Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #156571 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-12 18:53 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-14 14:02 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 383 — 39 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 18:53 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 16:32 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 13:40 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-01-13 17:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 17:11 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-13 16:10 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-13 14:23 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 18:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-13 17:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-14 08:03 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:07 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 15:11 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-01-14 08:27 -0700
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:26 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2016-01-16 16:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-16 14:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-15 16:50 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 19:38 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 11:15 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-15 15:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 14:00 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:53 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:03 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 11:11 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-16 08:41 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-16 09:10 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 07:46 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 20:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 19:18 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 23:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:15 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 15:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-16 22:51 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:15 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-16 22:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:03 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:03 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:24 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 15:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 13:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 10:31 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:50 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 17:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:36 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 22:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 19:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 06:20 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-20 10:09 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-20 13:27 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-20 10:11 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 05:56 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:35 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:35 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:45 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:13 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:40 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:27 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 10:56 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-22 19:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 11:22 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-22 20:00 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 12:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 09:07 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-22 14:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 09:11 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-23 11:27 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:14 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-19 17:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:47 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-20 14:04 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:38 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-21 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:15 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:47 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-21 11:54 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:52 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-23 14:46 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-23 17:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-23 18:50 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 04:25 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-23 14:44 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-23 16:54 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-23 15:01 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 07:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-24 15:07 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 10:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-24 11:21 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-24 11:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-24 20:23 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-26 14:21 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Orange" <oq7755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 04:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 04:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 07:34 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 04:19 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 16:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 03:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 20:57 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 09:54 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 13:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 23:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:09 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 00:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 17:40 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 07:19 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 19:18 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:19 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 13:09 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-25 14:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:22 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-25 16:04 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-26 09:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-25 19:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-25 19:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-25 20:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:42 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 11:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 19:23 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 21:42 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-27 08:27 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 06:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-28 15:56 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-26 17:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-26 16:05 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 19:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 14:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 19:10 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:27 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 23:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 00:54 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 17:02 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:30 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 18:17 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-17 08:18 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:21 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:51 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-20 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-20 17:13 