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


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #164962 > unrolled thread

Is it a lost cause?

Started by"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
First post2016-06-13 19:32 +0100
Last post2016-06-28 16:19 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 1000+ — 73 participants
Thread has 1303 articles; only the first 1000 are indexed.

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers | Browse in flat view

Thread has 1303 articles; showing the first 1000 in depth-first order. Use the flat group view to see the rest.


Contents

  Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:32 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-13 21:02 +0200
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 21:25 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 17:43 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-13 23:05 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:52 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-14 06:39 -0700
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:22 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:54 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-06-14 11:47 -0700
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 14:17 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? timcaffrey420@gmail.com - 2016-06-15 14:03 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 14:18 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-16 12:45 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:52 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:55 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:53 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 13:27 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:41 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 15:05 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 14:09 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:14 -0500
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 19:48 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-15 20:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 21:29 -0500
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-13 23:07 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 23:02 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:56 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:13 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Darren Salt <newsspam@moreofthespa.m.invalid> - 2016-06-17 03:39 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-17 08:46 +0200
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-13 23:44 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:57 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-14 09:41 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 12:09 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-13 20:14 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 10:54 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:57 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 13:02 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 14:45 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:22 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 19:56 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:30 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-14 10:21 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-15 08:19 -0500
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 19:59 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 23:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:48 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:39 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:56 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-14 09:48 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-14 19:08 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 00:18 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:57 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:05 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:53 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:53 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:24 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 13:03 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:53 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-15 13:10 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 12:28 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-15 15:37 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:19 +0300
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 17:52 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:08 +0300
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-16 12:46 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-17 16:09 +0300
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-17 10:34 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 22:58 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:03 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 20:12 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:24 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 18:07 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 18:06 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:25 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-20 18:25 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-21 16:11 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-21 21:13 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-21 19:49 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-22 07:33 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-22 09:04 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-22 09:23 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:40 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-24 18:58 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 03:47 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 23:55 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:03 +0300
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-03 10:20 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:43 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-15 08:27 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 04:38 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-02 14:00 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 08:13 -0700
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 12:09 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 12:36 -0700
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:32 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 07:49 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-15 04:54 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 12:52 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-01 22:17 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:10 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-02 21:35 +0300
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 20:45 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 22:14 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-02 21:42 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:12 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 22:41 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:33 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:45 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:36 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:20 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:38 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 12:03 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:18 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 15:17 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 18:28 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 03:14 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:17 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:53 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 09:55 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:15 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:42 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:51 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:45 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:54 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 12:06 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 19:10 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 20:16 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 22:12 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 21:20 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:15 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-04 11:03 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-05 10:12 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:26 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:33 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:35 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 18:20 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Alan Frisbie <Usenet03_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com> - 2016-07-04 09:16 -0700
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-04 09:01 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 15:54 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:55 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:11 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:01 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:32 +0200
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:47 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-05 17:11 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 21:08 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-06 14:44 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:19 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 13:01 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-04 16:50 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 13:27 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 16:27 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:30 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-03 17:31 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:30 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:57 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-07-03 14:51 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-05 02:49 +1000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-06 01:26 +1000
                                  Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 23:18 +0000
                                    Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) - 2016-07-04 08:24 +0000
                                      Re: software origami, was Is it a lost cause? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-04 09:45 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:20 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 16:15 -0400
                            Re: ancient history, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 22:55 +0000
                              Re: ancient history, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 06:35 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 11:54 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-03 11:22 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-03 12:33 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-03 22:57 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-04 15:47 -0500
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:24 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-05 10:12 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 22:31 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 13:10 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-05 01:47 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 21:56 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 00:44 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 00:55 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:21 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 11:39 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:21 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 13:06 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-03 13:53 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 13:02 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 01:16 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 22:35 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 23:23 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 00:07 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:20 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 13:37 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 22:41 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 13:22 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 10:59 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-04 14:49 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 15:33 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 12:06 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-04 10:00 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-05 01:42 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 08:52 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-07-05 22:59 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 06:44 -0400
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-04 09:45 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-03 07:11 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:12 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-03 11:14 +0300
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:04 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 07:49 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:26 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 21:53 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-07-04 17:33 -0400
                  Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 19:05 +0100
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:05 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 08:30 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 12:03 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 12:35 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-05 18:03 +0100
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 06:43 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:39 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:40 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 18:42 +0000
                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 19:53 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 15:20 -0400
