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


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #156357 > unrolled thread

1976 vs. 2016?

Started byhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
First post2016-01-10 19:18 -0800
Last post2016-01-12 02:52 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 388 — 41 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers


Contents

  1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-10 19:18 -0800
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-11 17:34 +1100
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 06:50 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:44 +1100
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 13:31 +0000
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-11 14:15 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 15:21 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:41 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-15 20:18 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-01-15 15:47 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-15 23:25 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 06:32 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-16 18:32 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-16 20:34 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:21 -0600
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-16 21:06 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-18 08:46 -0700
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-01-18 22:22 +0000
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-11 01:05 -0600
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-11 10:56 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 17:48 +0000
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 19:13 +0000
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-01-29 17:45 +0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 07:32 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-29 09:25 -0600
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Simmy Jacks" <sk98@nospam.com> - 2016-01-30 04:59 +1100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-29 20:12 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-30 09:24 +1100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-29 22:30 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-29 19:22 -0600
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-30 09:31 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 09:45 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-30 15:30 +0000
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 11:18 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:30 -0800
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-30 17:10 -0600
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 18:51 -0500
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-30 11:03 +0100
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 11:20 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 19:30 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-30 05:15 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-29 22:05 -0400
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-30 15:19 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-02-01 13:27 +0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-29 19:17 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 19:47 -0600
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-29 22:09 -0400
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:28 -0800
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-30 18:44 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-30 18:26 -0800
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 04:34 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 09:42 +0000
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 04:54 +1100
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-31 21:31 +0000
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 19:27 -0500
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:38 +1100
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 01:43 +0000
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 13:29 +1100
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 07:15 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 19:56 +1100
                                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-01 21:36 +0000
                                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 10:00 +1100
                                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 00:39 +0000
                                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 13:01 +1100
                                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 08:23 +0000
                                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 19:30 +1100
                                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 09:18 +0000
                                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 09:55 +0000
                                                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 12:19 +0000
                                                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 16:54 +0000
                                                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 18:35 +0000
                                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-03 05:22 +1100
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 07:53 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 20:01 +1100
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-01 11:02 +0000
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 05:36 +1100
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-01 19:25 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 09:27 +1100
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-02-02 12:45 +0800
                                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-02 16:23 +1100
                                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-02 08:24 +0000
                                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-02 20:34 +0000
                                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-03 01:18 +0000
                                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 15:25 +1100
                                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-03 08:45 +0000
                                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 20:51 +1100
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-31 14:09 -0800
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:46 +1100
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-31 20:16 -0600
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 07:19 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 14:46 +0000
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-31 15:22 +0000
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 15:48 +0000
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-31 16:43 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 12:55 -0500
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 17:55 +0000
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-31 20:36 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:24 +0000
                                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-01 10:07 +0000
                                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 10:42 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-01 12:56 +0000
                                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-01 16:48 +0000
                                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-02 09:42 +0000
                                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-02 17:05 +0000
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-31 21:34 +0000
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-02-02 00:46 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-02 09:58 +0000
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-01-31 15:30 +0000
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-31 16:44 +0000
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:26 -0600
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-01 00:06 +0100
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 13:02 +1100
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 21:55 -0600
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-02-01 12:52 +1100
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:59 -0800
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:40 -0600
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:25 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:52 -0600
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 21:23 +0000
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 10:52 -0600
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:13 -0600
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 16:02 -0600
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 17:14 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-31 16:33 -0600
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-31 19:11 -0500
                            Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-31 18:35 -0600
                              Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:51 -0600
                                Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-01 09:10 -0600
                                  Re: Dollar Coins in Coin Op Gear in the US Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 13:08 -0600
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 19:11 -0600
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-31 19:42 -0600
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 20:09 -0600
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-01 08:59 -0600
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 18:10 -0800
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 21:17 -0600
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 06:34 -0800
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:01 -0600
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 14:51 -0500
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 13:18 +1100
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-31 22:30 -0500
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 17:02 +0000
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-01 13:08 -0500
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-02 03:18 -0400
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-02 07:44 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Blanco" <rko4410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 19:12 +1100
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-02 14:14 +0000
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-02-02 14:37 +0000
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-31 23:10 -0500
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-01 09:28 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 11:51 -0600
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-01 13:07 -0500
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-02-02 03:31 -0400
                                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-02 12:40 -0800
                                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-03 12:45 -0500
                                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-03 18:24 +0000
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 07:53 +0000
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 08:12 -0500
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-01 16:03 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-01 16:15 +0000
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 06:01 +1100
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:56 -0800
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-31 15:58 -0600
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-31 17:52 -0800
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 08:12 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 12:23 -0600
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-01 14:05 -0600
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-01 12:43 -0800
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-02 00:12 +0000
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 15:27 -0600
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-02 00:08 +0000
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-01 18:24 -0600
                                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-01 19:07 -0600
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-30 13:13 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 17:03 -0600