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:11 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:10 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-21 20:35 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:40 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-21 20:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-21 16:02 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 18:42 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 13:29 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-01-22 21:09 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 16:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-22 13:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:16 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 18:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:49 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 12:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:24 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 18:13 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 10:35 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 08:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 11:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 19:56 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 21:12 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-19 00:07 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:06 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 07:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:47 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:11 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-19 10:15 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 20:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 07:03 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:34 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-19 07:59 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:19 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:16 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-20 06:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-20 11:41 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 12:07 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 04:53 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 20:16 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 07:46 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-20 15:01 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 08:17 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 17:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 21:22 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 08:52 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-21 11:46 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 07:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:33 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 12:01 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:23 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:37 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:34 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:42 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:54 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 07:09 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 07:26 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:52 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 15:50 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:58 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 19:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:26 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 19:08 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 10:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 17:41 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-22 03:38 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-22 17:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-23 05:06 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-23 15:29 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-25 02:15 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-18 08:53 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-18 10:22 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-18 09:58 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-18 07:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:38 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 17:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 11:42 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 20:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:20 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-18 07:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 04:18 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-18 18:51 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-19 00:41 -0400
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-18 23:58 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 07:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 14:27 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-19 14:38 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-19 18:33 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-19 16:28 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 13:57 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-19 16:46 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 17:50 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 21:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:53 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-19 22:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 17:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-21 07:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:26 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:31 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 16:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 19:27 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 17:54 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:01 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 11:01 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-19 11:19 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:30 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:32 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-18 19:06 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:57 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 15:40 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 15:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 15:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 13:05 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 21:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-16 22:57 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:17 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:27 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-19 23:24 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:10 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 08:15 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:42 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 15:40 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:36 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 20:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 16:28 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-20 08:18 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:21 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 15:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 11:15 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 17:44 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 19:08 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-16 17:07 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 09:56 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 16:30 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 05:13 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-19 13:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 14:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2016-01-21 17:05 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 12:18 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-22 13:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 17:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-15 22:20 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 10:42 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 06:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-16 11:39 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 07:23 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 13:09 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 03:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-14 11:02 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 11:56 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 18:57 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 16:08 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 18:03 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 21:41 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-15 15:43 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:06 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-15 07:04 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-15 19:29 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 06:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-15 15:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2016-01-14 16:00 -0900
