Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #158899 > unrolled thread
| Started by | philo <philo@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-05 11:25 -0600 |
| Last post | 2016-03-22 13:12 +0000 |
| Articles |
20 on this page of 1000+
— 53 participants
Thread has 1181 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed. |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers | Browse in flat view
Thread has 1181 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.
Qbasic philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-02-05 11:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-05 14:56 -0800
Re: Qbasic philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-02-05 18:13 -0600
Re: Qbasic Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-05 22:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-02-05 22:32 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Gene Buckle" <gene.buckle@bbs.retroarchive.org.remove-3hg-this> - 2016-02-11 10:22 -0800
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-11 17:16 -0800
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-11 18:49 -0800
Re: Qbasic philo <philo@privacy.net> - 2016-02-12 05:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-12 11:50 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-12 14:02 +0000
Re: Qbasic "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-02-12 23:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-12 09:50 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 06:53 -0500
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-12 13:40 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-12 09:53 -0800
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-02-13 14:37 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-12 14:04 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-12 09:55 -0800
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-12 20:49 +0000
Re: Qbasic Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-12 23:21 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-12 15:55 -0800
Re: Qbasic Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-13 00:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-16 15:55 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-12 21:09 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-12 17:11 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-12 23:27 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 06:26 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-16 15:54 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-17 11:34 -0800
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-17 19:56 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-17 12:48 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-17 18:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-17 19:23 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-18 12:00 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 15:02 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:36 -0500
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-19 04:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-19 20:05 -0600
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 21:34 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-20 08:03 -0600
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 11:09 -0500
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 10:39 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-20 12:05 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-20 13:47 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-20 14:21 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:06 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 23:29 -0500
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-20 22:48 -0600
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 19:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-21 09:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-21 23:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-18 18:04 -0400
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 05:59 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:30 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-21 18:34 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 21:03 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 05:53 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:27 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 12:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-21 12:23 -0800
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:17 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-21 18:36 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 14:03 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-22 13:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 11:05 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-22 11:19 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 15:39 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-25 06:18 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-25 06:53 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-25 08:45 -0600
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-25 15:56 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-25 18:19 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-25 10:25 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-25 16:07 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-25 16:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-25 16:01 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-25 18:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-26 15:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-26 10:15 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 11:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:30 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-27 13:06 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-26 19:05 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-26 20:49 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-27 14:33 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-26 21:46 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-27 06:44 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-27 11:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 10:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-28 12:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 16:34 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-28 17:47 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 07:40 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 09:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 12:46 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 14:31 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 17:23 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 18:13 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 20:14 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-28 21:04 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-29 09:31 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 07:43 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 08:21 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 12:43 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare pechter@chuckie.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-02-29 17:43 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-29 17:35 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-29 14:19 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 17:19 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-01 06:02 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-02 10:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:31 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-01 14:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:33 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-02 10:23 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-03 08:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 16:21 +0100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-03 16:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-03 16:23 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:58 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-02 15:06 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-03 15:57 +0100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-04 09:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-04 11:11 +0100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-04 16:22 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-05 03:05 +0100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-04 19:31 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-04 19:25 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-05 11:14 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-05 09:50 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-05 17:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-05 20:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-05 20:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-05 20:36 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-05 22:08 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-06 09:46 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-06 09:59 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-06 18:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:25 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-07 01:13 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-06 17:26 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-15 12:32 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 18:04 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-07 14:09 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 11:18 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-07 11:57 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 16:24 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-08 08:18 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-11 11:40 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-13 10:14 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 13:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:24 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:34 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-06 17:25 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 12:14 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare pechter@mongo.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-03-07 02:49 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 15:47 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-03-06 19:54 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-05 12:02 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-05 14:53 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-05 23:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-05 21:57 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-06 00:26 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-07 01:13 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 17:29 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-06 02:52 -0400
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 11:16 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 07:30 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-06 17:37 -0400
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 10:12 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 19:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 13:39 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 01:59 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-07 14:12 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 03:11 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-08 13:16 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 08:07 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-08 14:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-09 00:32 +0000
Re: Basic - lies about Medicare "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-09 11:58 +1100
Re: Basic - lies about Medicare mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-09 11:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-09 11:25 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-08 15:01 -0800
Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-08 07:18 -0700
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-08 15:06 -0400
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-09 13:41 +0000
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-09 06:48 -0700
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 04:44 +1100
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-10 13:24 +0000
Re: Water: was Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-10 14:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-09 05:09 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2016-03-08 11:23 -0800
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-03-06 09:54 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 01:57 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-07 01:13 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 13:35 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 11:51 +1100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 14:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 10:38 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-04 12:57 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-04 12:08 -0700
Re: computer security hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-04 14:36 -0800
Re: computer security Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-04 19:31 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-05 13:57 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-05 15:37 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-06 00:35 +0100
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-06 14:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-16 21:34 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-17 13:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-03-17 14:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 15:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-02 10:37 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-01 10:47 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:12 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-27 00:28 -0500
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-27 06:44 -0700
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-28 14:03 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 10:47 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-29 14:52 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-29 09:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 14:33 -0600
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-27 08:32 +0000
Re: Qbasic - lies about Medicare Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-02-27 11:21 -0500
Re: Qbasic pechter@chuckie.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-02-25 15:31 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-25 10:22 -0600
Re: Qbasic pechter@chuckie.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-02-25 17:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-25 08:11 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-25 10:40 -0600
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 04:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-23 12:29 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-24 13:55 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-24 15:24 -0600
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-21 09:13 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 03:23 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-21 17:38 +0000