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-31 02:58 +0100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:32 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 17:08 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-30 07:11 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-30 11:07 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-30 10:56 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-30 22:00 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-30 17:17 -0600
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-31 12:56 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-30 14:25 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-02 00:42 -0600
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mathias Koerber <mathias@koerber.org> - 2016-01-29 17:45 +0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 16:42 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-29 23:25 -0500
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:27 +1100
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-01-11 09:03 +0000
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 09:06 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 06:27 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 14:01 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 09:29 -0800
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 09:58 -0800
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 10:29 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 09:45 -0600
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-11 17:06 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 18:55 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 19:57 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 12:59 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 09:35 +1100
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 10:53 +0000
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 17:48 +0000
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 09:54 -0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-11 18:43 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 13:49 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-12 01:15 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:31 +1100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:52 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:33 -0800
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name,invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:18 +0100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:12 +0100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 04:52 +1100
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 20:05 +0100
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-12 18:36 -0600
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-01-13 21:27 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-14 00:15 -0600
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-13 02:34 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 14:16 +1100
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-14 00:23 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:41 -0600
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-16 23:56 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-12 02:56 -0400
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:30 +0100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:20 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 08:40 +1100
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:37 +1100
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:10 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:38 -0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:59 +1100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:28 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-01-11 11:54 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:57 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:29 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 20:46 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-11 19:30 -0800
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-11 02:59 -0800
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:44 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:39 +0100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-12 13:57 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:12 +1100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 17:19 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:38 -0600
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 08:07 -0800
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:50 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:07 +1100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-12 23:48 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 11:57 +1100
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-13 04:28 +0000
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 15:47 +1100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 19:57 +0100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-13 14:13 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-13 15:15 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-14 13:46 +0000
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 06:20 +1100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-13 14:13 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 03:10 +1100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:35 -0400
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-14 11:40 -0500
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 18:55 +0100
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-15 01:11 -0400
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-15 12:10 -0800
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Lon <lon.stowell@comcast.net> - 2016-01-18 08:50 -0700
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-18 16:11 +0000
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-18 21:23 +0000
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-18 10:04 -0800
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-18 10:29 -0800
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:16 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-15 01:15 -0400
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:35 -0400
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 06:27 -0500
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 06:55 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 14:07 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:36 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 06:17 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:15 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 11:09 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 07:30 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-12 07:41 -0800
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:24 -0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 09:51 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 16:04 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:18 -0800
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 09:49 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:10 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:50 +0100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:11 +1100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:16 +0100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 18:21 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:25 -0800
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-11 23:24 -0600
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 06:31 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:42 -0500
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-12 15:43 -0600
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 09:55 +1100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-12 10:07 +0100
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:22 -0800
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:58 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 11:53 -0800
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 15:56 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 13:52 -0800
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 00:15 +0100
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 19:18 -0800
                              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-13 08:29 +0100
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:10 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 18:32 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 17:07 -0800
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:34 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 16:07 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 11:48 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 20:01 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:28 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 11:03 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 05:42 +1100
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 14:57 +0000
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 07:15 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 16:03 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-11 11:48 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 10:15 -0800
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 13:54 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:41 +1100
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-11 20:03 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 13:15 -0600
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:55 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-11 17:12 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-11 19:35 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:03 -0500
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:26 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-11 20:00 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:30 -0500
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-11 19:45 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 15:27 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 13:10 -0800
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 18:15 -0500
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-11 18:02 -0600
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-11 22:53 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 00:06 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-12 14:39 +0000
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 16:01 -0500
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 22:07 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:21 +0000
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-12 06:56 -0500
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 07:19 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:26 -0800
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 16:22 +0000
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-12 13:16 -0500
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-13 05:23 +1100
                      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 19:52 -0600
                        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 23:22 -0600
                          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:14 -0600
                            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:52 -0500
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:59 -0500
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-13 23:15 -0400
                    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-14 05:44 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-12 10:56 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 13:49 -0500
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-12 16:18 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-12 14:37 +0000
                  Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 07:35 -0800
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-12 08:17 +0000
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-12 13:24 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 11:28 -0500
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-12 17:21 +0000
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-12 18:52 +0000
                Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-15 19:44 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-12 11:31 -0600
            Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-12 14:00 -0500
              Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-12 15:14 -0500
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 06:00 +1100
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-11 15:22 +0000
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-11 15:54 +0000
    Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-11 14:14 -0500
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-11 11:52 -0800
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 07:03 +1100
        Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-11 22:28 +0000
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-12 10:34 +1100
          Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-11 17:59 -0800
      Re: 1976 vs. 2016? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-12 02:52 +0000