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:05 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:04 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 21:17 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-19 07:57 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:53 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:01 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 21:17 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 18:08 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 21:25 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 07:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 18:46 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 10:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 20:00 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-14 00:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:30 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-14 01:35 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 14:02 +0000
Page 8 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 20 Next page →
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 21:42 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <l2fgabhj9ifeu499fbmcg584osb4n6f4tt@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #157872 |
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:23:25 -0500, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >In article <uobfabpu5o9tb0aanp3ebm6jm4ri4qgg9t@4ax.com>, solosam90 >@gmail.com says... >> >> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:42:11 -0500, "J. Clarke" >> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> >In article <12d831c2-264d-488d-a2ea-5eadbb8ffb86@googlegroups.com>, >> >hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... >> >> >> >> On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:41:22 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > 15400 km "made these bombers the first strategic bomber capable of >> >> > delivering its' payload into deep enemy territory and returning. " >> >> > http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/m-4.htm >> >> > It's 7817 km from Moscow to Washington, 6847km Warsaw to NYC, 8990km >> >> > Kamchatka to SF. Not that I'd expect there would be a lot to return >> >> > to, so (like the Mitchell raid on Tokyo) they could have been sent >> >> > one-way and the crews bail out over Canada, or to be picked up by >> >> > submarines. I expect all of the US would have been reachable from >> >> > airfields in USSR-controlled territory. >> >> >> >> The US greatly feared that the Soviets did have aircraft could >> >> deliver nasty bombs. They could also use Cuba as a base. >> >> >> >> One of the effects of Pearl Harbor was the idea that we could no >> >> longer could be complacent in our superiority or space. That is, >> >> we did not expect anyone to attack Pearl Harbor the way that they >> >> did, as well as inflicting the damage they did and at so very little >> >> cost. So, after that, we realized could not under-estimate our >> >> enemies again. >> >> >> >> Another time that lesson was brought home was when we discovered the >> >> Soviets had their own a-bomb, far, far sooner than we expected them >> >> to attain it. >> >> >> >> The result of all this--in the 1950s--was a great deal of hysteria and >> >> paranoia. The Soviets ruthless record and rhetoric didn't help matters. >> >> >> >> I believe Eisenhower knew, as a result of the U-2 spy flights, was that >> >> the Soviets weren't as militarily as strong as we suspected, but he >> >> couldn't say anything. >> > >> >Wasn't just the U-2s. Earlier, the US would fly single B-47s over the >> >Soviet Union. They always came back. Sometimes they had a few holes in >> >them, but they always came back. And that was just one plane, that >> >wasn't throwing H-bombs at the Soviet air defense. >> >> Some of them were shot down, we just didn't hear about it. > >And of course the Russians kept it a big secret like they kept the >shooting down of a U-2 a big secret. Oops. > I've watched several documentaries that talked about the US aircraft that got shot down over the Soviet Union. Thats why the switch to the U-2s. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-27 08:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnnagvqu.8nf.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #157889 |
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 21:42:16 -0600, JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > I've watched several documentaries that talked about the US aircraft > that got shot down over the Soviet Union. Thats why the switch to the > U-2s. > About 40 US planes were shot down between 1950 and 1970 with the loss of 250 crew. Mostly over Eastern Europe rather than Russia though. In the early '50s the RAF ran all the missions as FDR banned the flights after the loss af a Privateer off Latvia in 1950. The RAF had the best plane fot the job anyway - the Canberra, later built under licence by Martin as the B-57 and RB-57... -- Stan Barr plan.b@bluesomatic.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-27 06:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.311271d11c8dbdd3989ec0@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157889 |
In article <l2fgabhj9ifeu499fbmcg584osb4n6f4tt@4ax.com>, solosam90 @gmail.com says... > > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:23:25 -0500, "J. Clarke" > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >In article <uobfabpu5o9tb0aanp3ebm6jm4ri4qgg9t@4ax.com>, solosam90 > >@gmail.com says... > >> > >> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:42:11 -0500, "J. Clarke" > >> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >In article <12d831c2-264d-488d-a2ea-5eadbb8ffb86@googlegroups.com>, > >> >hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... > >> >> > >> >> On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:41:22 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > 15400 km "made these bombers the first strategic bomber capable of > >> >> > delivering its' payload into deep enemy territory and returning. " > >> >> > http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/m-4.htm > >> >> > It's 7817 km from Moscow to Washington, 6847km Warsaw to NYC, 8990km > >> >> > Kamchatka to SF. Not that I'd expect there would be a lot to return > >> >> > to, so (like the Mitchell raid on Tokyo) they could have been sent > >> >> > one-way and the crews bail out over Canada, or to be picked up by > >> >> > submarines. I expect all of the US would have been reachable from > >> >> > airfields in USSR-controlled territory. > >> >> > >> >> The US greatly feared that the Soviets did have aircraft could > >> >> deliver nasty bombs. They could also use Cuba as a base. > >> >> > >> >> One of the effects of Pearl Harbor was the idea that we could no > >> >> longer could be complacent in our superiority or space. That is, > >> >> we did not expect anyone to attack Pearl Harbor the way that they > >> >> did, as well as inflicting the damage they did and at so very little > >> >> cost. So, after that, we realized could not under-estimate our > >> >> enemies again. > >> >> > >> >> Another time that lesson was brought home was when we discovered the > >> >> Soviets had their own a-bomb, far, far sooner than we expected them > >> >> to attain it. > >> >> > >> >> The result of all this--in the 1950s--was a great deal of hysteria and > >> >> paranoia. The Soviets ruthless record and rhetoric didn't help matters. > >> >> > >> >> I believe Eisenhower knew, as a result of the U-2 spy flights, was that > >> >> the Soviets weren't as militarily as strong as we suspected, but he > >> >> couldn't say anything. > >> > > >> >Wasn't just the U-2s. Earlier, the US would fly single B-47s over the > >> >Soviet Union. They always came back. Sometimes they had a few holes in > >> >them, but they always came back. And that was just one plane, that > >> >wasn't throwing H-bombs at the Soviet air defense. > >> > >> Some of them were shot down, we just didn't hear about it. > > > >And of course the Russians kept it a big secret like they kept the > >shooting down of a U-2 a big secret. Oops. > > > > I've watched several documentaries that talked about the US aircraft > that got shot down over the Soviet Union. Thats why the switch to the > U-2s. I can find record of two losses of B-47s to Soviet aircraft. One was in international airspace in 1955, while the other was _after_ the U-2 incident, which made it kind of "me too". Neither was on a penetration mission in the '50s. Hardly evidence that the Soviets could effectively resist a US attack in the '50s.