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 13 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 50 Next page →
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 15:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nal6s7$kp2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160165 |
On 24-Feb-16 07:55, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes: >> That makes sense; if not for that exclusion, everyone would just >> wait to buy insurance until they got sick/injured, defeating the >> entire concept of insurance, which is based on _future_ risks. > > On the other hand, assume one paid into the insurance system for > their entire working career, is laid off, COBRA runs out and they're > unable to get insurance because of an existing condition. Nit: They could get new insurance, but any preexisting conditions were excluded. > Is that fair to the individual who paid so much into the system, to > be denied just as the need arises? No, it wasn't. That's one of many cases that the ACA solved--and that the GOP is trying to bring back by repealing it. > Of course, the individual mandate is intended to ensure that nobody > waits until they get sick/injured before obtaining insurance. That's the point! Without universal coverage, requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions in individual policies wasn't feasible. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 09:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pa6dnQaRF7EZ4lTLnZ2dnUU78L-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #159992 |
On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland wrote: > On 2/20/2016 2:21 PM, Osmium wrote: >> "Dave Garland" wrote: >> >>> On 2/20/2016 12:05 PM, Osmium wrote: >>>> "JimP" wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2016 08:03:23 -0600, "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:MPG.31319ad6aa4a33ff989f99@news.eternal-september.org... >>>>>>> In article <na8hf7$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. > The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care Act was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. Things will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the problems. As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not cancel existing contracts. Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 03:23 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <diu6jvF85p9U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160026 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:pa6dnQaRF7EZ4lTLnZ2dnUU78L-dnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland 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. >> > > The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care Act > was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. Things > will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the problems. > > As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The > shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross > incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved policy > that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not cancel existing > contracts. You have to if they are no longer allowed. > Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm. Which will also have to have cancelled their contracts which are no longer allowed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 17:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e4CdnR1zNMJbaFTLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #160047 |
On 21/02/2016 16:23, hgww wrote: > > > "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message > news:pa6dnQaRF7EZ4lTLnZ2dnUU78L-dnZ2d@giganews.com... >> On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland 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. >>> >> >> The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care >> Act was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. >> Things will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the >> problems. >> >> As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The >> shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross >> incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved >> policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not >> cancel existing contracts. > > You have to if they are no longer allowed. > >> Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm. > > Which will also have to have cancelled their contracts which are > no longer allowed. No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but new terms. Credit card companies do this all the time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-21 17:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <diuc8lF9ll5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160055 |
On 2016-02-21, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
[129 lines snipped]
>
> No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but new
> terms. Credit card companies do this all the time.
Really? 129 lines quoted for a 2 line reply?
--
Today is Boomtime, the 52nd day of Chaos in the YOLD 3182
I don't have an attitude problem.
If you have a problem with my attitude, that's your problem.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 07:41 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <diuloeFc6qjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160055 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:e4CdnR1zNMJbaFTLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 21/02/2016 16:23, hgww wrote: >> >> >> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message >> news:pa6dnQaRF7EZ4lTLnZ2dnUU78L-dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland 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. >>>> >>> >>> The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care >>> Act was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. >>> Things will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the >>> problems. >>> >>> As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The >>> shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross >>> incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved >>> policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not >>> cancel existing contracts. >> >> You have to if they are no longer allowed. >> >>> Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm. >> >> Which will also have to have cancelled their contracts which are >> no longer allowed. > > No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but new > terms. But the legal system doesn’t allow one party in a contract to unilaterally change the terms of a contract and to avoid paying out on what is no longer covered etc. > Credit card companies do this all the time. Not in the sense of welching on what they have contracted to provide they don’t.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 01:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s6KdnUuPPJX-_1fLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #160065 |
On 21/02/2016 20:41, hgww wrote:
>
>
> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:e4CdnR1zNMJbaFTLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 21/02/2016 16:23, hgww wrote:
{snip}
>>>> Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm.