Page 6 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 20  Next page →


#158461

FromStephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com>
Date2016-02-01 12:56 +0000
Message-ID<21luab14c2dpmsedlftqgncsaeflm579pa@4ax.com>
In reply to#158380
On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 20:36:06 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

>On 31 Jan 2016 17:55:58 GMT
>Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-01-31, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> 
>> [57 lines snipped]
>> 
>> > What surprises me is that it doesn't seem that uncommon to find really 
>> > foreign coins in the mix.  Coins from the UK, but other European
>> > countries too. 
>> 
>> I took a coffee jar full of small change to the supermarket the other
>> day (they have a machine that counts it and gives you a voucher for the
>> supermarket) and was surprised to find there was a 1989 Canadian penny,
>> a 2001 American penny, and 2001 & 2007 US dimes in it. I am in the UK.
>
>	There was a time when German vending machines got the occasional
>shilling through the Mark slot - it made for very cheap cigarettes.

I had a friend who worked in a huge engineering factory. They had a
machine that could be adjusted to make alloy washers of any size. He
set up the machine to make shilling size washers. They worked in
English chewing gum vending machines so I assume they would also work
in German cigarette machines. That could be annoying to the people who
owned the machines.

Steve

-- 
Neural Network Software for Windows                 http://www.npsnn.com

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


#158493

FromStan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org>
Date2016-02-01 16:48 +0000
Message-ID<slrnnav32n.2hl.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de>
In reply to#158461
On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:56:38 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme 
<steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>
> I had a friend who worked in a huge engineering factory. They had a
> machine that could be adjusted to make alloy washers of any size. He
> set up the machine to make shilling size washers. They worked in
> English chewing gum vending machines so I assume they would also work
> in German cigarette machines. That could be annoying to the people who
> owned the machines.

I used to work for a vending machine company which had machines in the
factory of a well-known car company.  The fitters in the machine shop
made a set of dies to stamp out brass washers the right size and
weight for the tea/coffee machine.  We had to threaten to pull out all
machines (including the cigarette ones!) to get thier management to sort 
the problem out.

-- 
Stan Barr     plan.b@bluesomatic.org

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


#158605

FromStephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com>
Date2016-02-02 09:42 +0000
Message-ID<sdu0bbd15snaj52h6jmrk11nqbhppar8ii@4ax.com>
In reply to#158493
On 1 Feb 2016 16:48:23 GMT, Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:56:38 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme 
><steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>
>> I had a friend who worked in a huge engineering factory. They had a
>> machine that could be adjusted to make alloy washers of any size. He
>> set up the machine to make shilling size washers. They worked in
>> English chewing gum vending machines so I assume they would also work
>> in German cigarette machines. That could be annoying to the people who
>> owned the machines.
>
>I used to work for a vending machine company which had machines in the
>factory of a well-known car company.  The fitters in the machine shop
>made a set of dies to stamp out brass washers the right size and
>weight for the tea/coffee machine.  We had to threaten to pull out all
>machines (including the cigarette ones!) to get thier management to sort 
>the problem out.

Yes but some other vending machine company would moved in!