Re: Qbasic Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-02-21 17:59 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 07:41 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-22 01:21 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 14:00 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 15:48 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-22 16:43 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-22 20:49 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-24 18:15 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-24 17:59 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-24 19:30 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:20 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-24 17:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 14:38 +1100
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 05:25 -0500
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-25 10:22 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 04:31 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-25 15:53 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 21:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:55 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-25 20:18 -0800
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 05:23 -0500
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-26 12:15 +0100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:24 -0800
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:14 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-25 23:34 -0600
Re: Qbasic "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 05:38 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-26 15:46 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-26 10:14 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 11:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-26 14:15 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-26 14:23 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-26 15:50 -0500
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-28 10:46 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-28 14:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 18:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 16:40 -0800
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-01 06:47 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 08:32 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-01 10:39 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 12:23 -0800
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-01 14:27 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 15:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-02 07:22 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 04:03 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-02 13:52 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-02 13:56 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-26 12:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-02-26 23:12 -0500
Re: Qbasic Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-27 09:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-02-27 14:37 -0500
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-27 17:08 -0800
Re: Qbasic Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-28 09:57 +0000
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-28 15:56 +0100
Re: Qbasic Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-02-28 19:00 -0800
Re: Qbasic Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-02-29 22:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-03-01 22:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-02 12:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-02 13:46 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-02 21:09 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-03 05:33 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-03-02 19:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-02 15:45 -0800
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-02 16:27 -0800
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-03 01:02 -0800
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-16 17:59 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-17 10:42 -0700
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-27 19:43 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:21 -0800
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-27 20:19 +0100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-26 08:27 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:25 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 09:30 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-27 15:00 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 13:52 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-27 17:16 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-27 18:22 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-27 17:12 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-27 20:23 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 05:43 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 03:34 +1100
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 08:41 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-28 11:16 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-28 14:57 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:55 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-29 09:25 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-29 09:46 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 09:22 -0600
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-29 16:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 09:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:17 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 08:59 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:25 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 04:38 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:20 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 09:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:35 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 04:35 +1100
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-07 18:19 -0500
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-08 00:48 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:49 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-29 16:12 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-29 10:46 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 12:49 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 11:03 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-29 14:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 15:56 -0600
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 08:30 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-01 12:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 09:10 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-03 10:36 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-29 17:35 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-28 18:41 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-27 20:12 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:18 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 03:28 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-26 15:48 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-26 11:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-26 14:09 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-27 03:15 -0600
Re: Qbasic "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-27 09:22 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-27 03:13 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-27 10:28 -0800
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-28 12:59 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 03:32 +1100
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 08:40 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-28 14:36 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-28 18:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-28 20:27 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 20:22 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 16:38 +1100
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 05:40 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-29 06:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-07 18:35 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 13:00 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 18:54 +1100
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-29 10:51 +0100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-29 16:05 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-28 22:06 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 19:01 +1100
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-02-29 08:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 05:01 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 10:46 -0800
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-01 10:12 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 05:59 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-29 14:59 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 16:06 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 09:12 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:37 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:24 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-01 12:18 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 06:04 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 09:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-03 11:33 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 11:46 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-13 11:25 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:47 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-28 10:58 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Alexis" <ggyy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 09:51 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-02-29 16:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 04:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-28 20:38 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 16:44 +1100
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 05:46 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-02-29 18:59 +1100
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-29 09:56 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-28 22:53 -0600
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 05:35 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-29 06:44 -0600
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-29 14:02 +0100
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 04:51 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-29 11:36 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 08:58 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-01 10:20 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-01 06:47 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-01 10:16 -0800
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 12:28 -0800
Re: Qbasic Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2016-03-01 21:03 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:23 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 18:02 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 11:18 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-02 12:19 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-01 15:14 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:24 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 15:53 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:13 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 09:15 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:38 +1100
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-09 12:38 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-09 19:15 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-10 05:06 -0800
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-10 09:35 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-10 07:42 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 04:14 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-10 15:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-02 14:19 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-02 07:23 -0700
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-02 07:29 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 04:04 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-02 12:50 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 11:55 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-02 19:40 +0000
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 03:34 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 11:46 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-03 11:47 -0800
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-03 22:07 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 17:04 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:16 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-02 15:54 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 03:44 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-02 16:59 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-02 15:08 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 12:19 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:11 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 08:56 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:21 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-01 10:57 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 05:56 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-03 09:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-01 13:55 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 01:28 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 10:41 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 14:16 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 16:24 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-21 14:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-03-21 20:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 13:55 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 13:16 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-21 17:00 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 17:12 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-21 18:44 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-21 21:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-24 23:13 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 13:25 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-21 23:36 -0500
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-22 12:56 +0100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-22 13:11 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 13:33 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 10:32 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 10:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-22 17:38 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 13:10 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-22 19:41 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 05:09 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-23 17:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 11:09 +1100
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-25 08:50 -0400
