Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.misc > #3039 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.TheWorld.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-23 16:39 -0400 |
| Last post | 2014-05-26 17:54 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 240 — 49 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.misc
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.TheWorld.com> - 2014-05-23 16:39 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2014-05-23 16:32 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-23 23:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 08:23 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 23:55 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-24 00:17 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2014-05-24 10:21 -0300
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-24 14:37 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 16:29 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-24 14:45 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 11:25 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 10:32 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 21:40 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 12:35 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 13:34 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 21:35 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-26 21:47 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-27 00:09 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-28 16:07 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-29 02:16 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-05-28 23:23 -0600
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-29 11:26 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 10:30 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-29 20:05 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-29 20:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-29 22:36 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 19:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-01 10:27 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-01 12:15 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:14 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:12 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 08:00 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2014-05-30 14:44 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:42 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 07:29 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:36 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 17:47 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 09:37 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 00:00 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:34 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 12:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-01 12:48 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:22 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:09 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-06-02 16:27 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-06-02 13:00 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-06-02 13:16 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-02 13:57 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> - 2014-08-29 13:38 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-29 22:14 +0300
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? greymaus <greymausg@mail.com> - 2014-08-29 20:55 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-08-30 01:21 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-06-01 09:23 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:44 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-31 23:54 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 11:21 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:03 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-04 09:33 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 09:35 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:31 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-06-01 21:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 16:46 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-31 07:26 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-31 12:48 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:44 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-01 07:32 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-06-01 12:18 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 18:59 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-30 07:28 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:26 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-30 15:24 -0800
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 17:40 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 16:24 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-05-30 15:57 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 16:14 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-31 12:46 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-31 21:41 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-01 12:31 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-06-02 09:19 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-06-02 07:06 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-29 21:46 +0200
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-29 21:31 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 20:49 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-30 02:00 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 11:42 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-30 06:32 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 16:22 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-30 22:43 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 08:06 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:29 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-30 13:23 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:44 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 15:52 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-30 07:18 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 21:09 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-30 16:17 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-30 13:19 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-30 21:47 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-30 23:01 +0100
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-30 18:44 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 17:17 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 07:51 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:47 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 08:03 -0400
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 09:48 -0500
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-31 15:03 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-30 12:53 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 15:14 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-29 13:33 +0000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 14:40 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? Will Honea <whonea@whonea.net> - 2014-05-26 20:38 -0600
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 13:32 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 05:58 +1000
Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-24 09:41 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 20:37 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-24 14:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-24 18:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 12:34 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-25 13:57 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 17:15 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 15:44 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 16:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 06:39 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-24 21:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 08:19 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-25 08:10 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 20:44 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-25 16:11 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-26 04:16 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 10:28 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 16:32 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 17:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-25 12:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-25 18:55 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 20:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2014-05-25 22:29 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-25 17:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-26 05:06 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 11:45 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-26 12:34 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Joe Makowiec <makowiec@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-26 14:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 12:35 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 13:41 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 14:39 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 16:03 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-26 11:27 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 12:26 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 13:36 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 18:46 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 21:27 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 15:46 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-26 17:01 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 11:40 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 14:59 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-27 12:17 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn ERSHC <ershc123@invalid.invalid> - 2014-05-27 03:50 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-27 05:50 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-26 12:54 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 17:49 +0000
Re: a long way from a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-26 17:55 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 19:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 18:59 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 09:03 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-27 16:01 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 16:03 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 16:55 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:47 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 21:34 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-27 21:20 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-05-27 20:16 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-28 11:22 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-28 13:27 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2014-05-29 15:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:19 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-30 07:43 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 13:19 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-30 12:29 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-30 16:57 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-27 17:28 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-27 18:12 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 17:05 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-28 00:12 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-28 08:08 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-28 11:01 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn cb@bobby.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2014-05-28 11:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 08:53 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rob Brown <brown@greenslade.gmcl.internal> - 2014-05-27 21:05 +0000
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-27 22:21 +0000
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-28 14:38 -0500
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 01:50 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 07:34 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 10:08 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 10:15 +0100
Re: A long time before there was a revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-29 09:40 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 20:58 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-27 09:35 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-26 20:58 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-26 21:16 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-26 20:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 11:33 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-27 10:49 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 23:46 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-27 06:39 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-05-27 10:45 +0000
Re: components not found in a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2014-05-25 19:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-25 22:23 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-26 17:20 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-27 13:01 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-29 00:24 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-29 12:52 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-29 15:00 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-05-29 14:21 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:40 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Andy Burns <usenet.feb2014@adslpipe.co.uk> - 2014-05-25 17:30 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 20:38 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 16:29 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:28 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-26 07:54 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-24 22:37 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-25 07:16 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-25 10:26 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-24 07:28 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-25 16:08 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-25 19:33 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> - 2014-05-31 09:06 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-31 10:28 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-05-26 17:54 +0100
Page 7 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 12 Next page →
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-27 05:58 +1000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <buhkoqF9i7lU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3210 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:359089630422799015.917999peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote: >> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote: >>> On Sun, 25 May 2014 10:25:56 +0100, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2014-05-24, Osmium <r124c4u102@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> "Stephen Sprunk" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Produce is sold by weight at the grocery store, but in US >>>>>> agricultural >>>>>> industry and commodities markets, crops are still measured in >>>>>> bushels. >>>>> >>>>> You city folk! >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, they empty the truck and then a guy with a long tape measure and >>>>> >> big >>>>> protractor sketches the truck box and they ruin that through a PC >> >>>>> program >>>> >>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>>> and it comes up with bushels and then ..... >>>> >>>> Lovely typo :-) >>>> >>> I smiled. >>> >>> [] >>>> >>>> Even the organic waste dump near here has a weighbridge. >>>> >>> The use of weights for scrap (and so recycling) is wrong; it's an active >>> disincentive to collect and re-use less dense material such as >>> polystyrene, as it is so bulky for it's weight, yet is non-biodegradable >>> in landfill. >> >> >> Any non-biodegradable waste in a landfill is just money in the bank. > I'm not sure how much degrades anyhow. Quite a bit of it still does, obviously the garden green waste and quite a bit of the kitchen waste does too. And dead animals etc. > Landfills these days have an impermeable > clay base and a layer of heavy plastic lining. Ours has no plastic lining. > Each day's trash is covered with dirt at the end of the day. That doesn’t happen here either. > I think when they close the landfill they > cover it with another layer of plastic, Ours doesn’t. > so the trash never gets exposed to air or water. Ours does. > It's as if they're taking great piains > to see that the stuff *never* degrades. Not even possible with the garden green waste and quite a bit of the kitchen waste does too. And dead animals etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How much does a Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn weigh? |