>>>
>>> Which will also have to have cancelled their contracts which are
>>> no longer allowed.
>>
>> No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but new
>> terms.
>
> But the legal system doesn’t allow one party in a contract
> to unilaterally change the terms of a contract and to avoid
> paying out on what is no longer covered etc.
>
>> Credit card companies do this all the time.
>
> Not in the sense of welching on what they have contracted to provide
> they don’t.
It is the government that is changing the terms of the contract. The
insurance company may have to wait for the annual renewal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 14:00 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <divbupFhbggU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160080 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:s6KdnUuPPJX-_1fLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 21/02/2016 20:41, hgww wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:e4CdnR1zNMJbaFTLnZ2dnUU78XudnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> On 21/02/2016 16:23, hgww wrote:
> {snip}
>
>>>>> Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm.
>>>>
>>>> Which will also have to have cancelled their contracts which are
>>>> no longer allowed.
>>>
>>> No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but new
>>> terms.
>>
>> But the legal system doesn’t allow one party in a contract
>> to unilaterally change the terms of a contract and to avoid
>> paying out on what is no longer covered etc.
>>
>>> Credit card companies do this all the time.
>>
>> Not in the sense of welching on what they have contracted to provide
>> they don’t.
>
> It is the government that is changing the terms of the contract.
No, the government is changing what can be in the contract.
> The insurance company may have to wait for the annual renewal.
No need to wait for that with a new policy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 15:48 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nafvho$abo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160080 |
On 21-Feb-16 19:21, Andrew Swallow wrote: > On 21/02/2016 20:41, hgww wrote: >> "Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote: >>> No. The insurance company issues a policy with the same name but >>> new terms. >> >> But the legal system doesn’t allow one party in a contract to >> unilaterally change the terms of a contract and to avoid paying out >> on what is no longer covered etc. >> >>> Credit card companies do this all the time. >> >> Not in the sense of welching on what they have contracted to >> provide they don’t. > > It is the government that is changing the terms of the contract. No, it was the govt saying that only policies meeting the minimum coverage standards would qualify for certain benefits; the govt did _not_ change the terms of non-qualifying policies. However, the demand for non-qualifying policies dropped to near zero, so insurers stopped offering them--including renewals--and offered other, qualifying policies to those customers instead. > The insurance company may have to wait for the annual renewal. They had a couple years' notice; it wasn't a surprise. And most policies _already_ met the requirements, so no change was needed. 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 | "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 16:43 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <dj1h84F46enU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160132 |
"Stephen Sprunk" wrote: "Others wrote" >> It is the government that is changing the terms of the contract. > > No, it was the govt saying that only policies meeting the minimum > coverage standards would qualify for certain benefits; the govt did > _not_ change the terms of non-qualifying policies. However, the demand > for non-qualifying policies dropped to near zero, so insurers stopped > offering them--including renewals--and offered other, qualifying > policies to those customers instead. Is one of the "certain benefits" that the insurer was allowed to sleep at a place of his own choosing?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 20:49 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nagh6k$2ve$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160140 |
On 22-Feb-16 16:43, Osmium wrote: > "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: > "Others wrote" >>> It is the government that is changing the terms of the contract. >> >> No, it was the govt saying that only policies meeting the minimum >> coverage standards would qualify for certain benefits; ... > > Is one of the "certain benefits" that the insurer was allowed to > sleep at a place of his own choosing? I'm not sure what you're referring to. How the employer and individual mandates intersect is convoluted, so I'm glossing over the details, but the general idea is that: 1. Individuals not covered by a qualified policy must pay a fine. 2. Individuals may purchase a qualified policy via an exchange. 3. Exchanges provide subsidies to some individuals. 4. Employers not offering a qualified policy to every full-time employee must pay a fine for _every_ such employee if _any_ of them receives a subsidy. A non-qualified policy doesn't count for any of the above, so there is no point in offering/buying one when you're still going to have to pay the fine anyway, and insurers stopped selling such. In summary, "if you like your policy, you can keep it" wasn't true for a small number of people who liked their non-qualified policies. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 18:15 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nalgte$qno$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160026 |