Steve
-- 
Neural Network Software for Windows                 http://www.npsnn.com

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


#158620

FromStan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org>
Date2016-02-02 17:05 +0000
Message-ID<slrnnb1oep.68g.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de>
In reply to#158605
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 09:42:53 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme 
<steve@easynn.com> wrote:
> On 1 Feb 2016 16:48:23 GMT, Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 01 Feb 2016 12:56:38 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme 
>><steve@easynn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I had a friend who worked in a huge engineering factory. They had a
>>> machine that could be adjusted to make alloy washers of any size. He
>>> set up the machine to make shilling size washers. They worked in
>>> English chewing gum vending machines so I assume they would also work
>>> in German cigarette machines. That could be annoying to the people who
>>> owned the machines.
>>
>>I used to work for a vending machine company which had machines in the
>>factory of a well-known car company.  The fitters in the machine shop
>>made a set of dies to stamp out brass washers the right size and
>>weight for the tea/coffee machine.  We had to threaten to pull out all
>>machines (including the cigarette ones!) to get thier management to sort 
>>the problem out.
>
> Yes but some other vending machine company would moved in!

True, our local arch-rivals would have loved to.  But the threat of
all the disruption was enough :-) 

-- 
Stan Barr     plan.b@bluesomatic.org

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


#158388

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-01-31 21:34 +0000
Message-ID<dh7cuiFfseU9@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158368
On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:55:58 +0000, Huge wrote:

> On 2016-01-31, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
> 
> [57 lines snipped]
> 
>> What surprises me is that it doesn't seem that uncommon to find really
>> foreign coins in the mix.  Coins from the UK, but other European
>> countries too.
> 
> I took a coffee jar full of small change to the supermarket the other
> day (they have a machine that counts it and gives you a voucher for the
> supermarket) and was surprised to find there was a 1989 Canadian penny,
> a 2001 American penny, and 2001 & 2007 US dimes in it. I am in the UK.
> 
> No idea how they got there.

I take mine to my bank now. They don't charge any commission and will 
either 'change up' or pay it in to your account.



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

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

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


#158577

FromMike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com>
Date2016-02-02 00:46 +0000
Message-ID<20160202004639.3ac38714@amaterasu>
In reply to#158368
On 31 Jan 2016 17:55:58 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> I took a coffee jar full of small change to the supermarket the other
> day (they have a machine that counts it and gives you a voucher for the
> supermarket) and was surprised to find there was a 1989 Canadian penny,
> a 2001 American penny, and 2001 & 2007 US dimes in it. I am in the UK.
> 
> No idea how they got there.

Check the number of USAF bases in East Anglia.  I got a cent in my
change in a supermarket in Newmarket this afternoon.


Mike

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


#158607

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-02-02 09:58 +0000
Message-ID<dhbcuiF7o8mU6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158577
On 2016-02-02, Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2016 17:55:58 GMT
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I took a coffee jar full of small change to the supermarket the other
>> day (they have a machine that counts it and gives you a voucher for the
>> supermarket) and was surprised to find there was a 1989 Canadian penny,
>> a 2001 American penny, and 2001 & 2007 US dimes in it. I am in the UK.
>> 
>> No idea how they got there.
>
> Check the number of USAF bases in East Anglia.  I got a cent in my
> change in a supermarket in Newmarket this afternoon.

Good point, and one that hadn't occurred to me.

(I suppose they may also have escaped from the bag of American money I
have for visits there, but it seems unlikely, since the coffee jar
just gets filled up with coppers (mostly) from my wallet).

-- 
Today is Pungenday, the 33rd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

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


#158353

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-01-31 15:30 +0000
Message-ID<dh6nl2F2udpU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158351
On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 07:19:21 -0500
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I keep getting nickels and quarters confused. I thought it was just
>> me.
>
> 	I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out which
> is which. There are three sizes of silver coins (in the pile I have to
> hand). The biggest one says (in small indistinct letters around the bottom
> "quarter dollar", the next one down says (in very small indistinct letters,
> in a different position) "five cents"  and the smallest just says "one
> dime" around the bottom. In each case the amount is about the hardest thing
> to find and read on the coin. Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?

Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and still
struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins, paper money all the
same size and virtually the same colour.