| Message-ID | <PM0004FA3AC7F2849B@aca24281.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #3076 |
Joy Beeson wrote: > On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:17:32 +0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> > wrote: > >> Of course, here in the US we still have liquid and dry pints and >> quarts and pecks and bushels, so who are we to complain? > > Pints and quarts come in liquid and dry, but pecks and bushels are > dry. Liquid measures continue up with gallons. > > A fluid quart is a quarter of a gallon; a dry quart is an eighth of a > peck, and a peck is a quarter of a bushel. > > Aha! Wikipedia claims that there used to be a dry gallon, equal to > half a peck! Finally the quart=1/8 explained. > > Dry measure is pretty much out of use; it was, in my youth, used only > for selling farm produce, and we weigh vegetables and fruit now. But > one still sometimes sees half-peck bags of apples. I suspect that > there is only one factory still making the bags, as they all look like > the one in the Wikipedia article. > > Bushel baskets used to be so common that dime stores sold oilcloth > liners to enable housewives to use a basket to dampen ironing, but I > haven't seen a bushel since 1960. My mother made a liner from oilcloth to carry the wet clothes outside to the clothesline. I think it disintegrated sometime after I left for college (1968). We also bought fruit in lugs. It was a rectangular wooden box made out of 1" boards and had a divider in the middle. I still remember the summer day when Dad came home with 8 of them filled with cherries. Took about 5 days to clean, pit and process them. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 09:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100> |
| In reply to | #3053 |
On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: > > (snip) > >> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >> the one used for weighing humans. > > I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) > in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) > We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. I say pavement, you say sidewalk I say boot, you say trunk let's call the whole thing off. > I don't know which other units have US and Imperial versions > different by some strange factor. > Mr wikipedia knows https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon#Relationship_to_other_units apparently you (US, possibly Canada as well?) have a standard size cup that is used in recipes, our cups are quite variable in size. Though a cylindrical one is called a mug. > -- glen > -- It's a money /life balance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 20:37 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <bubb4eFthhrU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3063 |
"Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... > On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt > <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >>> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >>> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >>> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >>> the one used for weighing humans. >> >> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) >> in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >> > We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. Petrol, actually. > I say pavement, you say sidewalk > I say boot, you say trunk > let's call the whole thing off. The whole thing was never on. >> I don't know which other units have US and Imperial versions different by >> some strange factor. > Mr wikipedia knows You sexist arsehole... > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon#Relationship_to_other_units > apparently you (US, possibly Canada as well?) have a standard size cup > that is used in recipes, our cups are quite variable in size. Though a > cylindrical one is called a mug. So are some individuals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 14:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3069 |
On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: > > "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message > news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >> >>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>> >>> (snip) >>> >>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >>>> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >>>> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >>>> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >>>> the one used for weighing humans. >>> >>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>> >> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. > > Petrol, actually. Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 18:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <llqm1p$uln$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3075 |
"Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... > Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. Derived from Rock Oil T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 12:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <git85b-oag2.ln1@news.chingola.ch> |
| In reply to | #3091 |
On 2014-05-24, gareth <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote: > "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. > > Derived from Rock Oil > > T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil Linoleum, lino for short, is/was in the UK more commonly a smooth floor covering which consisted of a linseed compound on a cloth backing. It was a common sight in the fifties and sixties. It was probably sold as a new miracle floor covering but my memories of it are less favourable; in particular when used in bedrooms, hallways and bathrooms it was hard and very cold on bare feet. -- Paul Sture The final step of #heartbleed recovery is to call your mother, and advise her to change her maiden name -- @gojomo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 13:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0.356a737ceba498619171.20140525135708BST.87a9a6yq1n.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #3143 |
Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> writes: > On 2014-05-24, gareth <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote: >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >> >> Derived from Rock Oil >> >> T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil > > Linoleum, lino for short, is/was in the UK more commonly a smooth floor > covering which consisted of a linseed compound on a cloth backing. > > It was a common sight in the fifties and sixties. It was probably sold as > a new miracle floor covering but my memories of it are less favourable; in > particular when used in bedrooms, hallways and bathrooms it was hard and > very cold on bare feet. My childhood home was a few miles from Kirkcaldy, one of the homes of lino. In the 30s, the house had been renovated with the very latest trends, and this included three beautiful hand-cut lino floors in fantastic art deco designs. The best was a bathroom with cavorting stylised fish. It would seem that, in the early days, it was a product that merited far more time and craft than it did in later years. It is still made there (now called Marmoleum) and I have a custom design in the kitchen (though nothing nearly as fancy -- just squares). They can still do laser-cut designs, but if you don't choose a standard one, the cost is considerable. Newsgroups trimmed, but I wonder at what point the topic drift makes it unsuitable even for comp.misc? -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 17:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <250520141715346716%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #3145 |