On 21-Feb-16 03:13, Andrew Swallow wrote: > On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland wrote: >> 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. > > The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care > Act was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. > Things will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the > problems. Zero times ten is ... still zero. For the actuaries, accountants and lawyers that actually do the work, it's on the same order as what they have to do every year _anyway_. The IT folks had to build entirely new interfaces to connect with the new exchanges, but again, they do that every few years anyway because the entire industry is forever suffering from Second System Syndrome. > As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The > shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross > incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved > policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not > cancel existing contracts. Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer > to buy from a rival firm. I doubt anyone's policy was actually canceled. The way such things work is that you give customers a contract that automatically renews every month as long as they keep paying, and you periodically amend various bits of it, e.g. the premium or coverage limits. If they don't like the amendments, they stop paying and it automatically terminates. You rarely "cancel" such a contract; at worst, you notify them that you're withdrawing the offer to renew. The amendments required by the ACA may have been more significant than usual, depending on how far the policy was from compliance, but there was _no_ reason to withdraw, much less cancel, any contracts. I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies were so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing the entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's still not the same thing as canceling the old one. 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 | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 17:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <52063219.478054561.347254.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #160172 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 21-Feb-16 03:13, Andrew Swallow wrote: >> On 21/02/2016 00:06, Dave Garland wrote: >>> 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. >> >> The insurance companies did not understand that the Affordable Care >> Act was going to force their directors had to work 10 times as hard. >> Things will settle down later on, when the directors have solved the >> problems. > > Zero times ten is ... still zero. > > For the actuaries, accountants and lawyers that actually do the work, > it's on the same order as what they have to do every year _anyway_. > > The IT folks had to build entirely new interfaces to connect with the > new exchanges, but again, they do that every few years anyway because > the entire industry is forever suffering from Second System Syndrome. > >> As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The >> shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for gross >> incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new improved >> policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but you do not >> cancel existing contracts. Cancelling equals telling the ex-customer >> to buy from a rival firm. > > I doubt anyone's policy was actually canceled. > > The way such things work is that you give customers a contract that > automatically renews every month as long as they keep paying, and you > periodically amend various bits of it, e.g. the premium or coverage > limits. If they don't like the amendments, they stop paying and it > automatically terminates. You rarely "cancel" such a contract; at > worst, you notify them that you're withdrawing the offer to renew. > > The amendments required by the ACA may have been more significant than > usual, depending on how far the policy was from compliance, but there > was _no_ reason to withdraw, much less cancel, any contracts. > > I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies were > so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing the > entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's > still not the same thing as canceling the old one. > Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they were actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. It's another case of the government thinking it knows what's best for people than the people themselves do - right or wrong. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 19:30 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nallad$70a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160173 |
On 24-Feb-16 18:59, Peter Flass wrote: > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 21-Feb-16 03:13, Andrew Swallow wrote: >>> As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The >>> shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for >>> gross incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new >>> improved policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but >>> you do not cancel existing contracts. Cancelling equals telling >>> the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm. >> >> ... >> I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies >> were so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to >> replacing the entire contract with a different (and much better) >> one. But that's still not the same thing as canceling the old >> one. > > Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they > were actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. I've only seen one actual complaint from someone whose policy was "canceled": some redneck lady that Faux News dredged up. Real journalists investigated and found that was paying $50/mo for an "insurance" policy that had a maximum annual payout of $500, and a _real_ insurance policy from the exchange would cost less (after subsidy), plus she would have qualified for Medicaid if she weren't living in a Red State. If that's the best the ACA's opponents can do, my money is on certain people complaining simply because they'll find any excuse to blame the Kenyan Muslim Communist Anti-Christ for anything--even things that happened before he took office or never happened at all. > It's another case of the government thinking it knows what's best > for people than the people themselves do - right or wrong. *shrug* It's not the first time, and it won't be the last. At least this case is actually delivering what was promised--unlike the War on Drugs, the "Liberation" of Iraq, etc. 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 | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-25 18:20 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <2g6vcbt4tilqbp5fo3smmuakpb0q2ve34t@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #160174 |