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:50 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-04 16:28 -0500
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:37 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:03 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 21:08 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:13 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 06:36 -0400
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 12:37 +0100
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 13:21 +0100
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:12 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:09 +0200
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 19:52 +0100
                                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 21:11 +0200
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 20:30 +0100
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-06 00:51 +0000
                                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 20:09 +0100
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 20:32 +0100
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-06 00:44 +0000
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 17:05 -0500
                                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 19:47 -0400
                                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 20:00 -0500
                                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-05 21:16 -0600
                                      Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:08 +0000
                                        Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                          Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-06 15:01 +0000
                                            Re: tiny old computers, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:49 -0400
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-06 10:45 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:00 +0200
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 20:46 -0400
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 07:23 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-06 04:30 -0400
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 10:44 +0100
                                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:34 +0200
                                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:32 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 19:56 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:52 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:25 +0000
                          Re: stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 06:10 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:35 -0500
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-05 17:18 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:05 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:12 +0000
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-07-05 21:49 +0000
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-06 06:12 -0500
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-06 11:21 -0700
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-06 19:41 +0000
                                    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-07 08:35 -0500
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-05 08:51 -0600
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:05 +0100
                      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-04 23:04 +0300
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-04 20:35 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:54 +0000
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-04 21:12 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 20:49 +0000
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-04 21:54 +0100
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:16 +0300
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:40 -0500
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-05 18:51 +0100
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-05 21:08 +0300
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-04 17:21 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:28 +0100
                        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 16:38 +0000
                          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 17:53 +0100
                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-04 14:52 -0600
                              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-04 17:22 -0400
                                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:39 +0000
                    Re: self-modifying code, was Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-04 16:35 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-13 21:50 -0400
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:00 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-13 23:03 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-13 23:37 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 20:43 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:05 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 12:07 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-14 10:20 -0700
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-14 19:16 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-15 08:01 -0500
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 13:06 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-15 14:26 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 03:24 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-07-02 08:43 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:11 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:38 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 07:56 -0700
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-02 10:30 -0500
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-07-02 16:50 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 17:21 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 16:58 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-02 11:52 -0700
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:38 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-02 06:23 -0500
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:02 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 06:09 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:01 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:09 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:29 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:30 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 08:57 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 23:14 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 08:36 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-16 12:46 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:25 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 14:22 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-02 22:33 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2016-06-14 23:24 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:02 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 12:02 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 09:38 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:35 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-15 17:36 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:02 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:32 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 17:00 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-18 18:14 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-18 12:25 -0500
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-13 20:11 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:04 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 09:44 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> - 2016-06-14 23:26 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:43 -0500
          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:48 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Darren Salt <newsspam@moreofthespa.m.invalid> - 2016-06-17 03:50 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 10:08 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:42 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:50 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:52 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Luke A. Guest <laguest@archeia.com> - 2016-07-01 20:28 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-01 20:21 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-01 23:10 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-01 22:35 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:35 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 09:53 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 11:24 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 11:21 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-07-02 12:39 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:01 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 13:51 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:32 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-02 19:51 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 22:06 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-03 10:41 -0700
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 11:29 -0500
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 18:39 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:36 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 18:56 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 19:14 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-03 15:28 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:23 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-03 17:35 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 19:48 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2016-07-03 15:01 -0400
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-03 13:17 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-07-06 01:24 +1000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:29 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 12:09 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-05 17:38 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 18:23 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:30 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-06 09:02 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:29 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 23:07 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 12:45 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-06 09:05 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-06 13:52 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Gerard Schildberger <gerard46@rrt.net> - 2016-07-06 15:43 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 07:37 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-06 08:51 -0700
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-06 15:09 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 00:26 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:12 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-04 12:47 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:43 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-02 18:40 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-02 13:09 -0700
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 23:01 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-02 19:19 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-03 00:55 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-07-03 08:59 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:12 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 08:10 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-03 11:22 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-03 12:24 -0500
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-02 07:05 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-02 12:59 +0000
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 09:14 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:26 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-02 13:00 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:46 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 14:59 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:27 -0400
              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:17 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 15:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:41 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-04 14:17 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 15:10 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 16:09 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:18 +0200
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:28 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:53 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:34 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-07 14:45 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 16:27 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-07 11:53 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-07 16:01 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 17:33 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-07 18:13 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 19:30 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:38 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:19 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 14:22 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-04 12:42 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-04 22:30 +0200
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-05 13:32 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 15:25 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-06 13:11 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-06 21:20 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-06 21:52 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-08 12:12 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 12:48 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-08 07:30 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-08 09:22 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-08 16:00 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-07-08 08:43 -0600