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-25 10:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 14:34 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-24 12:58 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 14:01 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-02-29 16:07 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-02-29 16:39 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 10:49 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-01 10:41 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-29 10:26 -0500
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 17:38 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-29 12:56 -0500
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 18:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 10:53 -0800
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-29 19:21 +0000
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-02-29 20:19 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-02-29 20:32 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-01 16:18 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-02 14:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-02 16:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 12:17 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-10 09:48 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-10 13:29 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-10 18:27 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-10 20:14 -0600
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-11 11:06 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-11 10:09 -0600
Re: Qbasic Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-03-11 11:21 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-11 10:28 -0800
Re: Qbasic Uncle Steve <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2016-03-12 16:12 -0500
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-11 19:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-10 16:58 -0800
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-02 17:35 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-03 00:51 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:59 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-03 10:48 -0600
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-16 20:52 -0400
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-16 18:11 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-16 20:52 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-29 16:26 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-01 13:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:10 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-01 15:44 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-01 13:36 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-01 12:55 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-02 10:21 +1100
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-02 08:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-02 11:57 -0800
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-02 15:13 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-02 17:32 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-02 13:36 -0600
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-02 19:44 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-02 12:14 -0800
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-02 14:43 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-02 18:06 -0800
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 10:44 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-03 11:23 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 15:03 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-03 14:04 -0800
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:04 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-03 16:16 -0800
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-11 17:02 -0800
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-03 17:04 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 19:01 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-04 09:47 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-04 11:25 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-04 12:32 -0600
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-04 12:34 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-04 12:08 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 16:02 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-04 10:54 -0800
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-04 20:36 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-05 15:41 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 14:12 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-07 10:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 17:34 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-07 14:42 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 21:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-07 22:37 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-08 09:16 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-08 09:22 -0600
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-16 20:45 -0400
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-08 17:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-08 10:38 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-08 22:11 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-08 09:10 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 10:38 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 13:07 -0500
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 11:27 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 13:35 -0700
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 16:28 -0500
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-07 14:05 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-07 14:28 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 17:37 -0500
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 16:10 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 18:30 -0700
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 18:00 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 22:07 -0500
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 20:06 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-16 20:39 -0400
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 18:30 -0700
Re: Trump vs. Hillary JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 20:23 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 22:17 -0500
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-07 20:15 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-08 08:13 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-08 07:24 -0700
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-08 08:53 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-08 10:58 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-08 15:34 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-09 14:39 +0000
Re: Trump vs. Hillary "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-09 10:05 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-09 09:41 -0800
Re: Trump vs. Hillary "Sam Crean" <sg55443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-10 04:57 +1100
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-09 21:11 +0000
Re: Trump vs. Hillary "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-09 15:23 -0600
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-03-10 17:40 +0000
Re: Trump vs. Hillary scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 21:31 +0000
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 18:30 -0700
Re: Trump vs. Hillary Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-07 22:25 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 18:33 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 18:38 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 13:35 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 21:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-07 12:59 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-08 08:44 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-08 09:19 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-05 15:29 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-07 14:21 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 15:45 -0600
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-06 17:52 -0800
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 13:42 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-03-07 10:11 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-07 13:04 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-07 13:35 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-08 10:31 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-03 19:28 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 13:19 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-03 11:04 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-02 17:35 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Sangmo" <ju410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 12:20 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-16 22:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-16 09:44 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-16 12:10 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-16 19:53 +0000
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-16 17:01 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-17 07:39 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-18 12:42 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 09:02 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-18 12:45 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-18 10:52 -0500
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-19 13:23 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-17 07:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-16 11:54 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-18 12:55 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-18 15:42 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-18 17:54 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-18 17:47 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-18 19:57 -0500
Re: Qbasic Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-03-18 21:09 -0400
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-20 12:55 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-20 14:39 -0700
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-21 07:53 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-21 12:00 -0500
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-21 20:48 -0400
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-19 12:56 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-19 17:07 -0600
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-20 03:35 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 07:45 -0600
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-20 06:09 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 09:16 -0600
Re: Qbasic "John Akers" <ja5443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 04:41 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 13:21 -0600
Re: Qbasic "John Akers" <ja5443@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 08:09 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-20 16:37 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-21 13:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-20 17:02 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 18:04 -0600
Re: Qbasic greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-03-21 15:57 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-21 11:24 -0600
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-21 16:51 +0000
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-03-21 17:43 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-21 12:55 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 14:03 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-22 16:26 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 07:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 13:56 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-21 10:56 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-21 11:14 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 14:07 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-22 17:08 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-23 10:08 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-04-13 07:57 -0700
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-21 19:45 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 13:51 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-22 13:13 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-22 07:27 -0700
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-22 07:31 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 08:31 -0700
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-21 20:17 +0100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-21 12:42 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 13:33 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 15:58 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-22 16:28 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-19 13:12 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-19 16:48 -0700
Re: Qbasic Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2016-03-20 00:37 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-20 12:57 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 13:05 -0600
Re: Qbasic Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-03-20 12:43 -0600
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-20 14:04 -0600
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-20 19:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-21 12:04 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-20 16:52 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-20 19:06 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-21 12:06 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 13:51 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-21 19:03 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 12:04 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 12:17 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-22 12:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-22 17:43 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 12:55 -0600
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-22 11:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 14:00 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 14:32 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 06:53 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 15:03 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 19:34 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-22 17:57 -0700
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-22 21:47 +0000
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-23 18:34 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 14:39 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 07:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-23 09:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-23 16:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-23 17:36 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-23 18:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 07:30 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-23 15:16 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 07:51 +1100
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-24 01:14 +0100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-23 22:36 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-23 19:02 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 14:29 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-24 13:03 +0000