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 19:30:34 -0600, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >On 24-Feb-16 18:59, Peter Flass wrote: >> Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> On 21-Feb-16 03:13, Andrew Swallow wrote: >>>> As for cancelling the policies that was an act of stupidity. The >>>> shareholders should fire the health insurance directors for >>>> gross incompetence. You may offer your existing customers a new >>>> improved policy that complies with the Affordable Care Act but >>>> you do not cancel existing contracts. Cancelling equals telling >>>> the ex-customer to buy from a rival firm. >>> >>> ... >>> I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies >>> were so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to >>> replacing the entire contract with a different (and much better) >>> one. But that's still not the same thing as canceling the old >>> one. >> >> Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they >> were actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. > >I've only seen one actual complaint from someone whose policy was >"canceled": some redneck lady that Faux News dredged up. Real >journalists investigated and found that was paying $50/mo for an >"insurance" policy that had a maximum annual payout of $500, and a >_real_ insurance policy from the exchange would cost less (after >subsidy), plus she would have qualified for Medicaid if she weren't >living in a Red State. > >If that's the best the ACA's opponents can do, my money is on certain >people complaining simply because they'll find any excuse to blame the >Kenyan Muslim Communist Anti-Christ for anything--even things that >happened before he took office or never happened at all. Like NAFTA and jobs going overseas. Mentioned multiple times in political adverts for state and Presidential Republican candidates blaming it on President Obama. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-24 17:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <323e786a-28ac-44a3-a479-e86cc2413688@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #160173 |
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 7:59:10 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: > Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies were > > so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing the > > entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's > > still not the same thing as canceling the old one. > Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they were > actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. It's another case > of the government thinking it knows what's best for people than the people > themselves do - right or wrong. Lots of people who have a serious illness discovered the hard way that their health insurance policies were pretty bad, and they were left with unexpected very high out of pocket costs. I don't think such policies were "better". ACA attempts to correct some of that. Time Magazine reported that the health care industry is the BIGGEST lobbyist. It certainly seems that criticism of ACA is partisan and comes out of the right wing. As mentioned, when surveys refer to it as 'ACA', it gets a much better rating than when referred to as 'Obamacare'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-25 14:38 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dj7b90Fikq1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160175 |
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message news:323e786a-28ac-44a3-a479-e86cc2413688@googlegroups.com... > On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 7:59:10 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: > >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> > I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies were >> > so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing the >> > entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's >> > still not the same thing as canceling the old one. > >> Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they were >> actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. It's another >> case >> of the government thinking it knows what's best for people than the >> people >> themselves do - right or wrong. > > Lots of people who have a serious illness discovered the hard way that > their health insurance policies were pretty bad, and they were left with > unexpected very high out of pocket costs. I don't think such policies > were > "better". ACA attempts to correct some of that. > Time Magazine reported that the health care industry is the BIGGEST > lobbyist. It would be more surprising if it wasn't given the massive changes in the health care industry currently. > It certainly seems that criticism of ACA is partisan and comes out of the > right wing. > > As mentioned, when surveys refer to it as 'ACA', it gets a much better > rating than when referred to as 'Obamacare'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-25 05:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3138a09864a2705989fa7@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #160175 |