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-08 14:49 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 18:45 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 17:32 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-07-08 11:35 -0700
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:51 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-07 07:47 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-07 23:41 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-09 00:46 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-09 12:51 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2016-07-09 14:07 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 13:05 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-09 14:12 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 14:21 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-09 19:35 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:55 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-09 10:40 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-09 09:02 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 15:28 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-09 13:09 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-10 19:39 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-10 19:29 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-10 21:03 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-10 22:59 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-11 02:35 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-07-11 09:21 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 01:31 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:35 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-10 14:38 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-07-10 21:29 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 07:25 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-07-12 07:04 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-07-12 11:35 -0500
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-07-12 16:56 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-11 18:25 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 18:00 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 14:13 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-09 15:25 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-09 16:39 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 16:30 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:43 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-09 21:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-09 18:25 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-09 18:53 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-07-09 20:55 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-10 12:06 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-10 14:05 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-11 11:32 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 14:04 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 10:00 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 15:58 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 11:38 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-11 13:19 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 09:43 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 22:31 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 14:48 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 15:16 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 11:46 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-11 17:13 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:50 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:13 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 12:46 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 11:00 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:17 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-12 12:41 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-12 22:09 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 16:23 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-11 16:41 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:36 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-12 08:43 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:05 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:56 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 10:52 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-11 19:44 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-11 13:30 -0700
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 21:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-12 00:06 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-12 12:44 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-12 20:23 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-11 22:49 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 11:44 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-07-12 16:58 +0100
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:44 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:36 -0500
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 16:12 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-12 13:34 -0500
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 19:40 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 17:31 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-12 12:34 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-11 11:29 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 16:57 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-11 16:01 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:27 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:46 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 18:00 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-11 18:39 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-11 11:03 -0700
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 18:31 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-11 16:44 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-11 17:59 +0100
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-11 20:28 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 07:51 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-12 10:14 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-12 08:31 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-12 12:06 -0400
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:49 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:13 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-12 18:04 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-12 17:52 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-13 09:09 +0100
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-13 15:56 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-13 12:43 +0000
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-14 12:18 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-12 18:16 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-07-12 21:57 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-12 13:23 -0500
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-12 19:46 +0100
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-12 19:09 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-07-13 03:36 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-13 06:38 +0100
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-13 07:23 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2016-07-12 20:36 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-13 12:48 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-07-12 20:48 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-13 06:34 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-13 13:34 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-07-13 15:46 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 13:23 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-07-08 10:56 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-08 19:57 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 09:49 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:04 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:20 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:43 +0200
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-07-05 19:30 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 20:32 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 17:19 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-07 01:48 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-07 12:52 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-07 15:25 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-08 12:18 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-08 11:06 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-07-10 12:25 -0500
                                Compiler Design was Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-08 19:21 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-07 15:30 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 17:36 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? pechter@t61.(none) (William Pechter) - 2016-07-08 20:43 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-09 14:18 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2016-07-06 00:28 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-03 17:32 +0200
          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-07-02 13:09 -0700
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-07-03 09:13 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-07-02 19:20 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rambo <Rambo@thisaintreal.org> - 2016-06-13 20:07 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-13 21:42 +0200
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:43 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:12 +0000
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:17 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:31 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:44 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-13 21:25 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:44 +0100
    Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-13 20:29 +0000
      Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-13 21:48 -0400
        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 08:11 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:49 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:14 +0000
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:23 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 08:33 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:46 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 10:22 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:36 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 12:01 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 11:59 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-14 12:30 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:21 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 19:51 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-14 15:24 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? colonel_hack@yahoo.com - 2016-06-15 16:30 -0700
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-15 20:07 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 09:38 +0200
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 09:23 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:05 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 10:44 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-16 21:11 -0700
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-17 09:00 +0200
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-14 17:07 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 17:14 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:45 +0200
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:34 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:44 +0200
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-15 17:21 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 23:15 -0400
                Re: Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 10:05 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 09:10 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:29 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 09:41 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:42 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:29 +0000
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:47 +0100
          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 06:24 -0400
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:37 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:42 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 13:53 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-14 13:00 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:20 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Brian Reay <no.sp@m.com> - 2016-06-14 08:35 -0700
          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 11:45 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 15:18 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-14 15:57 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:03 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:10 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:13 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:37 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:41 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 12:25 -0400
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:19 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-14 15:09 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:02 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:36 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:40 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:09 -0500
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:23 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 13:50 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 17:02 -0500
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:02 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 21:13 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 20:59 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 22:19 +0100
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 23:23 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 10:01 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:40 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-15 12:19 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:37 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:39 +0100