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-28 15:56 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n8e2km$n5f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #157889 |
"JimP" <solosam90@gmail.com> wrote in message news:l2fgabhj9ifeu499fbmcg584osb4n6f4tt@4ax.com... > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:23:25 -0500, "J. Clarke" > <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>In article <uobfabpu5o9tb0aanp3ebm6jm4ri4qgg9t@4ax.com>, solosam90 >>@gmail.com says... >>> >>> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:42:11 -0500, "J. Clarke" >>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >In article <12d831c2-264d-488d-a2ea-5eadbb8ffb86@googlegroups.com>, >>> >hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... >>> >> >>> >> On Monday, January 25, 2016 at 8:41:22 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> > 15400 km "made these bombers the first strategic bomber capable of >>> >> > delivering its' payload into deep enemy territory and returning. " >>> >> > http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/m-4.htm >>> >> > It's 7817 km from Moscow to Washington, 6847km Warsaw to NYC, >>> >> > 8990km >>> >> > Kamchatka to SF. Not that I'd expect there would be a lot to return >>> >> > to, so (like the Mitchell raid on Tokyo) they could have been sent >>> >> > one-way and the crews bail out over Canada, or to be picked up by >>> >> > submarines. I expect all of the US would have been reachable from >>> >> > airfields in USSR-controlled territory. >>> >> >>> >> The US greatly feared that the Soviets did have aircraft could >>> >> deliver nasty bombs. They could also use Cuba as a base. >>> >> >>> >> One of the effects of Pearl Harbor was the idea that we could no >>> >> longer could be complacent in our superiority or space. That is, >>> >> we did not expect anyone to attack Pearl Harbor the way that they >>> >> did, as well as inflicting the damage they did and at so very little >>> >> cost. So, after that, we realized could not under-estimate our >>> >> enemies again. >>> >> >>> >> Another time that lesson was brought home was when we discovered the >>> >> Soviets had their own a-bomb, far, far sooner than we expected them >>> >> to attain it. >>> >> >>> >> The result of all this--in the 1950s--was a great deal of hysteria >>> >> and >>> >> paranoia. The Soviets ruthless record and rhetoric didn't help >>> >> matters. >>> >> >>> >> I believe Eisenhower knew, as a result of the U-2 spy flights, was >>> >> that >>> >> the Soviets weren't as militarily as strong as we suspected, but he >>> >> couldn't say anything. >>> > >>> >Wasn't just the U-2s. Earlier, the US would fly single B-47s over the >>> >Soviet Union. They always came back. Sometimes they had a few holes >>> >in >>> >them, but they always came back. And that was just one plane, that >>> >wasn't throwing H-bombs at the Soviet air defense. >>> >>> Some of them were shot down, we just didn't hear about it. >> >>And of course the Russians kept it a big secret like they kept the >>shooting down of a U-2 a big secret. Oops. >> > > I've watched several documentaries that talked about the US aircraft > that got shot down over the Soviet Union. Thats why the switch to the > U-2s. > There was a secret US Air Force program... in which US pilots would fly B-29s over the Soviet Union until they detected all the radars "lighting up", and then turn around and fly back. It was a dangerous game. If a B-29 was lost, there would be a cover story about how the crew died. -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 17:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <065d7767-64e5-41cc-ae02-91de6f380b54@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #157735 |
On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 6:36:29 AM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote: > Lot of people don't realize that Nixon was a Quaker. Nixon was in reality a roughneck, a poor kid from the streets. He managed to get himself reasonably polished up, but then took on the pitbull role for the Republican party after his election to Congress. Ironically, he really to get beyond that when he became VP, but Eisenhower assigned Nixon to do all the dirty work, while Eisenhower acted as a dignified statesman, staying above the fray and Nixon got the bad press. Eisenhower failed to give Nixon a solid endorsement in 1960, which didn't help Nixon's chances. As best as I can tell, Nixon never followed his Quaker birth. I don't think his father, also a roughneck, was a Quaker either. While Nixon did talk about his early poverty once in a speech, generally he seemed to act like a society gentleman, or at least he wanted to be a society gentlemen. As is joked about, Nixon always wore a suit and tie, even for a photo op on the beach. Late in life, Nixon had an aide to help him do research. That aide later wrote two tell-all books, which was sad because it was a betrayal of a private trust. Anyway, she said Nixon remained intensely competitive to the end, though he was devastated by Pat's death. He was not expected to live very long after her passing, and he didn't. Nixon was overjoyed when Bill Clinton quietly invited him to the White House to consult on foreign policy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-26 16:05 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dgod4jFelm1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #157703 |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message
news:n86imo$t3k$1@dont-email.me...
> On 1/25/2016 4:55 PM, jack wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message
>> news:n8660m$g2r$1@dont-email.me...
>>> On 1/25/2016 11:22 AM, JimP wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:41:41 -0600, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> jack wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> None of them were that fragile in the early 50s.
>>>>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=grade+school+desk+1950&tbm=isch
>>>>>
>>>>> The Russians did not have deliverable nuclear weapons in the early
>>>>> '50s.
>>>
>>> By the mid-'50s the M-4 ("Bison") jet bomber was operational.
>>
>> That didn’t have the range to deliver nukes to much of the US.
>
> 15400 km "made these bombers the first strategic bomber capable of
> delivering its' payload into deep enemy territory and returning. "
> http://fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/m-4.htm
Lots of the US is outside that range and would have seen russia
obliterated if they had actually been stupid enough to try it.
The real threat was to western europe, not to the US before ICBMs showed up.
> It's 7817 km from Moscow to Washington, 6847km Warsaw to NYC, 8990km
> Kamchatka to SF. Not that I'd expect there would be a lot to return to, so
> (like the Mitchell raid on Tokyo) they could have been sent one-way and
> the crews bail out over Canada, or to be picked up by submarines. I expect
> all of the US would have been reachable from airfields in USSR-controlled
> territory.
You're wrong.
> It doesn't actually seem to have been a very successful airplane, but we
> didn't know that, and it did have the range.