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-25 12:57 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-25 09:22 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-26 04:03 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-26 13:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 04:14 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 12:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-29 07:55 +0100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-29 13:55 +0000
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last,name.invalid> - 2016-03-29 17:12 +0200
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 09:17 -0700
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-30 05:43 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-03-30 05:39 +0100
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-30 17:26 +1100
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-03-30 09:56 +0100
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 03:29 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-30 10:01 +0000
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-03-30 23:06 +0100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 06:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 12:14 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 07:08 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-30 15:04 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-31 11:17 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-30 05:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-29 15:54 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 09:17 -0700
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-29 17:59 +0100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-29 17:08 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 12:17 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-30 11:01 -0700
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-30 15:13 -0600
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 08:14 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 15:53 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 09:40 -0400
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-31 20:02 +0000
Re: Qbasic pechter@cobalt.pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-04-01 16:02 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-04-01 12:27 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 09:40 -0400
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-31 20:52 -0500
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-29 14:05 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-29 20:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-30 09:41 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-30 10:15 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-30 15:17 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 08:07 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 09:40 -0400
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:22 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-30 13:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-30 16:05 +0000
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 03:45 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-29 17:06 -0500
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-29 17:22 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-29 22:04 -0700
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-30 17:29 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 12:19 -0500
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-30 19:52 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-04-02 13:12 -0700
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-30 13:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-30 15:16 +0000
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 03:58 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-30 19:51 +0000
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 07:13 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-31 09:15 +0000
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 21:19 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-31 11:23 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:38 +1100
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-31 12:33 -0700
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-31 12:16 +0200
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:00 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-31 12:41 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-31 13:10 +0000
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-31 11:27 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:39 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-31 20:55 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:11 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 12:20 -0500
Re: Qbasic Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-03-30 11:48 -0600
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 15:56 -0500
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 08:11 +1100
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-03-31 16:41 -0400
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-31 07:10 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 09:40 -0400
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-30 16:27 -0500
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-29 17:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-29 17:45 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-29 23:20 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-03-31 11:19 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-31 19:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-04-02 13:24 -0700
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-03 08:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-04-03 13:47 +0200
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 12:18 -0400
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-04-04 10:48 -0400
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-04-04 12:00 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 14:49 -0400
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-04-04 18:38 -0500
Re: Qbasic Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-04-09 18:23 +0200
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 14:49 -0400
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-04 20:50 +0000
Re: Qbasic "Thomas Johns" <TJzz@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 04:03 +1000
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-04-04 10:45 -0400
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-03 12:18 -0400
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-04-03 14:45 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-04-04 17:34 -0700
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-05 13:10 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-04-05 10:16 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-26 04:05 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-25 12:15 -0600
Re: Qbasic greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-03-26 11:43 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-26 12:43 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 11:55 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-28 12:24 -0700
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-29 07:31 +1100
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-29 07:24 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-28 15:53 -0600
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-28 21:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-25 22:48 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-26 07:04 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 04:18 +1100
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-26 17:59 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-26 19:50 +0000
Re: Qbasic greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-03-26 20:22 +0000
Re: Qbasic Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-27 04:34 -0300
Re: Qbasic greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-03-27 09:18 +0000
Re: Qbasic Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-03-27 17:45 +0000
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-27 13:28 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 04:21 +1100
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-26 13:24 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 04:17 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-26 12:47 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 11:50 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 11:48 -0700
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-29 07:29 +0100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-24 09:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-24 09:52 -0600
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-24 10:18 -0500
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-24 10:39 -0600
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-24 09:21 -0700
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-24 10:37 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-24 11:04 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-24 14:19 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-04-11 23:00 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-24 13:25 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 07:15 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-24 13:35 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 05:26 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-24 13:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2016-03-25 12:17 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-26 04:09 +1100
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-24 13:12 -0700
Re: Qbasic Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-27 04:43 -0300
Re: Qbasic jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-03-27 13:26 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 04:45 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-27 13:02 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-27 19:11 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-27 15:25 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-27 15:40 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-27 17:40 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 11:10 +1100
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 11:08 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-28 09:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-27 11:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-27 12:02 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 07:32 +1100
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-27 17:48 -0500
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-27 15:53 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-28 13:29 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-28 12:50 -0700
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-29 07:34 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-28 21:12 +0000
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-29 13:11 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-03-29 14:47 +0100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-29 15:49 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-29 17:15 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-29 17:17 -0700
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 06:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-30 12:22 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 09:40 -0400
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-04-01 05:25 +1100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-31 20:08 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-31 20:57 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-01 07:39 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-04-01 09:14 +0100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-01 13:51 +0000
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-04-02 06:23 +0100
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-02 08:33 +0000
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-04-04 12:27 -0400
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-04-04 20:54 +0000
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-27 17:45 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-28 13:30 -0500
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-27 13:12 -0700
Re: Qbasic Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-03-27 18:31 -0300
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-27 16:32 -0700
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-28 09:30 +0000
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 04:17 +1100
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-28 04:57 -0700
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-28 12:50 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 04:30 +1100
Re: Qbasic Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2016-04-04 10:55 -0400
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-04-04 11:01 -0700
Re: Qbasic Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-04-04 19:43 +0100
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-04-04 23:31 +0200
Re: Qbasic "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-04-04 17:15 -0500
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-04-05 00:42 +0200
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 11:41 -0700
Re: Qbasic "764hho" <764hho@nospam.com> - 2016-03-29 07:20 +1100
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-28 14:56 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-28 11:30 -0700
Re: Qbasic Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-03-28 12:20 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-29 17:11 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-29 20:33 -0500
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-30 10:18 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 06:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-30 16:07 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 06:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-30 15:14 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 09:15 -0700
Re: Qbasic Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-03-23 19:58 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 06:45 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-03-22 15:07 -0600
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 07:20 +1100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-22 13:24 -0500
Re: Qbasic Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-03-22 19:50 +0000
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-23 11:05 +0000
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-23 09:41 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-23 17:12 -0700
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-24 06:30 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-24 10:07 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-24 10:37 -0700
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-24 14:03 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-24 14:46 -0500
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-24 16:59 -0500
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-21 13:59 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 14:23 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-25 13:57 -0500
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-22 13:54 -0700