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:10 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:19 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 01:59 +1000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 17:06 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 12:15 -0500
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 19:50 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 19:44 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:55 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 11:49 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:31 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-15 08:27 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:29 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-15 18:20 +0200
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:27 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 17:18 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:58 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-06-16 07:38 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 08:59 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:30 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:34 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-16 07:49 -0500
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-17 12:26 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 13:06 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-17 10:44 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-17 13:02 -0500
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 19:36 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 19:33 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-17 20:15 -0500
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 09:55 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:49 -0700
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 12:08 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-17 14:10 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-17 20:11 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Steve Hall <sweet_stevie@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-17 19:42 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-17 22:54 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:48 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:07 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:38 -0700
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:07 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 11:49 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:10 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:05 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 19:04 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-16 09:37 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-16 18:24 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-17 15:26 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:39 -0700
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:36 +0200
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-21 17:13 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-21 19:10 +0100
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-21 21:00 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 14:42 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:31 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:30 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 13:55 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:12 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:18 +0100
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-16 01:47 +1000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:53 +0100
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 22:37 +0100
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-16 09:49 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 11:06 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 09:06 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 10:46 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 10:15 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 17:46 +0200
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-16 17:38 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 16:16 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 17:06 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 17:13 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-16 17:14 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-19 18:35 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-19 10:05 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:18 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:16 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 06:23 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-20 02:45 -0500
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 09:39 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-19 10:06 -0700
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-19 20:21 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-06-17 08:03 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 08:07 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 10:23 +0100
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-16 01:55 +1000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-16 12:30 +0000
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-18 02:03 +1000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-17 16:24 +0000
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-17 18:53 +0100
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-17 20:05 -0700
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 12:27 -0500
                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:29 -0500
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-17 22:35 +0000
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-17 19:54 -0400
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 10:15 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 10:32 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:05 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:52 -0700
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 17:32 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-18 17:36 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 09:08 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:47 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 14:26 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 13:59 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:05 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 18:33 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 13:58 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 11:49 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 18:52 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:53 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-18 15:37 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:45 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 09:53 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-18 11:02 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 11:13 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:35 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:42 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:47 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:14 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:01 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:27 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-18 04:56 -0700
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:43 -0700
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:09 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 16:51 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:20 +0200
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-18 17:51 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:31 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:28 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 21:51 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:31 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:11 +0200
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-18 15:57 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-18 14:59 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-20 11:01 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-20 13:54 -0500
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-18 17:13 +0300
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 14:40 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 16:56 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-18 08:30 -0700
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 10:49 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:03 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:31 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-19 21:49 +0300
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-06-20 07:41 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 05:49 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-19 19:54 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-19 19:55 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:24 -0400
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> - 2016-06-19 14:13 -0500
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-19 22:12 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-19 19:24 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-20 00:27 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 11:25 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-20 12:10 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 17:24 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 18:29 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 13:37 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-20 00:29 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 06:25 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-20 06:57 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 10:09 +0300
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-20 08:31 -0500
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 09:47 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 18:43 +0300
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2016-06-20 18:09 +0000
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 16:15 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-22 15:09 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-20 13:50 -0500
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 05:43 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:07 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-07-03 13:33 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-20 13:53 -0700
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-20 16:30 -0500
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:33 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-20 19:55 -0400
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-21 11:02 -0500
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-21 19:02 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-21 20:30 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-27 13:06 -0700
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-28 05:29 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-21 11:52 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 20:16 -0400
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-21 22:55 -0400
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-22 05:40 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 04:56 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-22 06:59 -0400
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 17:26 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0200
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 15:57 +0200
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:29 +0200
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-27 13:18 -0700
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:16 -0400
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 10:17 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 10:29 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-28 11:46 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 13:10 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 14:49 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 18:41 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 15:59 -0400
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-28 13:01 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 13:09 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:36 -0400
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-29 11:53 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-28 14:47 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 18:41 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-22 12:47 +0000
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-22 19:02 -0500
                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-23 13:08 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-23 14:02 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-24 12:47 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-24 13:47 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-23 09:08 -0500
                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-23 15:51 +0200
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-06-23 18:33 +0200
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-24 12:33 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-24 15:37 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-25 20:50 +0100
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-26 20:10 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-26 21:38 +0000
                                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 05:42 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-27 08:33 +0200
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 13:58 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-27 19:05 +0000
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 20:54 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-27 11:37 +0000
                                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-27 14:10 +0100
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-28 14:06 +0100
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-28 14:02 +0000
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-28 14:27 +0000
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:45 +0200
                                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-28 16:19 +0000