No it did not with the whole of the US. And they never had that
many of them, so they couldn’t even just do suicide missions.
>>> And the Tu-95 ("Bear") turboprop, which is still in limited service.
>>>
>>>>> I think a lot of these duck and cover drills were more like the
>>>>> early 60's,
>>>>> and I do remember some of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jon
>>>>
>>>> We had duck and cover when Ike was President. So, 1950s.
>>>>
>>> I definitely remember drills at the school I was at in the late '50s
>>> (Sputnik era). Don't remember them earlier, but I might just not
>>> remember.
>>
>> Yeah, the movie was very early 50s.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_and_Cover_(film)
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-25 19:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31108a7bf9eeaa72989e9d@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157664 |
In article <n8660m$g2r$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com
says...
>
> On 1/25/2016 11:22 AM, JimP wrote:
> > On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:41:41 -0600, Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com>
> > wrote:
> >> jack wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> None of them were that fragile in the early 50s.
> >>> https://www.google.com/search?q=grade+school+desk+1950&tbm=isch
> >>
> >> The Russians did not have deliverable nuclear weapons in the early '50s.
>
> By the mid-'50s the M-4 ("Bison") jet bomber was operational. And the
> Tu-95 ("Bear") turboprop, which is still in limited service.
About as limited as the B-52. There are roughly as many Bears in
service as B-52s, however the Bears have two designation--the majority
are Tu-95 strategic bombers, but 15 or so are Tu-142 maritime patrol
aircraft,
> >> I think a lot of these duck and cover drills were more like the early 60's,
> >> and I do remember some of them.
> >>
> >> Jon
> >
> > We had duck and cover when Ike was President. So, 1950s.
> >
> I definitely remember drills at the school I was at in the late '50s
> (Sputnik era). Don't remember them earlier, but I might just not remember.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 14:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <359217652.474750785.308885.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156839 |
J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
>>
>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
>> {snip}
>>
>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
>>
>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
>
> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
> on it can break it.
>
You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
enough to stand on :-)
--
Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 19:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n7hacm$1sn$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156856 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
>>>
>>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> {snip}
>>>
>>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
>>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
>>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
>>>
>>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
>>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
>>
>> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
>> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
>> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
>> on it can break it.
>
> You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
> enough to stand on :-)
Yep. Fragile desks would have lasted one period.
--
Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 19:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3105fb7e90f61d50989e26@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156869 |
In article <n7hacm$1sn$2@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
>
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
> >>>
> >>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> {snip}
> >>>
> >>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
> >>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
> >>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
> >>>
> >>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
> >>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
> >>
> >> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
> >> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
> >> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
> >> on it can break it.
> >
> > You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
> > enough to stand on :-)
>
> Yep. Fragile desks would have lasted one period.
You must have been a rather violent lot then. These seemed to last out
a school year fairly well, but by the end of it there were always a few
in the corner with their tops leaned in the seats.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 23:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n7hqgd$cu8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156872 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> In article <n7hacm$1sn$2@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
>>
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>> > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> >> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
>> >>>
>> >>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >>> {snip}
>> >>>
>> >>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
>> >>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
>> >>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
>> >>>
>> >>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
>> >>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
>> >>
>> >> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
>> >> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
>> >> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
>> >> on it can break it.
>> >
>> > You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
>> > enough to stand on :-)
>>
>> Yep. Fragile desks would have lasted one period.
>
> You must have been a rather violent lot then.
Well, maybe not me personally, but yeah.
> These seemed to last out a school year fairly well, but by the end of
> it there were always a few in the corner with their tops leaned in the
> seats.
When a desk was broken, we knew it was one of the bigger guys.
In PS 68 we still had those desks with the inkwells, bolted to the
floor. Cast iron legs.
The newer Junior High they built for the baby boom was still 3 stories,
but it looked like 1 from the front. That had desks you could move
around but still park a truck on.
--
Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 00:54 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31064808728b9ec8989e28@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156884 |
In article <n7hqgd$cu8$1@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
>
> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > In article <n7hacm$1sn$2@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
> >>
> >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >> >> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> >>> {snip}
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
> >> >>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
> >> >>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
> >> >>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
> >> >>
> >> >> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
> >> >> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
> >> >> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
> >> >> on it can break it.
> >> >
> >> > You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
> >> > enough to stand on :-)
> >>
> >> Yep. Fragile desks would have lasted one period.