Re: Qbasic Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-03-21 17:46 -0400
Re: Qbasic mausg@mail.com - 2016-03-22 11:31 +0000
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-22 13:15 +0100
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 04:48 +1100
Re: Qbasic "Jim Bank" <jb410@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 07:37 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-16 18:55 -0700
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-16 21:04 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-17 13:48 +1100
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-17 00:49 -0700
Re: Qbasic Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-03-17 09:28 +0100
Re: Qbasic Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-03-17 10:45 -0500
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 08:16 +1100
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-17 12:58 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-17 06:55 -0700
Re: Qbasic hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-03-18 13:08 -0700
Re: Qbasic "hanja" <hanja228@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 09:22 +1100
Re: Qbasic Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-03-18 18:12 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-18 17:47 -0700
Re: Qbasic JimP. <blue@cwahi.net> - 2016-03-18 20:00 -0500
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-19 07:28 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-21 13:50 +0000
Re: Qbasic Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-21 13:51 -0700
Re: Qbasic scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-03-22 13:12 +0000
Page 3 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 50 Next page →
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 08:03 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <dira1bFg36eU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159886 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... > In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com says... >> >> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In article <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >> >> >> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles Richmond >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, they >> >>>> have >> >>>> *no* >> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >> >>> >> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >> >>> >> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >> >> >> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >> > >> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >> > they might both be alive today." >> > >> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >> > >> >> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party members >> in >> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of >> lying >> to obtain what they want. > > The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches by Obama on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 11:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.313259d846d71a8d989f9d@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #159921 |
In article <dira1bFg36eU1@mid.individual.net>, r124c4u102@comcast.net says... > > "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... > > In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com says... > >> > >> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message > >> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... > >> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> In article <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, > >> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > >> >> > >> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles Richmond > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, they > >> >>>> have > >> >>>> *no* > >> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." > >> >>> > >> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: > >> >>> > >> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY > >> >> > >> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. > >> > > >> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, > >> > they might both be alive today." > >> > > >> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let > >> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) > >> > > >> > >> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party members > >> in > >> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of > >> lying > >> to obtain what they want. > > > > The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? > > Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches by Obama > on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. The lying checklist: (1) Is he a politician? (2) Are his lips moving?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 10:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <ui5hcbp5i6hfrrotipvksdgag201a5vsqp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #159921 |
On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: > >"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com says... >>> >>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >> In article <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>> >> >>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles Richmond >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, they >>> >>>> have >>> >>>> *no* >>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>> >>> >>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>> >>> >>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>> >> >>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>> > >>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>> > they might both be alive today." >>> > >>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>> > >>> >>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party members >>> in >>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of >>> lying >>> to obtain what they want. >> >> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? > >Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches by Obama >on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the scams they had been paying in to. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 12:05 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <diro7nFjpahU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159951 |
"JimP" wrote: > On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> > wrote: > >> >>"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com says... >>>> >>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> In article <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>> >> >>>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>> >>> Richmond >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, they >>>> >>>> have >>>> >>>> *no* >>>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>> >> >>>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>> > >>>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>> > they might both be alive today." >>>> > >>>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>> > >>>> >>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>> members >>>> in >>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of >>>> lying >>>> to obtain what they want. >>> >>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >> >>Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches by >>Obama >>on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. > > The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid > out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those > types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap > policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the > scams they had been paying in to. There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is cancelled. Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day zero!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 13:47 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <naafpj$9mk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #159965 |
On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: > "JimP" wrote: > >> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>> says... >>>>> >>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> In article >>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>> >> >>>>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>> >>> Richmond >>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>> they >>>>> >>>> have >>>>> >>>> *no* >>>>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>> > >>>>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>> > they might both be alive today." >>>>> > >>>>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>> members >>>>> in >>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of >>>>> lying >>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>> >>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>> >>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>> by Obama >>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >> >> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >> scams they had been paying in to. > > There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. > Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman > was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were > likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures > recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies > are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced > to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is > cancelled. > Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the rates by 10X." > Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then > when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like > ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an > honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day zero! Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily change the terms of it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 14:21 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <dis05jFlr44U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #159975 |
"Dave Garland" wrote: > On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >> "JimP" wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>>> says... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> In article >>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>>> >>> Richmond >>>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>>> they >>>>>> >>>> have >>>>>> >>>> *no* >>>>>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>>> > they might both be alive today." >>>>>> > >>>>>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>>> members >>>>>> in >>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... or of >>>>>> lying >>>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>>> >>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>>> >>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>>> by Obama >>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >>> >>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >>> scams they had been paying in to. >> >> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman >> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced >> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >> cancelled. >> > Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of > policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say "you got > cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the rates by 10X." > >> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like >> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day zero! > > Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your policy" > before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily change the > terms of it. I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? Is this kind of reasoning common in your world?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 18:06 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #159981 |
On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: > "Dave Garland" wrote: > >> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >>> "JimP" wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>>>> says... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>>>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >> In article >>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>>>> >>> Richmond >>>>>>> >>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>>>> they >>>>>>> >>>> have >>>>>>> >>>> *no* >>>>>>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>>>> > they might both be alive today." >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>>>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>>>> members >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... >>>>>>> or of >>>>>>> lying >>>>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>>>> >>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>>>> by Obama >>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >>>> >>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >>>> scams they had been paying in to. >>> >>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman >>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced >>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >>> cancelled. >>> >> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of >> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say >> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the >> rates by 10X." >> >>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like >>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day >>> zero! >> >> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your >> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily >> change the terms of it. > > I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? > Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to unconditionally "keep their policy". In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers pregnancy for the same price.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 18:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <711896192.477709474.532721.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #159992 |