-- 
Today is Sweetmorn, the 31st day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

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


#158363

Frommausg@mail.com
Date2016-01-31 16:44 +0000
Message-ID<slrnnasefk.1ur.mausg@smaus.org>
In reply to#158353
On 2016-01-31, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 07:19:21 -0500
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, I keep getting nickels and quarters confused. I thought it was just
>>> me.
>>
>> 	I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out which
>> is which. There are three sizes of silver coins (in the pile I have to
>> hand). The biggest one says (in small indistinct letters around the bottom
>> "quarter dollar", the next one down says (in very small indistinct letters,
>> in a different position) "five cents"  and the smallest just says "one
>> dime" around the bottom. In each case the amount is about the hardest thing
>> to find and read on the coin. Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
>
> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and still
> struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins, paper money all the
> same size and virtually the same colour.
>
>
>

But the notes are of good quality..


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

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


#158397

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2016-01-31 16:26 -0600
Message-ID<n8m1hj$j5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#158353
On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out
>> which is which. ... Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
> 
> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and
> still struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins,

See my earlier response on that.

> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.

Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.

Color has been added to the $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 notes, subtly at
first but becoming more pronounced with each new series.  This helped
the public accept the first major change to our currency in decades.

Redesigning the $1 note was never authorized/funded because it was
supposed to be withdrawn when the Sac dollar coin was introduced, but
Congress keeps pushing back the latter due to lobbyists.

The $2 note is in limited production/circulation, so it'll probably stay
in its present form indefinitely--and that's probably appropriate for
what is, in practice, more of a novelty than actual currency.  It may,
however, get more popular if/when the $1 note is withdrawn.

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]


#158401

FromMorten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid>
Date2016-02-01 00:06 +0100
Message-ID<rjg2oc-okb.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to#158397
In article <n8m1hj$j5$1@dont-email.me>,
Stephen Sprunk  <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
>On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out
>>> which is which. ... Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
>> 
>> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and
>> still struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins,
>
>See my earlier response on that.
>
>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>
>Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
>accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.

How can the rest of the world cope, then?

BTW; there now seems an international consensus on a rough colour to
value mapping. Notes of around EUR 5 are greenish or turquise-blue, 
10s are red, 20s are blue, 50s are yellow/gold, 100s are purple; but
the similarities end there. Even China with their 50 and 100 notes 
fit in.

But I can find no standard for this anywhere.

>Color has been added to the $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 notes, subtly at
>first but becoming more pronounced with each new series.  This helped
>the public accept the first major change to our currency in decades.
>
>Redesigning the $1 note was never authorized/funded because it was
>supposed to be withdrawn when the Sac dollar coin was introduced, but
>Congress keeps pushing back the latter due to lobbyists.
>
>The $2 note is in limited production/circulation, so it'll probably stay
>in its present form indefinitely--and that's probably appropriate for
>what is, in practice, more of a novelty than actual currency.  It may,
>however, get more popular if/when the $1 note is withdrawn.

The US has such a staggering logistics issue with changing out the
currency; it takes time and resources. Wereas Sweden change them from
full, primary circulation to invalidation in 8 months. They really
don't support their cash.

-- mrr

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


#158426

From"jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com>
Date2016-02-01 13:02 +1100
Message-ID<dh7smaFc450U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158401

"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message 
news:rjg2oc-okb.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article <n8m1hj$j5$1@dont-email.me>,
> Stephen Sprunk  <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
>>On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>>> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out
>>>> which is which. ... Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>>>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
>>>
>>> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and
>>> still struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins,
>>
>>See my earlier response on that.
>>
>>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>>
>>Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
>>accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
>
> How can the rest of the world cope, then?

Not much of the rest of the world varies
the size of the note with the denomination.

> BTW; there now seems an international consensus on a rough colour to
> value mapping. Notes of around EUR 5 are greenish or turquise-blue,
> 10s are red, 20s are blue, 50s are yellow/gold, 100s are purple; but
> the similarities end there. Even China with their 50 and 100 notes
> fit in.

Australia doesn’t, even on the sequence as opposed to the value.