> >
> > You must have been a rather violent lot then.
>
> Well, maybe not me personally, but yeah.
>
> > These seemed to last out a school year fairly well, but by the end of
> > it there were always a few in the corner with their tops leaned in the
> > seats.
>
> When a desk was broken, we knew it was one of the bigger guys.
> In PS 68 we still had those desks with the inkwells, bolted to the
> floor. Cast iron legs.
I''ve seen those. If they had us hide under those it might make a
little bit of sense.
> The newer Junior High they built for the baby boom was still 3 stories,
> but it looked like 1 from the front. That had desks you could move
> around but still park a truck on.
Ours were generally speaking a chair with an extended arm that was the
"desk". On some it was full width and metal, on most it was half width
and particle board with a molded plastic seat. The science classrooms
were better-they had tables and chairs instead. But by the time we got
to those they had stopped having drills.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 17:02 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dg3df1F60nlU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156887 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.31064808728b9ec8989e28@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <n7hqgd$cu8$1@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
>>
>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > In article <n7hacm$1sn$2@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says...
>> >>
>> >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>> >> >> am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> >>> {snip}
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states
>> >> >>>> that
>> >> >>>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
>> >> >>>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a
>> >> >>> bomb
>> >> >>> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and
>> >> >> steel
>> >> >> that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign
>> >> >> with
>> >> >> a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old
>> >> >> leaning
>> >> >> on it can break it.
>> >> >
>> >> > You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly
>> >> > sturdy
>> >> > enough to stand on :-)
>> >>
>> >> Yep. Fragile desks would have lasted one period.
>> >
>> > You must have been a rather violent lot then.
>>
>> Well, maybe not me personally, but yeah.
>>
>> > These seemed to last out a school year fairly well, but by the end of
>> > it there were always a few in the corner with their tops leaned in the
>> > seats.
>>
>> When a desk was broken, we knew it was one of the bigger guys.
>> In PS 68 we still had those desks with the inkwells, bolted to the
>> floor. Cast iron legs.
>
> I''ve seen those. If they had us hide under those it might make a
> little bit of sense.
That is what most grade schools had in the very early 50s when
those drills started.
>> The newer Junior High they built for the baby boom was still 3 stories,
>> but it looked like 1 from the front. That had desks you could move
>> around but still park a truck on.
>
> Ours were generally speaking a chair with an extended arm that was the
> "desk". On some it was full width and metal, on most it was half width
> and particle board with a molded plastic seat. The science classrooms
> were better-they had tables and chairs instead. But by the time we got
> to those they had stopped having drills.
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 16:30 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7jotk$rrj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #156887 |
On 1/17/2016 11:54 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > In article <n7hqgd$cu8$1@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... >> The newer Junior High they built for the baby boom was still 3 stories, >> but it looked like 1 from the front. That had desks you could move >> around but still park a truck on. > > Ours were generally speaking a chair with an extended arm that was the > "desk". On some it was full width and metal, on most it was half width > and particle board with a molded plastic seat. The science classrooms > were better-they had tables and chairs instead. But by the time we got > to those they had stopped having drills. > Aha! _Now_ what you say makes sense. I personally wouldn't even call those things desks. And associate them more with High and maybe (don't remember) Middle School. Our elementary school desks (rural NY) were (1st grade) the cast-iron and wood flip-top desks with inkwell holes, bolted to the floor, and (later grades) sheet-metal tub with (I think) tubular steel legs and laminate flip top. The 1st you could have parked a truck on, the latter the same, if you lowered it on top carefully. Both covered substantial floor area (at least 1.5x2 ft). t Anybody who told you to shelter under one of those chair/desk combos was an idiot, or more likely just going through the motions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 18:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31073ca124e148c7989e36@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156931 |