Page 34 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 32 33 [34] 35 36 … 50  Next page →


#165008

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 08:44 +0100
Message-ID<njoclp$ka1$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#164973
"Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message 
news:op.yi0i0nr0msr2db@dell3100.dlink.com...
>
> Classic troll: 0/20

Speaking for yourself, as usual, complaining about threads and yet
prolonging them?

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


#164974

Fromscott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date2016-06-13 20:29 +0000
Message-ID<6JE7z.70628$bx2.14785@fx34.iad>
In reply to#164962
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> writes:
>The Raspberry Pi in all its invocations was conceived as a filip
>for education about computer systems but looking at some of the
>recent posts in these NGs, it seems to have got stuck in a blind alley;
>the alley of Linux, whereas the real education about computers and
>how they work is down at a much lower level.
>

Nonsense.   Nothing prevents one from doing low-level programming
on any of the SBCs (Single Board Computers[*]).     There's no reason
to force everyone to write their own operating system, so having a
linux distribution for the SBC significantly increases the applicability
of the SBC to multiple problem sets.

[*] e.g raspberry pi, odroid, et alia

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


#164999

FromMichael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Date2016-06-13 21:48 -0400
Message-ID<alpine.LNX.2.02.1606132141130.25704@darkstar.example.org>
In reply to#164974
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> writes:
>> The Raspberry Pi in all its invocations was conceived as a filip
>> for education about computer systems but looking at some of the
>> recent posts in these NGs, it seems to have got stuck in a blind alley;
>> the alley of Linux, whereas the real education about computers and
>> how they work is down at a much lower level.
>>
>
> Nonsense.   Nothing prevents one from doing low-level programming
> on any of the SBCs (Single Board Computers[*]).     There's no reason
> to force everyone to write their own operating system, so having a
> linux distribution for the SBC significantly increases the applicability
> of the SBC to multiple problem sets.
>
> [*] e.g raspberry pi, odroid, et alia
>
And what made single board computers useful for learning forty years ago 
was that they included a good monitor in ROM, so you could single step 
through a program or use a software interrupt to end the program and show 
the results via the monitor.

That's been missing from computers for a long time (was the Apple II the 
last one to include a useful Monitor?).

Linux is overkill, but it exists and has all the tools needed.  The 
computer and the software doesn't cost much, so the fact that it is 
"overkill" doesn't matter.

The Monitor (and the same happened when BASIC was in ROM, at least in 
terms of trying BASIC) allowed for instant results.  But computers have 
gotten so fast that one can compile a simple C program in no time, and 
thus any problems with using a compiler for playing with programs is gone. 
I remember trying C on a Radio Shack Color COmputer, the CPU clocked at 
1MHz, 64K of RAM, and 2 5.25" floppy drives.  It took a lot of time to
compile, and the error messages would scroll by too fast.  It's so much 
easier doing the same thing on a fast Linux machine (and despite what 
people say, the Pi is a fast Linux machine).

I think the real issue about the Pi is that the learning aspect is mostly 
hidden away, and "here is a cheap piece of hardware to reproduce what 
someone else cooked up" is much more visible.  So if kids are learning by 
playing with the Pi, we don't hear much about it, but we do hear that the 
Pi makes a dandy way to connect your tv set to the internet.

   Michael

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


#165005

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-14 08:11 +0100
Message-ID<20160614081146.5a6ced12c0ed2b962231eec4@eircom.net>
In reply to#164999
On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 21:48:04 -0400
Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:

> I think the real issue about the Pi is that the learning aspect is mostly 
> hidden away, and "here is a cheap piece of hardware to reproduce what 
> someone else cooked up" is much more visible.  So if kids are learning by 
> playing with the Pi, we don't hear much about it, but we do hear that the 
> Pi makes a dandy way to connect your tv set to the internet.

	Yes it does, but the various Android based TV sticks are similar in
price and are an even easier way to connect your TV set to the internet.
Even when computers were rare and expensive a sizeable proportion of the
people who got to use one did little (if anything) more than reproducing
what someone else cooked up, only a relatively few became fascinated and
got stuck into the details. Now with the machines so much cheaper, and so
many things convenient and easy to just reuse the tinkerers are hidden in
the noise to the casual eye - but they're around buying the boards to
connect the GPIO pins to relays and using their Pis and Arduinos as
components with software written in Python and C.

