Security". One is the basic benefit > for the elderly; that fund is not in terrible shape and could be fixed > with minimal adjustments. > > The other side is health care for the elderly. That's Medicare. Are you thinking of SSI for disabled? -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-11-05 12:27 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: rationality |
| Message-ID | <9fc7e42f-2382-4885-a65f-9afafde9b154@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #154024 |
On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 1:46:48 PM UTC-5, D_J_E wrote: > That's Medicare. Yes, it's Medicare that's in very big trouble. > Are you thinking of SSI for disabled? I don't believe that's in trouble. Some years ago, the govt tightened up severely and it's now hard to qualify for benefits. Ironically, that created a windfall for lawyers, since claimants now must get a lawyer to qualify, and lawyers get a cut of the benefits. IMHO, it really sucks to make a disabled person jump through loops and pay a lawyer to get benefits they are legally entitled to. Of course, private insurance ain't much better. I know someone who became severely disabled who had private insurance. He had to get a lawyer to get the carrier to pay up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 44 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 42 43 [44] 45 46 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web