In article <n7jotk$rrj$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com says... > > On 1/17/2016 11:54 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <n7hqgd$cu8$1@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... > > >> The newer Junior High they built for the baby boom was still 3 stories, > >> but it looked like 1 from the front. That had desks you could move > >> around but still park a truck on. > > > > Ours were generally speaking a chair with an extended arm that was the > > "desk". On some it was full width and metal, on most it was half width > > and particle board with a molded plastic seat. The science classrooms > > were better-they had tables and chairs instead. But by the time we got > > to those they had stopped having drills. > > > > Aha! _Now_ what you say makes sense. I personally wouldn't even call > those things desks. And associate them more with High and maybe (don't > remember) Middle School. Our elementary school desks (rural NY) were > (1st grade) the cast-iron and wood flip-top desks with inkwell holes, > bolted to the floor, and (later grades) sheet-metal tub with (I think) > tubular steel legs and laminate flip top. The 1st you could have > parked a truck on, the latter the same, if you lowered it on top > carefully. Both covered substantial floor area (at least 1.5x2 ft). > t > Anybody who told you to shelter under one of those chair/desk combos > was an idiot, or more likely just going through the motions. Bingo, and by doing so made the whole administration look ridiculous. I think that's part of the problem with education over most of the latter part of the 20th century and on into today, teachers say and do things that the kids recognize as patently ridiculous and then wonder why the kids don't respect them. And when it's not the teachers being ridiculous, it's the principals or the administrators or the regulators. I saw those old sturdy desks with inkwells two places--a Catholic school in Louisiana had them in some classrooms, and I took one class in the old high school building, that was made part of the middle school briefly before it was condemned for structural inadequacy--my experience of that building was mostly walking around it to get to the gym or the shop (we had shop in Middle School, with power tools and everything, but not in high school--you had to be on the non-college-bound track to get shop in high school). Note that a friend of mine who taught high school for over 40 years in New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Baghdad, in both public and parochial schools, and has a PhD in education tells me that he he remembers when those crummy desk-chairs came in--seems that there was an educational fad that came along that touted the advantages of being able to rearrange the seating to order. None of the teachers I ever had actually did such rearranging, but one I dated for a while many years later did. Apparently the first ones were fairly decent, but they wera also expensive and they got cheaper and cheaper and cheaper as time went by.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 19:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3105faa7d8aa66b4989e24@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #156856 |
In article <359217652.474750785.308885.peter_flass-
yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, peter_flass@yahoo.com says...
>
> J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <OK-dndgKyZP7PAbLnZ2dnUU78QmdnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > am.swallow@btinternet.com says...
> >>
> >> On 17/01/2016 11:40, J. Clarke wrote:
> >> {snip}
> >>
> >>> So provide_one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that
> >>> ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something
> >>> resembling a US elemntary school student desk.
> >>
> >> Try the bombing of London. Roofs fall in and windows break when a bomb
> >> goes off near by. The desk can stop flying glass.
> >
> > No, it CAN'T. I am not talking about something that is big and steel
> > that two fat people can have sex on. I am talking about somethign with
> > a top about 10x12 inches that is so fragile that six-year-old leaning
> > on it can break it.
> >
>
> You had strange desks. Ours were maybe 18"x24", and were certainly sturdy
> enough to stand on :-)
They were rather typical school desks--I sat in similar ones in Florida,
Louisiana, Virginia, and California. Even the ones that had a larger
surface were not designed so that one could stand on the desk, even if
it did not break it would fall over.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 08:18 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <87lh7onvbx.fsf@redbull.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> |
| In reply to | #156804 |
You know what? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: > In article <dg1126Fhpc9U1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com >> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >> > "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> wrote: >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >> > In article <dg0e81Fdm1hU1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com >> >> >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> > In article <dg001bFagh2U1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com The only thing more indicative of idiocy than BEING Speedo is ARGUING with Speedo. --NK1G
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-17 23:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1601172320450.26926@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #156817 |
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016, Lawrence Statton wrote:
>
> You know what?
>
> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>> In article <dg1126Fhpc9U1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com
>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>> "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> In article <dg0e81Fdm1hU1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com
>>>>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> In article <dg001bFagh2U1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com
>
> The only thing more indicative of idiocy than BEING Speedo is ARGUING
> with Speedo.
>
Well this internet thing should have a sidepanel to keep track of who is
who.