> But I can find no standard for this anywhere.
>
>>Color has been added to the $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 notes, subtly at
>>first but becoming more pronounced with each new series.  This helped
>>the public accept the first major change to our currency in decades.
>>
>>Redesigning the $1 note was never authorized/funded because it was
>>supposed to be withdrawn when the Sac dollar coin was introduced, but
>>Congress keeps pushing back the latter due to lobbyists.
>>
>>The $2 note is in limited production/circulation, so it'll probably stay
>>in its present form indefinitely--and that's probably appropriate for
>>what is, in practice, more of a novelty than actual currency.  It may,
>>however, get more popular if/when the $1 note is withdrawn.
>
> The US has such a staggering logistics issue with changing out the
> currency; it takes time and resources. Wereas Sweden change them from
> full, primary circulation to invalidation in 8 months. They really
> don't support their cash.
 

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


#158440

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2016-01-31 21:55 -0600
Message-ID<n8mkpi$pn8$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#158401
On 31-Jan-16 17:06, Morten Reistad wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk  <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>>
>> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines
>> that accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
> 
> How can the rest of the world cope, then?

"Easier" doesn't imply the opposite is impossible.

> BTW; there now seems an international consensus on a rough colour to
> value mapping. Notes of around EUR 5 are greenish or turquise-blue, 
> 10s are red, 20s are blue, 50s are yellow/gold, 100s are purple; but
> the similarities end there. Even China with their 50 and 100 notes 
> fit in.
> 
> But I can find no standard for this anywhere.

Would the US follow it even if there were?  Here are our colors:

$1	N/A
$2	N/A
$5	Purple
$10	Orange
$20	Green
$50	Pink
$100	Teal

So far, Congress has refused to reintroduce the $500 and $1000 notes
dropped in Series 1950, despite obvious need due to inflation.

>> Redesigning the $1 note was never authorized/funded because it was 
>> supposed to be withdrawn when the Sac dollar coin was introduced,
>> but Congress keeps pushing back the latter due to lobbyists.
>> 
>> The $2 note is in limited production/circulation, so it'll probably
>> stay in its present form indefinitely--and that's probably
>> appropriate for what is, in practice, more of a novelty than actual
>> currency.  It may, however, get more popular if/when the $1 note is
>> withdrawn.
> 
> The US has such a staggering logistics issue with changing out the 
> currency; it takes time and resources. Wereas Sweden change them
> from full, primary circulation to invalidation in 8 months. They
> really don't support their cash.

Replacing notes isn't difficult; their lifespan is only 4-8 years (15
years for $100), so we constantly print new ones just to keep up with
old ones falling apart.  Withdrawing a note, especially the most used
one with no accepted replacement, is an entirely different matter.

The US is also in a unique position because ~2/3rds of our currency
circulates overseas and is the preferred currency in black markets and
places with unstable local currencies--though the Euro is starting to
get popular for both now as well, and for similar reasons.

This is what motivated the big redesign in Series 1996-1999 (and the
smaller one in Series 2004-2009): counterfeit notes had gotten so good
("supernotes") that foreign banks couldn't reliably detect them, and
they were losing millions when they brought such notes back here and the
Fed rejected them.  While Series 1995 and older are still legal tender
in the US, many foreign banks stopped accepting them--other than $1/$2
notes, which simply aren't worth counterfeiting.

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]


#158421

From"jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com>
Date2016-02-01 12:52 +1100
Message-ID<dh7s2sFc09oU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158397

"Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote in message 
news:n8m1hj$j5$1@dont-email.me...
> On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out
>>> which is which. ... Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
>>
>> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and
>> still struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins,
>
> See my earlier response on that.
>
>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>
> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
> accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
>
> Color has been added to the $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 notes, subtly at
> first but becoming more pronounced with each new series.  This helped
> the public accept the first major change to our currency in decades.

Makes not sense to do it gradually. People wouldn’t have heart attacks
if it was done suddenly or start rioting in the streets, even in America.

> Redesigning the $1 note was never authorized/funded because it was
> supposed to be withdrawn when the Sac dollar coin was introduced, but
> Congress keeps pushing back the latter due to lobbyists.
>
> The $2 note is in limited production/circulation, so it'll probably stay
> in its present form indefinitely--and that's probably appropriate for
> what is, in practice, more of a novelty than actual currency.  It may,
> however, get more popular if/when the $1 note is withdrawn.

Makes more sense to have just $1 and $2 coins and no notes of that
denomination at all. Presumably its just the vending machine lobby
prevention that from happening. Since its so irrelevant, an obscene
gesture should be made in their general direction. Its not as if they
have any political power. 