	Why should you expect to hear much about it, nobody heard much
about how Mullard making the OC71 and OC45 cheaply contributed to the
likes of me making all sorts of electronic odds and ends for the fun of it.
You'd have to have been involved in retailing electronic components to have
any idea how popular the hobby was - and even then you'd not be able to
tell how many were faithfully following the instructions in the magazine
and how many were learning to design their own. Everyone started by doing
the first though.

	These days you'd have to be involved in selling the interface
boards to have any kind of feel - and you can be pretty sure anyone buying
those is planning on some tinkering.

	I don't think kids are learning computer science by playing with
Pis and Arduinos, but some are learning about using embedded controllers in
their own engineering projects.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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


#165011

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 08:49 +0100
Message-ID<njoctf$l5k$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165005
"Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message 
news:20160614081146.5a6ced12c0ed2b962231eec4@eircom.net...
>
> Why should you expect to hear much about it, nobody heard much
> about how Mullard making the OC71 and OC45 cheaply contributed to the
> likes of me making all sorts of electronic odds and ends for the fun of 
> it.

Where even the manufacturing rejects were sold to us in the 1960s
as Red-Spot transistors!

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


#165023

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-14 08:14 +0000
Message-ID<ds9smvFkqbiU8@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#165011
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:49:00 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
> news:20160614081146.5a6ced12c0ed2b962231eec4@eircom.net...
>>
>> Why should you expect to hear much about it, nobody heard much about
>> how Mullard making the OC71 and OC45 cheaply contributed to the likes
>> of me making all sorts of electronic odds and ends for the fun of it.
> 
> Where even the manufacturing rejects were sold to us in the 1960s as
> Red-Spot transistors!

And then we filed off the casing, washed out the jelly, covered it up 
again and used it as an OCP71.



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

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

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


#165025

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 09:23 +0100
Message-ID<njoeur$ri7$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165023
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:ds9smvFkqbiU8@mid.individual.net...
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:49:00 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>
>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>> news:20160614081146.5a6ced12c0ed2b962231eec4@eircom.net...
>>>
>>> Why should you expect to hear much about it, nobody heard much about
>>> how Mullard making the OC71 and OC45 cheaply contributed to the likes
>>> of me making all sorts of electronic odds and ends for the fun of it.
>>
>> Where even the manufacturing rejects were sold to us in the 1960s as
>> Red-Spot transistors!
>
> And then we filed off the casing, washed out the jelly, covered it up
> again and used it as an OCP71.

I've a couple of the earlier ones here that had a clear filling, so all you 
had to
do was to scrape off the black paint. I've also a genuine OCP71 and one
of those ORP12 that I tended to use in preference because of the caveat
when soldering "geranium" transistors that two much heat would cause
further diffusion into a resistance.

The opacity was introduced after optical noise in industrial circuits was
causing a problem, but the feeling amongst the hobbyists was that Mullard
had done it deliberately to prevent anyone from getting an OCP71
on the cheap! 

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


#165027

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-14 08:33 +0000
Message-ID<ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#165025
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:23:52 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:ds9smvFkqbiU8@mid.individual.net...
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:49:00 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>> news:20160614081146.5a6ced12c0ed2b962231eec4@eircom.net...
>>>>
>>>> Why should you expect to hear much about it, nobody heard much about
>>>> how Mullard making the OC71 and OC45 cheaply contributed to the likes
>>>> of me making all sorts of electronic odds and ends for the fun of it.
>>>
>>> Where even the manufacturing rejects were sold to us in the 1960s as
>>> Red-Spot transistors!
>>
>> And then we filed off the casing, washed out the jelly, covered it up
>> again and used it as an OCP71.
> 
> I've a couple of the earlier ones here that had a clear filling, so all
> you had to do was to scrape off the black paint. I've also a genuine
> OCP71 and one of those ORP12 that I tended to use in preference because
> of the caveat when soldering "geranium" transistors that two much heat
> would cause further diffusion into a resistance.

Oh yes...I probably have a couple of ORP12s around.

I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my 
toolbox - gathering dust!

> The opacity was introduced after optical noise in industrial circuits
> was causing a problem, but the feeling amongst the hobbyists was that
> Mullard had done it deliberately to prevent anyone from getting an OCP71
> on the cheap!

Probably true, although the black paint did scratch off rather easily and 
I think that caused problems until they used the opaque jelly.




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

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

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


#165029

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 09:46 +0100
Message-ID<njog8u$vrh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165027
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
>
> I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
> toolbox - gathering dust!

Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie
on Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?


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


#165033

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-14 10:22 +0000
Message-ID<dsa46vFkqbiU11@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#165029
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:46:18 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
>> toolbox - gathering dust!
> 
> Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie on
> Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?

No, I bought it. I used to work for a place in Brighton called Technical 
Trading - they used to advertise valves on page 3 of Practical Wireless!



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

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

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


#165036

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 11:36 +0100
Message-ID<njomnp$ksa$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165033
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dsa46vFkqbiU11@mid.individual.net...
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:46:18 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
>>>
>>> I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
>>> toolbox - gathering dust!
>>
>> Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie on
>> Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?
>
> No, I bought it. I used to work for a place in Brighton called Technical
> Trading - they used to advertise valves on page 3 of Practical Wireless!

And for most people, the last valve disappeared when they wnet to
flat screen TVs and monitors.

I still have CRTs in one of my 'scopes and the spectrum analyser,
although the latter is rapidly becoming redundant because the
flat screen 'scope has a 100MHz FFT facility.

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


#165041

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 12:01 +0100
Message-ID<njoo5u$ssa$4@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#165036
On 14/06/16 11:36, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
> news:dsa46vFkqbiU11@mid.individual.net...
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:46:18 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>>> news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
>>>>
>>>> I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
>>>> toolbox - gathering dust!
>>>
>>> Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie on
>>> Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?
>>
>> No, I bought it. I used to work for a place in Brighton called Technical
>> Trading - they used to advertise valves on page 3 of Practical Wireless!
>
> And for most people, the last valve disappeared when they wnet to
> flat screen TVs and monitors.

Hah! Not for RF engineers, and rick musicians.

>
> I still have CRTs in one of my 'scopes and the spectrum analyser,
> although the latter is rapidly becoming redundant because the
> flat screen 'scope has a 100MHz FFT facility.
>
>


-- 
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

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


#165044

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2016-06-14 11:59 +0100
Message-ID<20160614115959.ebd8ec49117a04967a430e2f@eircom.net>
In reply to#165029
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:46:18 +0100
"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
> news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
> >
> > I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
> > toolbox - gathering dust!
> 
> Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie
> on Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?

	I had one of those - that nickname should have been kept for
Everyday Electronics though.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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


#165094

FromMichael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Date2016-06-14 12:30 -0400
Message-ID<alpine.LNX.2.02.1606141226350.26861@darkstar.example.org>
In reply to#165044
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:46:18 +0100
> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message
>> news:ds9tquFkqbiU10@mid.individual.net...
>>>
>>> I had a little heat sink clip that I used religiously. It's still in my
>>> toolbox - gathering dust!
>>
>> Not that little rivetted aluminium thingy that came as a freebie
>> on Practical Electronics or Practical Wireless, AKA "Camm's Comics"?
>
> 	I had one of those - that nickname should have been kept for
> Everyday Electronics though.
>
It is a concept that doesn't really exist in North America.  But we'd get 
those magazines from England, I still have a template for drawing either 
schematics or circuit board layout, I forget which, that was taped to the 
cover of Practical Electronics.  I also have a piece of plastic that's for 
bending leads on components.  I'm sure it annoyed the magazine stores, I 
remember times when there'd be a sticker on the magazine, "ask at the 
desk" because otherwise the freebie of the month would clog up the 
magazine racks.

ANd then of course, floppy disks were rather standard on some magazines 
from the UK.  Certainly in the days of the Atari ST, I picked up some 
interesting software that way.  Then eventually the floppies became 
CDROMs, and then DVDs.

For North American magazines (really, US magazines), such things were an 
occasional thing, some special bonus or something worked up with an 
advertiser.

   Michael


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


#165103

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 18:21 +0100
Message-ID<njpee9$g4f$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#165094
"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message 
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1606141226350.26861@darkstar.example.org...
>   I also have a piece of plastic that's for bending leads on components.

The little green quadrilateral with the slot down the middle?

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


#165114

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-14 19:51 +0100
Message-ID<njpjod$ke3$7@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#165094
On 14/06/16 17:30, Michael Black wrote:
> I remember times when there'd be a sticker on the magazine, "ask at the
> desk" because otherwise the freebie of the month would clog up the
> magazine racks.

Bless. No it was because us broke teenagers used to remove them off the 
magazine fronts in the dipslay and pocket them

-- 
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly 
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential 
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations 
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with 
what it actually is.