In article <323e786a-28ac-44a3-a479-e86cc2413688@googlegroups.com>, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... > > On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 7:59:10 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: > > > Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > > I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies were > > > so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing the > > > entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's > > > still not the same thing as canceling the old one. > > > Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they were > > actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. It's another case > > of the government thinking it knows what's best for people than the people > > themselves do - right or wrong. > > Lots of people who have a serious illness discovered the hard way that > their health insurance policies were pretty bad, and they were left with > unexpected very high out of pocket costs. I don't think such policies were > "better". ACA attempts to correct some of that. The main "correction" was the eliminate caps on benefits--that could have been handled as easily by simply implementing national medical disaster insurance, that comes into effect at 2 million dollars or so in expenses (which was the typical cap on private insurance). I suspect that there would be little resistance to that option but nobody went for it--the democrats wanted a government-funded system and the republicans were simply not going to sit still for it, and the voters, being aware that everything nonmilitary that the government touches turns to crap, supported them. > Time Magazine reported that the health care industry is the BIGGEST lobbyist. And they want something beneficial to them, which means freedom to charge any price, no matter how high, for any service, no matter how minor, with reasonable expectation that they will get paid. Don't assume that what "the health care industry" wants is beneficial to its customers. > It certainly seems that criticism of ACA is partisan and comes out of the > right wing. > > As mentioned, when surveys refer to it as 'ACA', it gets a much better > rating than when referred to as 'Obamacare' Well, yes, because "ACA" contains a lie--we're all for "affordable care", but that is not something that Obamacare provides.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-25 10:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nan615$mte$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #160177 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: > In article <323e786a-28ac-44a3-a479-e86cc2413688@googlegroups.com>, > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... >> >> It certainly seems that criticism of ACA is partisan and comes out of the >> right wing. >> >> As mentioned, when surveys refer to it as 'ACA', it gets a much better >> rating than when referred to as 'Obamacare' > > Well, yes, because "ACA" contains a lie--we're all for "affordable > care", but that is not something that Obamacare provides. Gee, just like the electioneering going on now. Outright lies passed off as facts. People previously un-insurable now have a guaranteed source of insurance. Carry on. The death of truth doesn't pass unnoticed by some of us. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-26 04:31 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dj8s47F1trU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #160177 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in message news:MPG.3138a09864a2705989fa7@news.eternal-september.org... > In article <323e786a-28ac-44a3-a479-e86cc2413688@googlegroups.com>, > hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says... >> >> On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 7:59:10 PM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote: >> >> > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> > > I suspect what actually happened is that some (very bad) policies >> > > were >> > > so far out of compliance that the amendments amounted to replacing >> > > the >> > > entire contract with a different (and much better) one. But that's >> > > still not the same thing as canceling the old one. >> >> > Maybe, but who judges "better." If the policyholders thought they were >> > actually better you wouldn't be getting the complaints. It's another >> > case >> > of the government thinking it knows what's best for people than the >> > people >> > themselves do - right or wrong. >> >> Lots of people who have a serious illness discovered the hard way that >> their health insurance policies were pretty bad, and they were left with >> unexpected very high out of pocket costs. I don't think such policies >> were >> "better". ACA attempts to correct some of that. > > The main "correction" was the eliminate caps on benefits--that could > have been handled as easily by simply implementing national medical > disaster insurance, that comes into effect at 2 million dollars or so in > expenses (which was the typical cap on private insurance). I suspect > that there would be little resistance to that option but nobody went for > it--the democrats wanted a government-funded system and the republicans > were simply not going to sit still for it, and the voters, being aware > that everything nonmilitary that the government touches turns to crap, That is a lie with all of local roads, govt schools, the cops, the judicial system, operations like the TVA etc etc etc. > supported them. > >> Time Magazine reported that the health care industry is the BIGGEST > lobbyist. > > And they want something beneficial to them, which means freedom to > charge any price, no matter how high, for any service, no matter how > minor, with reasonable expectation that they will get paid. Don't > assume that what "the health care industry" wants is beneficial to its > customers. > >> It certainly seems that criticism of ACA is partisan and comes out of the >> right wing. >> >> As mentioned, when surveys refer to it as 'ACA', it gets a much better >> rating than when referred to as 'Obamacare' > > Well, yes, because "ACA" contains a lie--we're all for "affordable > care", but that is not something that Obamacare provides. It is for those at the bottom of society.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 50 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web