Michael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-18 04:45 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dg24n7FqvulU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #156804 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.310547c1efabdeb9989e16@news.eternal-september.org... > In article <dg1126Fhpc9U1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com > says... >> >> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >> news:20160117071953.1458d78111ce4e224bbd597d@eircom.net... >> > On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 17:40:40 +1100 >> > "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:MPG.3104f349b20cfca7989e13@news.eternal-september.org... >> >> > In article <dg0m06FfarhU1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com >> >> > says... >> >> >> >> >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >> news:MPG.3104e38d45519862989e10@news.eternal-september.org... >> >> >> > In article <dg0e81Fdm1hU1@mid.individual.net>, jkl8976@nospam.com >> >> >> > says... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >> news:MPG.3104b3913ac9cd18989e0e@news.eternal-september.org... >> >> >> >> > In article <dg001bFagh2U1@mid.individual.net>, >> >> >> >> > jkl8976@nospam.com >> >> >> >> > says... >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message >> >> >> >> >> news:20160116205742.241d8d9555de0488b9f27635@eircom.net... >> >> >> >> >> > On 16 Jan 2016 14:09:15 GMT >> >> >> >> >> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> We had almost as many atom bomb drills >> >> >> >> >> >> as fire drills in grade school during the 50s. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > The only one of those I heard of that made sense was, "Bend >> >> >> >> >> > over, tuck your head between your knees and kiss your arse >> >> >> >> >> > goodbye". >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It was more complicated than that in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Are you old enough to remember those drills personally? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We didn't have any here. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > I am and Ahem's got the right of it--they were risible. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> He's not right with the about what made sense. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> It did make sense to get where you wouldn't be >> >> >> >> exposed to flash burns. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > That's nice. Perhaps the designers of the drills should have >> >> >> > read >> >> >> > the same book you did. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Plenty survived Hiroshima >> >> >> >> and Nagasaki because they weren't exposed to >> >> >> >> flash burns purely by luck because of where they >> >> >> >> were when the bomb went off. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > So? >> >> >> >> >> >> So some of what they were told to do like get under their >> >> >> desks did make sense and is better than doing nothing. >> >> > >> >> > ROF,L. >> >> > >> >> > Jack, you have clearly not seen one of the desks that we were >> >> > supposed >> >> > to hide under. >> >> >> >> I have actually, there is plenty of video around on that. >> >> >> >> Holding a notebook over hour heads would have given >> >> > about as much protection. >> >> >> >> Nope. >> > >> > You're both missing the real reason they were a waste of time. >> >> No. >> >> > Sure they may help you if you are on the outskirts >> > of a city in which one of a very few bombs went off, >> >> Going to help you avoid flash burns when it's a lot worse than that too. >> >> > but if MAD had ever broken down >> >> That wasn't the situation when they had those drills. > > You're correct that MAD had not broken down. And it was never going to, even the worst of those in charge were never actually that stupid, particularly in the 50s being discussed when the USSR have had anything like the delivery capability to do anything like MAD. > The first indication that MAD has broken down > would be missiles coming over the Pole. And that was never going to happen. >> > then that would not have been the scenario. The real problem would >> > have been surviving in a country with no functioning infrastructure, >> >> Still much better to not have flash burns in that situation. >> >> > large areas of uninhabitable radioactive waste >> >> That wouldn't have been the case for most of the kids. >> >> > and water borne fallout to contend with. >> >> Still much better to not have flash burns. >> >> > The fictional depictions of this scenario always >> > struck me as being unreasonably optimistic. >> >> Sure, but still much better to not have flash burns. > > So provide _one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that > ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something > resembling a US elemntary school student desk. Plenty were in similar situations and survived when those who weren't were much worse off due to their flash burns. Even just the lack of flash burns improves your chances of survival very dramatically indeed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-19 12:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <557dd246-713c-4ce9-8447-cd8629584758@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #156804 |
On Sunday, January 17, 2016 at 6:34:47 AM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote: > So provide _one_ accunt from Hiroshima or Nagasaki that states that > ANYBODY was protected from flash burns by hiding under something > resembling a US elemntary school student desk. Note that the attack on Hiroshima was essentially without warning. The Japanese saw only a few planes, and assumed they were not bombers. Oppenheimer had assumed Hiroshima casualties would be much less if people had been in shelters. Again, obviously at ground zero there wasn't any survival, but in marginal areas--quite a large area-- being in a basement was certainly preferable to being on the street or an upper story. In the U.S., fallout shelters, with food and water, were widely established to provide some protection immediately after a blast. If you crash your call into a wall at 100 mph, I'm not sure if an airbag and seatbelt will be adequate to protect you. But I suspect if your speed was 35 mph, you'll be glad you had both. safety
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web