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


#158425

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2016-01-31 17:59 -0800
Message-ID<6cd4eee7-d425-49c3-952b-d41b1139890c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#158397
On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 5:26:37 PM UTC-5, Stephen Sprunk wrote:


> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
> accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.

Notes used to be larger than today.  I think they were the same size
as punched cards.  Actually, I think punched cards were sized to be the
same as notes, to take advantage of existing divided drawers

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


#158434

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2016-01-31 20:40 -0600
Message-ID<n8mgdf$g0r$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#158425
On 31-Jan-16 19:59, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
>> accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
> 
> Notes used to be larger than today.

"Large" notes, used through Series 1918, were 79.38 × 188.51 mm.

"Small" notes, used since Series 1928, are 66.294 × 155.956 mm.

There has never been a difference by denomination, and "Large" notes
today are worth far more than face value as collectors' items; there is
no reason for a vending machine to accept them.

> I think they were the same size as punched cards.  Actually, I think
> punched cards were sized to be the same as notes, to take advantage
> of existing divided drawers

IBM's 82.55 × 187.325 mm punch cards were first produced in 1928, and
the similarity to pre-1928 note size does make that theory credible.

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]


#158455

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-02-01 09:25 +0000
Message-ID<dh8mknFhqfpU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158397
On 2016-01-31, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
> On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>> On 2016-01-31, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out
>>> which is which. ... Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>>> 10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?
>> 
>> Hear, hear. I've been visiting the USA regularly for 35 years and
>> still struggle with the money. Illogical sizes for coins,
>
> See my earlier response on that.
>
>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>
> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines that
> accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.

W-e-e-e-e-e-e-llll. Only if your vending machine manufacturers are limiting
themselves to the American market.



-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 32nd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

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


#158510

FromStephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Date2016-02-01 12:52 -0600
Message-ID<n8o9c0$sk5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#158455
On 01-Feb-16 03:25, Huge wrote:
> On 2016-01-31, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
>> On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>> 
>> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines
>> that accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
> 
> W-e-e-e-e-e-e-llll. Only if your vending machine manufacturers are
> limiting themselves to the American market.

Vending machines made for a worldwide market take standard bill/coin
acceptor modules that come in variants tuned for each country.  Ones for
variable-size notes will naturally be more complicated (and thus more
expensive) than ones for fixed-size notes.

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]


#158539

FromHuge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
Date2016-02-01 21:23 +0000
Message-ID<dha0n2FsneeU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#158510
On 2016-02-01, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
> On 01-Feb-16 03:25, Huge wrote:
>> On 2016-01-31, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:
>>> On 31-Jan-16 09:30, Huge wrote:
>>>> paper money all the same size and virtually the same colour.
>>> 
>>> Being all the same size makes it easier to make vending machines
>>> that accept all (or at least multiple) denominations of notes.
>> 
>> W-e-e-e-e-e-e-llll. Only if your vending machine manufacturers are
>> limiting themselves to the American market.
>
> Vending machines made for a worldwide market take standard bill/coin
> acceptor modules that come in variants tuned for each country.  Ones for
> variable-size notes will naturally be more complicated (and thus more
> expensive) than ones for fixed-size notes.

Good point. Thank you.


-- 
Today is Boomtime, the 32nd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
                  I don't have an attitude problem.
    If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.

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


#158364

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-31 10:52 -0600
Message-ID<1sesab149mset6c7qkd9jn5rms8q67ccui@4ax.com>
In reply to#158351
On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 14:46:31 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Jan 2016 07:19:21 -0500
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I keep getting nickels and quarters confused. I thought it was just
>> me.
>
>	I find I have to look carefully at American coins to work out which
>is which. There are three sizes of silver coins (in the pile I have to
>hand). The biggest one says (in small indistinct letters around the bottom
>"quarter dollar", the next one down says (in very small indistinct letters,
>in a different position) "five cents"  and the smallest just says "one
>dime" around the bottom. In each case the amount is about the hardest thing
>to find and read on the coin. Would it have been so hard to have a large 5,
>10 and 25 on the coins - and make the sizes relate to the value ?

I've seen some documentaries o nthe Mint and how they make coins.
Apprently US money have to look good. The points you made are
apparently not part of the process.

-- 
JimP.

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


Page 6 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 20  Next page →

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


csiph-web