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: > On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: >> "Dave Garland" wrote: >> >>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >>>> "JimP" wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>>>>> says... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>>>>>> On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>>> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>>>>>>>> Richmond >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>> *no* >>>>>>>>>>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>>>>>> they might both be alive today." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>>>>>> the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>>>>> members >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... >>>>>>>> or of >>>>>>>> lying >>>>>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>>>>> by Obama >>>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >>>>> >>>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >>>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >>>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >>>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >>>>> scams they had been paying in to. >>>> >>>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >>>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman >>>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >>>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >>>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >>>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced >>>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >>>> cancelled. >>>> >>> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of >>> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say >>> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the >>> rates by 10X." >>> >>>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >>>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like >>>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >>>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day >>>> zero! >>> >>> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your >>> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily >>> change the terms of it. >> >> I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? >> Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? > > I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not > literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to > Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to > arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private > companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to > unconditionally "keep their policy". > > In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the > policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers > pregnancy for the same price. > > Effectively making the policy uneconomical for the insurer. Obama admitted he lied, because if he had told the truth no one would have supported Obamacare - the classic "end justifies the means". -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 23:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3133073f864900f5989f9f@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #159992 |
In article <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com says... > > On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: > > "Dave Garland" wrote: > > > >> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: > >>> "JimP" wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... > >>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com > >>>>>> says... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message > >>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... > >>>>>>> > On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> >> In article > >>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, > >>>>>>> >> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles > >>>>>>> >>> Richmond > >>>>>>> >>> wrote: > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, > >>>>>>> they > >>>>>>> >>>> have > >>>>>>> >>>> *no* > >>>>>>> >>>> voice, they have *no* choice." > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> >> Yes he does. Poor Karen. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, > >>>>>>> > they might both be alive today." > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let > >>>>>>> > the truth get in the way of a good line?) > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party > >>>>>>> members > >>>>>>> in > >>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... > >>>>>>> or of > >>>>>>> lying > >>>>>>> to obtain what they want. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? > >>>>> > >>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches > >>>>> by Obama > >>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. > >>>> > >>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid > >>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those > >>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap > >>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the > >>>> scams they had been paying in to. > >>> > >>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. > >>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman > >>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were > >>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures > >>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies > >>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced > >>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is > >>> cancelled. > >>> > >> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of > >> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say > >> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the > >> rates by 10X." > >> > >>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then > >>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like > >>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an > >>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day > >>> zero! > >> > >> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your > >> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily > >> change the terms of it. > > > > I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? > > Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? > > I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not > literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to > Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to > arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private > companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to > unconditionally "keep their policy". > > In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the > policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers > pregnancy for the same price. Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 22:48 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nabfet$dvf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160014 |
On 2/20/2016 10:29 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > In article <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com > says... >> >> On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: >>> "Dave Garland" wrote: >>> >>>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >>>>> "JimP" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>>>>>> says... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>>>>>>> On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>>>> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>>>>>>>>> Richmond >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>> *no* >>>>>>>>>>>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>>>>>>> they might both be alive today." >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>>>>>>> the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>>>>>> members >>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... >>>>>>>>> or of >>>>>>>>> lying >>>>>>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>>>>>> by Obama >>>>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >>>>>> >>>>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >>>>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >>>>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >>>>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >>>>>> scams they had been paying in to. >>>>> >>>>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >>>>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman >>>>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >>>>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >>>>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >>>>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced >>>>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >>>>> cancelled. >>>>> >>>> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of >>>> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say >>>> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the >>>> rates by 10X." >>>> >>>>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >>>>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like >>>>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >>>>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day >>>>> zero! >>>> >>>> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your >>>> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily >>>> change the terms of it. >>> >>> I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? >>> Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? >> >> I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not >> literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to >> Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to >> arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private >> companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to >> unconditionally "keep their policy". >> >> In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the >> policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers >> pregnancy for the same price. > > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. > Triples? Cite? Or are we exaggerating just a tiny bit? If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay half the medical costs? But anyhow, it's a risk pool. The woman gets to pay extra to cover the (typically young male) morons who get injured in auto accidents and "hold my beer and watch this" incidents, and the older male prostate problems (and maybe Viagra).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 19:37 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ditbaiF15oqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160015 |
"Dave Garland" <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote in message news:nabfet$dvf$1@dont-email.me... > On 2/20/2016 10:29 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >> In article <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com >> says... >>> >>> On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: >>>> "Dave Garland" wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >>>>>> "JimP" wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" >>>>>>> <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >>>>>>>>> says... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >>>>>>>>>>> On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >>>>>>>>>>>>> Richmond >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >>>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *no* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >>>>>>>>>>> they might both be alive today." >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >>>>>>>>>>> the truth get in the way of a good line?) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party >>>>>>>>>> members >>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... >>>>>>>>>> or of >>>>>>>>>> lying >>>>>>>>>> to obtain what they want. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches >>>>>>>> by Obama >>>>>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid >>>>>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >>>>>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >>>>>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >>>>>>> scams they had been paying in to. >>>>>> >>>>>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >>>>>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman >>>>>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >>>>>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >>>>>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >>>>>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is >>>>>> forced >>>>>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >>>>>> cancelled. >>>>>> >>>>> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of >>>>> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say >>>>> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the >>>>> rates by 10X." >>>>> >>>>>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >>>>>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like >>>>>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >>>>>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day >>>>>> zero! >>>>> >>>>> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your >>>>> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily >>>>> change the terms of it. >>>> >>>> I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? >>>> Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? >>> >>> I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not >>> literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to >>> Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to >>> arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private >>> companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to >>> unconditionally "keep their policy". >>> >>> In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the >>> policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers >>> pregnancy for the same price. >> >> Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not >> the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. >> > Triples? Cite? Or are we exaggerating just a tiny bit? > > If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay half > the medical costs? Not when they are just insuring themselves, have no family and are mostly ensuring that they don’t produce kids in that situation. > But anyhow, it's a risk pool. Doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone should be paying for the cost of the most risky behaviour that can produce very high medical costs. Why should I pay higher premiums because fools choose to smoke, are obscenely obese etc etc etc ? > The woman gets to pay extra to cover the (typically young male) morons who > get injured in auto accidents and "hold my beer and watch this" incidents, There are in fact far fewer of those than pregnancies. > and the older male prostate problems There are in fact far fewer of those than pregnancies. > (and maybe Viagra). Those don’t cost anything like what pregnancies do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 09:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <14adnTiHO43LHVTLnZ2dnUU78a2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #160015 |
On 21/02/2016 04:48, Dave Garland wrote:
{snip}
> If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay half
> the medical costs?
Family health insurance policies frequently covered the wife's pregnancy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 23:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nadh6o31tt2@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #160027 |
On 2016-02-21, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 21/02/2016 04:48, Dave Garland wrote:
> {snip}
>
>> If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay half
>> the medical costs?
>
> Family health insurance policies frequently covered the wife's pregnancy.
Makes sense - most families result from pregnancy. :-)
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-18 18:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <proto-225A0A.18041818032016@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #160073 |
In article <nadh6o31tt2@news3.newsguy.com>,
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2016-02-21, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > On 21/02/2016 04:48, Dave Garland wrote:
> > {snip}
> >
> >> If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay half
> >> the medical costs?
> >
> > Family health insurance policies frequently covered the wife's pregnancy.
>
> Makes sense - most families result from pregnancy. :-)
And we hope the husband had something to do with the pregnancy.
--
To terrify children with the image of hell,
to consider women an inferior creation is that good for the world?