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


#165140

FromGene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
Date2016-06-14 15:24 -0700
Message-ID<gq01mb57s3r43tihotoavbb2qmejoc37ok@4ax.com>
In reply to#165094
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 12:30:10 -0400, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
wrote:

[snip]

>It is a concept that doesn't really exist in North America.  But we'd get 
>those magazines from England, I still have a template for drawing either 
>schematics or circuit board layout, I forget which, that was taped to the 
>cover of Practical Electronics.  I also have a piece of plastic that's for 
>bending leads on components.  I'm sure it annoyed the magazine stores, I 
>remember times when there'd be a sticker on the magazine, "ask at the 
>desk" because otherwise the freebie of the month would clog up the 
>magazine racks.

     When I were a lad ... (in North American, not Yorkshire), in the
early 80s, there was a magazine that came on tape.  CLOAD magazine.

     I have seen music magazines with CDs freebies.

     Some collectible-card-game magazines include (or included; I do
not know the current practice) cards or packages of cards.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

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


#165268

Fromcolonel_hack@yahoo.com
Date2016-06-15 16:30 -0700
Message-ID<alpine.LFD.2.20.1606151627050.14768@localhost>
In reply to#165094
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Michael Black wrote:
>
> ANd then of course, floppy disks were rather standard on some magazines from 
> the UK.  Certainly in the days of the Atari ST, I picked up some interesting 
> software that way.  Then eventually the floppies became CDROMs, and then 
> DVDs.
>
Or those thin flexable plastic records --sort of an ``LP ROM''. There was 
one on e-bay a while back. Don't recall what system it was for.

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


#165269

FromMichael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Date2016-06-15 20:07 -0400
Message-ID<alpine.LNX.2.02.1606152004090.29826@darkstar.example.org>
In reply to#165268
On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, colonel_hack@yahoo.com wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Michael Black wrote:
>> 
>> ANd then of course, floppy disks were rather standard on some magazines 
>> from the UK.  Certainly in the days of the Atari ST, I picked up some 
>> interesting software that way.  Then eventually the floppies became CDROMs, 
>> and then DVDs.
>> 
> Or those thin flexable plastic records --sort of an ``LP ROM''. There was one 
> on e-bay a while back. Don't recall what system it was for.
>
>
But were those ever common?  There was one in an early INterface Age, but 
I don't remember it as anything but a single-shot deal.  I have no idea 
how well it worked, you had to be able to get the preamplified output of 
your turntable to your computer, I don't think a lot of people had their 
computer next to their stereo system at the time.  And not only was there 
the issue of what "cassette standard" to use, but, even with Microsoft 
BASIC, there were differences between machines.  You could go for a 
popular computer, or try to be useful to all, and each had its problems.

   Michael

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


#165280

FromMorten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid>
Date2016-06-16 09:38 +0200
Message-ID<oj1a3d-ni2.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to#165269
In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1606152004090.29826@darkstar.example.org>,
Michael Black  <et472@ncf.ca> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, colonel_hack@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Michael Black wrote:
>>> 
>>> ANd then of course, floppy disks were rather standard on some magazines 
>>> from the UK.  Certainly in the days of the Atari ST, I picked up some 
>>> interesting software that way.  Then eventually the floppies became CDROMs, 
>>> and then DVDs.
>>> 
>> Or those thin flexable plastic records --sort of an ``LP ROM''. There was one 
>> on e-bay a while back. Don't recall what system it was for.
>>
>>
>But were those ever common?  There was one in an early INterface Age, but 
>I don't remember it as anything but a single-shot deal.  I have no idea 
>how well it worked, you had to be able to get the preamplified output of 
>your turntable to your computer, I don't think a lot of people had their 
>computer next to their stereo system at the time.  And not only was there 
>the issue of what "cassette standard" to use, but, even with Microsoft 
>BASIC, there were differences between machines.  You could go for a 
>popular computer, or try to be useful to all, and each had its problems.

Piping audio to the C64's cassette port requires a little hardware hack,
but one that was very popular in the early eighties. There were "DIY" kits
for this in the electronics stores, and records were in a lot of magazines.
Some local FM stations even broadcast C64 games late at night. 

You did a load, and then started the record, or listened to the broadcast, 
and when the load finished you could save or run the program.

The C64 cassette interface was only 300 baud and has a bit of redundancy, 
and was quite rubustly coded; so it could cope with a lot of abuse.
But it was SLOOOOWWWW.

-- mrr

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


Page 34 of 50 — ← Prev page 1 … 32 33 [34] 35 36 … 50  Next page →

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


csiph-web