In article <0.356a737ceba498619171.20140525135708BST.87a9a6yq1n.fsf@bsb.me.uk>, Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote: > Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> writes: > > > On 2014-05-24, gareth <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote: > >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message > >> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... > >>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. > >> > >> Derived from Rock Oil > >> > >> T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil > > > > Linoleum, lino for short, is/was in the UK more commonly a smooth floor > > covering which consisted of a linseed compound on a cloth backing. > > > > It was a common sight in the fifties and sixties. It was probably sold as > > a new miracle floor covering but my memories of it are less favourable; in > > particular when used in bedrooms, hallways and bathrooms it was hard and > > very cold on bare feet. > > My childhood home was a few miles from Kirkcaldy, one of the homes of > lino. In the 30s, the house had been renovated with the very latest > trends, and this included three beautiful hand-cut lino floors in > fantastic art deco designs. The best was a bathroom with cavorting > stylised fish. > > It would seem that, in the early days, it was a product that merited far > more time and craft than it did in later years. > > It is still made there (now called Marmoleum) and I have a custom design > in the kitchen (though nothing nearly as fancy -- just squares). They > can still do laser-cut designs, but if you don't choose a standard one, > the cost is considerable. Lino is what the Yanks call vinyl, as a floor covering, IIRC. Still, the stuff to use these days is Amtico. -- "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 15:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.xge67sjho4et73@dell3100> |
| In reply to | #3143 |
On Sun, 25 May 2014 11:34:24 +0100, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote: > On 2014-05-24, gareth <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote: >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >> >> Derived from Rock Oil >> >> T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil > > Linoleum, lino for short, is/was in the UK more commonly a smooth floor > covering which consisted of a linseed compound on a cloth backing. > > It was a common sight in the fifties and sixties. It was probably sold > as > a new miracle floor covering but my memories of it are less favourable; > in > particular when used in bedrooms, hallways and bathrooms it was hard and > very cold on bare feet. > It's making a comeback now! http://www.ecofriendlyflooring.com/linoleum.html -- It's a money /life balance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 16:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlo46gr.150u.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #3143 |
On Sun, 25 May 2014 12:34:24 +0200, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote: > On 2014-05-24, gareth <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote: >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >> >> Derived from Rock Oil >> >> T'other in Britland is Linoleum - Linseed Oil > > Linoleum, lino for short, is/was in the UK more commonly a smooth floor > covering which consisted of a linseed compound on a cloth backing. Linseed oil and woodchippings/sawdust on a hessian backing and subjected to heat and pressure. Also popular for topping workbenches and making pseudo woodcuts. -- Stan Barr plan.b@dsl.pipex.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 06:39 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <bucedcF6ernU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3075 |
"Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... > On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: > > >> >> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> (snip) >>>> >>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >>>>> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >>>>> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >>>>> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >>>>> the one used for weighing humans. >>>> >>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>>> >>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >> >> Petrol, actually. > > Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 21:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3111 |
On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: > "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >> >> >> >>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> (snip) >>>>> >>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look >>>>>> it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there >>>>>> are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at >>>>>> all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which >>>>>> definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>> >>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>>>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>>>> >>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>> >>> Petrol, actually. >> >> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. > > There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations pertaining to the substance in question....! -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 08:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <buck8eF7k98U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3113 |
"Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message news:bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net... > On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: > >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> (snip) >>>>>> >>>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look >>>>>>> it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there >>>>>>> are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at >>>>>>> all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which >>>>>>> definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>>> >>>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>>>>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>>>>> >>>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>>> >>>> Petrol, actually. >>> >>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >> >> There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits > > Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant > term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations > pertaining to the substance in question....! Sure, but that is just the rather quaint old fashioned terminology so often seen in regulations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 08:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <budms9Fe217U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3114 |
On Sun, 25 May 2014 08:19:18 +1000, 2ju wrote: > "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net... >> On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: >> >>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>>>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (snip) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you >>>>>>>> look it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that >>>>>>>> there are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not >>>>>>>> used at all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out >>>>>>>> which definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) >>>>>>> in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to >>>>>>> that.) >>>>>>> >>>>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>>>> >>>>> Petrol, actually. >>>> >>>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >>> >>> There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits >> >> Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant >> term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations >> pertaining to the substance in question....! > > Sure, but that is just the rather quaint old fashioned terminology so > often seen in regulations. I'll leave you to believe that, then. -- Using UNIX since v6 (1975)... Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 20:44 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <budvt1FfudoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3126 |
"Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message news:budms9Fe217U1@mid.individual.net... > On Sun, 25 May 2014 08:19:18 +1000, 2ju wrote: > >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net... >>> On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>> >>>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>>>>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>>>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (snip) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you >>>>>>>>> look it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that >>>>>>>>> there are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not >>>>>>>>> used at all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out >>>>>>>>> which definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) >>>>>>>> in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to >>>>>>>> that.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>>>>> >>>>>> Petrol, actually. >>>>> >>>>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >>>> >>>> There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits >>> >>> Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant >>> term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations >>> pertaining to the substance in question....! >> >> Sure, but that is just the rather quaint old fashioned terminology so >> often seen in regulations. > > I'll leave you to believe that, then. Its got nothing to do with belief, everything to do with how regulations are worded.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 16:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <buej1fFjpifU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3140 |
On 2014-05-25, 2ju <2ju@gmail.com> wrote: > > > "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message > news:budms9Fe217U1@mid.individual.net... >> On Sun, 25 May 2014 08:19:18 +1000, 2ju wrote: >> >>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>> news:bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net... >>>> On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>> >>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>>> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>>>>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (snip) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you >>>>>>>>>> look it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that >>>>>>>>>> there are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not >>>>>>>>>> used at all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out >>>>>>>>>> which definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) >>>>>>>>> in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to >>>>>>>>> that.) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Petrol, actually. >>>>>> >>>>>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >>>>> >>>>> There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits >>>> >>>> Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant >>>> term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations >>>> pertaining to the substance in question....! >>> >>> Sure, but that is just the rather quaint old fashioned terminology so >>> often seen in regulations. >> >> I'll leave you to believe that, then. > > Its got nothing to do with belief, everything > to do with how regulations are worded. You can go right ahead and keep believing this in your deranged little word. Meanwhile, us grownups will carry on with our lives. -- Today is Setting Orange, the 72nd day of Discord in the YOLD 3180 "I do not believe in revealed religion — I will have nothing to do with your immortality; we are miserable enough in this life, without speculating on another." Lord Byron, 1778-1824, letter to Rev. Francis Hodgson, 1811
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 04:16 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <bueqdbFli56U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3161 |
"Huge" <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote in message news:buej1fFjpifU2@mid.individual.net... > On 2014-05-25, 2ju <2ju@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >> news:budms9Fe217U1@mid.individual.net... >>> On Sun, 25 May 2014 08:19:18 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>> >>>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>> news:bucgt5Fmh2vU5@mid.individual.net... >>>>> On Sun, 25 May 2014 06:39:31 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Bob Eager" <news0002@eager.cx> wrote in message >>>>>> news:bubna0Fmh2vU4@mid.individual.net... >>>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>>>>>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (snip) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you >>>>>>>>>>> look it up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is >>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> there are two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not >>>>>>>>>>> used at all in the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out >>>>>>>>>>> which definition is the one used for weighing humans. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) >>>>>>>>>> in imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to >>>>>>>>>> that.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Petrol, actually. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no such thing as a correct term with something like that. >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_spirits >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps not; to a point I agree with you. However, it is the dominant >>>>> term in the names of documents etc. associated with the UK regulations >>>>> pertaining to the substance in question....! >>>> >>>> Sure, but that is just the rather quaint old fashioned terminology so >>>> often seen in regulations. >>> >>> I'll leave you to believe that, then. >> >> Its got nothing to do with belief, everything >> to do with how regulations are worded. > > You can go right ahead and keep believing this in your deranged little > word. Meanwhile, us grownups will carry on with our lives. Very few grownups are actually silly enough to use the term petroleum spirit anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 10:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.xgesl6yxo4et73@dell3100> |
| In reply to | #3075 |
On Sat, 24 May 2014 15:05:52 +0100, Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote: > On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: > > >> >> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> (snip) >>>> >>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >>>>> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >>>>> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >>>>> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >>>>> the one used for weighing humans. >>>> >>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>>> >>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >> >> Petrol, actually. > > Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. > Quite; the transpondians refer to Gasoline as gas (though it is a liquid) whilst we old world folk say petrol as an abbreviation for petroleum. Same with lino/linoleum. Other abbreviations are widely found: taxi or cab for taxi-metered cabriolet car for carriage bus for omnibus pram for perambulator bike for bicycle (though some also use it for motor-bicycle) tram for trampoline etc > -- It's a money /life balance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-25 15:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0004FA3AD8BB81D8@aca24281.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #3133 |
Stanley Daniel de Liver wrote: > On Sat, 24 May 2014 15:05:52 +0100, Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote: > >> On Sat, 24 May 2014 20:37:28 +1000, 2ju wrote: >> >> >>> >>> "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote in message >>> news:op.xgcvqq1jo4et73@dell3100... >>>> On Sat, 24 May 2014 00:55:06 +0100, glen herrmannsfeldt >>>> <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In alt.sys.pdp11 Dale R Worley <worley@shell01.theworld.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> (snip) >>>>> >>>>>> The fortnight is little-used, but its meaning is clear if you look it >>>>>> up in the dictionary. The problem with the stone is that there are >>>>>> two versions: 14 lb. and 20 lb, and since it is not used at all in >>>>>> the US, there's no way for a USanian to find out which definition is >>>>>> the one used for weighing humans. >>>>> >>>>> I remember when Canada sold gasoline (and probably other things) in >>>>> imperial gallons, which were 5/4 US gallons. (Or close to that.) >>>>> >>>> We don't have gasoline in the Britain, just petroleum. >>> >>> Petrol, actually. >> >> Petroleum spirit is, I believe, the correct term. >> > Quite; the transpondians refer to Gasoline as gas (though it is a liquid) > whilst we old world folk say petrol as an abbreviation for petroleum. Gas is shorthand for gasoline. > Same with lino/linoleum. > Other abbreviations are widely found: > taxi or cab for taxi-metered cabriolet > car for carriage > bus for omnibus > pram for perambulator > bike for bicycle (though some also use it for motor-bicycle) > tram for trampoline > etc [emoticon wrenching back to on-topic] Valves. :-) I still can't get over that term. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web