Christopher Hitchens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 05:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.313362a154e4365e989fa1@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #160015 |
In article <nabfet$dvf$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com says... > > On 2/20/2016 10:29 PM, J. Clarke wrote: > > In article <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com > > says... > >> > >> On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: > >>> "Dave Garland" wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: > >>>>> "JimP" wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... > >>>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com > >>>>>>>> says... > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message > >>>>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... > >>>>>>>>>> On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> In article > >>>>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, > >>>>>>>>>>> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles > >>>>>>>>>>>> Richmond > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, > >>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>> *no* > >>>>>>>>>>>>> voice, they have *no* choice." > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Yes he does. Poor Karen. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, > >>>>>>>>>> they might both be alive today." > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let > >>>>>>>>>> the truth get in the way of a good line?) > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican party > >>>>>>>>> members > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... > >>>>>>>>> or of > >>>>>>>>> lying > >>>>>>>>> to obtain what they want. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" pitches > >>>>>>> by Obama > >>>>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never paid > >>>>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those > >>>>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap > >>>>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the > >>>>>> scams they had been paying in to. > >>>>> > >>>>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. > >>>>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old woman > >>>>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were > >>>>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures > >>>>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies > >>>>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is forced > >>>>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is > >>>>> cancelled. > >>>>> > >>>> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of > >>>> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say > >>>> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the > >>>> rates by 10X." > >>>> > >>>>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then > >>>>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something like > >>>>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an > >>>>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day > >>>>> zero! > >>>> > >>>> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your > >>>> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily > >>>> change the terms of it. > >>> > >>> I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? > >>> Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? > >> > >> I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not > >> literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to > >> Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to > >> arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private > >> companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to > >> unconditionally "keep their policy". > >> > >> In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the > >> policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers > >> pregnancy for the same price. > > > > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not > > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. > > > Triples? Cite? Or are we exaggerating just a tiny bit? What, you want me to dig up my bills from the past? I was paying 500 a month for a policy with a $2000 deductible that covered everything I needed covered. Try to find a policy with a $2000 deductible for $500 a month on the exchange in Connecticut. > If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay > half the medical costs? So you would provide a discount for any man who got a vasectomy? > But anyhow, it's a risk pool. The woman gets to pay extra to cover the > (typically young male) morons who get injured in auto accidents and > "hold my beer and watch this" incidents, and the older male prostate > problems (and maybe Viagra). Yeah, in your world insurance cost is divorced from risk. The 19 year old should pay the same life insurance premium as the 90 yeara old for the same coverage. If you have visions of becoming an actuary, don't quit your day job.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 03:30 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <diu71qF89kkU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160030 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.313362a154e4365e989fa1@news.eternal-september.org... > In article <nabfet$dvf$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com > says... >> >> On 2/20/2016 10:29 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >> > In article <naaut0$525$1@dont-email.me>, dave.garland@wizinfo.com >> > says... >> >> >> >> On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: >> >>> "Dave Garland" wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >> >>>>> "JimP" wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" >> >>>>>> <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >> >>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >> >>>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$ru2$1@dont-email.me>, numerist@aquaporin4.com >> >>>>>>>> says... >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in message >> >>>>>>>>> news:na64q81taf@news3.newsguy.com... >> >>>>>>>>>> On 2016-02-19, J. Clarke <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> In article >> >>>>>>>>> <55da763f-fd07-4b33-82ce-2caecceb0904@googlegroups.com>, >> >>>>>>>>>>> jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-7, Charles >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Richmond >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bless the beasts and the programmers... for in this world, >> >>>>>>>>> they >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> have >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *no* >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> voice, they have *no* choice." >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, yes, you refer to this: >> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPcSVGqVeY >> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes he does. Poor Karen. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> "If Mama Cass had given Karen Carpenter her ham sandwich, >> >>>>>>>>>> they might both be alive today." >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> (Yes, I know that's not accurate, but why should we let >> >>>>>>>>>> the truth get in the way of a good line?) >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> Charlie!!! You are becoming a Republican!!! The Republican >> >>>>>>>>> party >> >>>>>>>>> members >> >>>>>>>>> in >> >>>>>>>>> the US *never* let the truth get in the way of a good story... >> >>>>>>>>> or of >> >>>>>>>>> lying >> >>>>>>>>> to obtain what they want. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> The same is true of the Democrats, so what is your point? >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Perhaps he slept through the "You can keep your insurance" >> >>>>>>> pitches >> >>>>>>> by Obama >> >>>>>>> on TV. The man clearly has no reluctance to lie. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The insurances that were shut down took in premiums, but never >> >>>>>> paid >> >>>>>> out on claims. They were scams. People who stupidly thought those >> >>>>>> types of health insurance policies were good, demanded the crap >> >>>>>> policies back. So the President allowed the fools to get back the >> >>>>>> scams they had been paying in to. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> There were perfectly usable plans that were made illegal to sell. >> >>>>> Consider a plan that was based on the notion that a 25 year old >> >>>>> woman >> >>>>> was more likely to get pregnant than a 25 year old man. There were >> >>>>> likely variants of this in *all 50* states. 50 state legislatures >> >>>>> recognized them as legal to sell. But Obamacare says those policies >> >>>>> are not suitable for Americans to buy. The insurance company is >> >>>>> forced >> >>>>> to quit offering that policy and the 25 year old guy's policy is >> >>>>> cancelled. >> >>>>> >> >>>> Insurance companies were discontinuing and/or changing the terms of >> >>>> policies all the time even before. Insurance companies could say >> >>>> "you got cancer? we're going to cancel your policy or raise the >> >>>> rates by 10X." >> >>>> >> >>>>> Now tell me how "You can keep your policy" is not a lie? And then >> >>>>> when the media finally got up to speed on this he said something >> >>>>> like >> >>>>> ... he might have misled people. Does that sound to you like an >> >>>>> honest man? It was not 'misled', it was a bald faced lie from day >> >>>>> zero! >> >>>> >> >>>> Only in the sense that it's a lie to say "you could keep your >> >>>> policy" before, even though the insurance company might arbitrarily >> >>>> change the terms of it. >> >>> >> >>> I don't understand. A didn't happen because B might have happened? >> >>> Is this kind of reasoning common in your world? >> >> >> >> I'd say "you can keep your policy" is marketing talk. It's not >> >> literally true, but it's as true with Obamacare as it was prior to >> >> Obamacare, maybe a bit more so (because O'care limits their ability to >> >> arbitrarily drop you). In reality, so long as there are private >> >> companies setting the terms, no one has ever been able to >> >> unconditionally "keep their policy". >> >> >> >> In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit offering the >> >> policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the woman that covers >> >> pregnancy for the same price. >> > >> > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not >> > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. >> > >> Triples? Cite? Or are we exaggerating just a tiny bit? > > What, you want me to dig up my bills from the past? > > I was paying 500 a month for a policy with a $2000 deductible > that covered everything I needed covered. Try to find a policy with > a $2000 deductible for $500 a month on the exchange in Connecticut. There are plenty for less than $1500 a month. >> If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay >> half the medical costs? > > So you would provide a discount for any man who got a vasectomy? > >> But anyhow, it's a risk pool. The woman gets to pay extra to cover the >> (typically young male) morons who get injured in auto accidents and >> "hold my beer and watch this" incidents, and the older male prostate >> problems (and maybe Viagra). > > Yeah, in your world insurance cost is divorced from risk. The 19 year > old should pay the same life insurance premium as the 90 yeara old for > the same coverage. > > If you have visions of becoming an actuary, don't quit your day job. That's the way all universal health care funding systems work, even compulsory insurance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 18:34 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nadkt1$k82$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160030 |
On 21-Feb-16 04:59, J. Clarke wrote: > dave.garland@wizinfo.com says... >> On 2/20/2016 10:29 PM, J. Clarke wrote: >>> dave.garland@wizinfo.com says... Sheesh, people; trim your quotes! >>>> In your strawman above, the insurer is not forced to quit >>>> offering the policy, they are forced to offer coverage to the >>>> woman that covers pregnancy for the same price. >>> >>> Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there >>> is not the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. >>> >> Triples? Cite? Or are we exaggerating just a tiny bit? > > What, you want me to dig up my bills from the past? > > I was paying 500 a month for a policy with a $2000 deductible that > covered everything I needed covered. Try to find a policy with a > $2000 deductible for $500 a month on the exchange in Connecticut. If you can't, blame your state legislators/regulators, not Obama. I pay <$200/mo for a PPO with a $1000/yr deductible. When Obamacare went into effect, we got a letter saying there were no changes because our policy was already compliant, i.e. it was a complete non-event. FWIW, that includes OB/GYN coverage even though I'm male because if I were to add a woman to my policy, _she_ would need it, and it would be inefficient to change policy terms depending on who was covered. (At the request of our flying club, a PPOE investigated offering a rider to its life insurance policy to cover light plane accidents; the insurer said that administering such a rider would be so expensive they'd rather remove the exclusion from our entire policy--at no cost.) >> If males are half the cause of pregnancy, shouldn't they get to pay >> half the medical costs? > > So you would provide a discount for any man who got a vasectomy? No, because the cost of administering such a discount would likely be more than the potential savings. Also, a vasectomy obviously doesn't stop his wife (or daughters) from getting pregnant by _other_ men. I could see a discount for post-menopausal women, but it'd be wiped out by the other health risks/costs riding due to age (for both sexes). >> But anyhow, it's a risk pool. The woman gets to pay extra to cover >> the (typically young male) morons who get injured in auto accidents >> and "hold my beer and watch this" incidents, and the older male >> prostate problems (and maybe Viagra). > > Yeah, in your world insurance cost is divorced from risk. The 19 > year old should pay the same life insurance premium as the 90 yeara > old for the same coverage. IIRC, by law premiums can't vary by more than 2x based on age. Yes, that means low-risk people pay more than they should (and high-risk people pay less than they should) according to an actuary. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-20 21:03 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9f605622-7847-4ff5-bdf3-0c3cc0234325@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #160014 |
On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:29:48 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote: > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. Heck, the reason you can only get health insurance in workplace plans these days (well, before Obamacare) is because insurance companies have to charge the same rate *to people who are HIV-positive*. Well-meaning legislators didn't understand the difference between private health insurance, which people are free to buy or not, and a universal socialized single-payer medicare program; what works for one does _not_ work for the other. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 05:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31336140aeb36aa8989fa0@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #160019 |
In article <9f605622-7847-4ff5-bdf3-0c3cc0234325@googlegroups.com>, jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... > > On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:29:48 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote: > > > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not > > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. > > Heck, the reason you can only get health insurance in workplace plans these > days (well, before Obamacare) is because insurance companies have to charge the > same rate *to people who are HIV-positive*. > > Well-meaning legislators didn't understand the difference between private > health insurance, which people are free to buy or not, and a universal > socialized single-payer medicare program; what works for one does _not_ work > for the other. I just had a thought--maybe an actuary should run for President some time--somebody who actually undertands how insurance works. However I had no problem obtaining private insurance before Obamacare-- the thing is the policies available under Obamacare charge three times the premium, have deductibles twice as high, and don't offer any better coverage. And everybody at work complains about the crappy medical and dental plan--that is not due to cheapness or greed on the part of the company-- by all accounts it changed for the worse when Romneycare (the Massachussetts plan that was the prototype for Obamacare) took effect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 03:27 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <diu6s4F886pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160029 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.31336140aeb36aa8989fa0@news.eternal-september.org... > In article <9f605622-7847-4ff5-bdf3-0c3cc0234325@googlegroups.com>, > jsavard@ecn.ab.ca says... >> >> On Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 9:29:48 PM UTC-7, J. Clarke wrote: >> >> > Which means in effect that my premium triples even though there is not >> > the tiniest possibility that I will ever become pregnant. >> >> Heck, the reason you can only get health insurance in workplace plans >> these >> days (well, before Obamacare) is because insurance companies have to >> charge the >> same rate *to people who are HIV-positive*. >> >> Well-meaning legislators didn't understand the difference between private >> health insurance, which people are free to buy or not, and a universal >> socialized single-payer medicare program; what works for one does _not_ >> work >> for the other. > > I just had a thought-- That's not a thought, it's a brain fart. > maybe an actuary should run for President some time-- > somebody who actually undertands how insurance works. It isnt the Prez that decides what the country will have, its Congress. > However I had no problem obtaining private insurance before Obamacare-- But you aren't riddled with cancer and you don't have HIV etc. > the thing is the policies available under > Obamacare charge three times the premium, That's a lie. > have deductibles twice as high, and don't offer any better coverage. They do for those who have a serious medical problem. > And everybody at work complains about the crappy medical and > dental plan--that is not due to cheapness or greed on the part of the > company--by all accounts it changed for the worse when Romneycare (the > Massachussetts plan that was the prototype for Obamacare) took effect. Bet that's a lie too.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web