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


Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #11730 > 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 post2016-07-05 14:28 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 788 — 65 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi


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? 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? 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? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-17 10:51 +0200
        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 15:32 +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? 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? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 11:28 +0000
                      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? 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? 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? 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? 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? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-04 09:01 -0500
                                    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? 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: 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: 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? 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: 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? 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: 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? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-06 12:05 +0200
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-06 11:41 +0100
                                            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-06 08:59 -0400
                                      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? 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? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2016-07-05 16:33 +0000
                                  Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-05 18:16 +0000
                                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? 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? 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, 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? "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? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-03 20:25 +0100
                          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? "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? 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? 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? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-02 14:08 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-02 12:27 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:34 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 16:57 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 06:23 -0400
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 12:06 +0100
              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? 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? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-07 17:33 +0200
                                    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? 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? 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? 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? Richard Ashbery <basura@invalid.addr.uk> - 2016-07-09 16:56 +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? 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? 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? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2016-07-12 01:47 +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? 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? 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? 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
                          OT was Re: Is it a lost cause? "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-14 12:09 +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? 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? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-16 13:42 +0200
                  Symbolics [Re: Is it a lost cause?] colonel_hack@yahoo.com - 2016-06-15 17:08 -0700
                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? "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? 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? 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? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-14 21:58 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 23:15 +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? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:39 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-14 13:53 -0400
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-14 18:17 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-14 21:50 +0300
                  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? 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? 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? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 11:16 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:40 +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? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-16 14:42 +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? 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 13:58 +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? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2016-06-18 15:19 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 14:35 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-18 16:50 +0200
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 16:58 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-18 19:09 +0200
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 13:11 +0200
                                    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? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-18 21:58 +0300
                                  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? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-18 11:17 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:25 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-18 17:04 +0100
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 18:31 +0000
                                      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? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-20 17:57 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 19:18 +0100
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 21:18 +0300
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-20 18:38 +0000
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-20 20:57 +0100
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 18:25 +0000
                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 20:17 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-20 19:41 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 20:52 +0100
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-06-20 23:02 +0300
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-03 06:01 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie <cdknospam@msn.com> - 2016-07-03 13:50 -0400
                                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-03 20:11 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-03 23:05 +0000
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-04 07:05 +0100
                                                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-07-05 12:56 +0200
                                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 12:54 +0100
                                                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 13:14 +0100
                                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-07-05 16:19 +0100
                                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-05 16:51 +0100
                                                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie <cdknospam@msn.com> - 2016-07-04 01:12 -0400
                                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-20 21:18 +0000
                                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-20 19:04 -0400
                                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-21 06:16 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-20 20:01 +0000
                                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-20 21:29 +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? "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? "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2016-06-18 10:47 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-18 10:38 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 18:52 -0400
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-19 10:55 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:58 -0500
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 15:37 -0500
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 21:07 +0000
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-17 22:27 +0000
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-18 10:06 +0200
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-18 12:31 +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 18:17 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 18:47 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-19 12:13 +0200
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-19 08:10 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-19 10:59 +0000
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-06-19 18:13 +0100
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2016-06-21 03:09 +0000
                        Re: Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 19:59 +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? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-17 17:40 +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? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 22:25 -0400
                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-18 10:56 -0400
                              Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 19:00 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-18 19:33 -0400
                                Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-19 10:46 +0100
                                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-19 10:51 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-19 12:30 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-19 13:03 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-19 16:32 +0000
                                        Re: Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-19 17:17 +0000
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:19 +0100
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-20 07:53 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> - 2016-06-19 18:44 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-19 21:08 +0100
                                          Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-20 11:16 +0000
                                            Re: Is it a lost cause? David Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-06-20 15:26 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-20 16:44 +0100
                                              Re: Is it a lost cause? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-20 20:07 +0000
                                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-19 18:32 +0000
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-19 19:35 +0100
                                      Re: Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-19 19:33 +0000
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-06-14 12:34 -0400
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-14 22:12 +0200
                      Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-14 21:33 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 07:23 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-15 13:05 +0000
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 14:15 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:50 +0100
            Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:07 +0100
              Re: Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-14 15:45 +0000
                Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 16:51 +0100
                  Re: Is it a lost cause? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-15 07:58 +0100
                    Re: Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-15 08:41 +0000
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 08:46 +0100
        Re: Is it a lost cause? "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 06:31 -0400
    Re: Is it a lost cause? Steve Drain <steve@kappa.me.uk> - 2016-06-15 12:08 +0100
      Re: Is it a lost cause? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:36 +0100
    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-04 21:31 +0000
      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:16 +0000
        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-05 15:42 +0000
          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-05 17:54 +0000
            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-05 18:33 +0000
              Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-06 01:14 +0000
                Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-06 07:19 +0000
    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-04 21:42 +0000
    Re: stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-04 21:47 +0000
    Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-04 17:55 -0400
      Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 02:46 +0000
        Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-05 08:58 +0100
          Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-05 07:54 -0700
            Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-05 15:43 -0700
          Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 11:57 -0400
            Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-05 16:06 +0000
              Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 14:05 -0400
                Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-07-05 13:24 -0500
                  Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 14:29 -0400
                    Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 19:59 +0000
                Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-05 18:31 +0000
                  Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 15:32 -0400
                    Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-05 20:05 +0000
                      Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-07-05 22:36 -0400
                        Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-06 07:14 +0000
                        Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-07-06 07:59 +0000
                  Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 19:59 +0000
                    Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-05 20:05 +0000
                Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-07-05 19:57 +0000
          Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:16 +0000
            Re: S/360 stacks, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-07-05 15:38 -0700
      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Dennis <dennis@none.none> - 2016-07-04 19:55 -0500
        Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-07-05 12:46 -0500
          Re: 360 architecture, was self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> - 2016-07-05 21:11 +0000
          Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-05 20:32 -0400
            Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-07-06 07:20 +0000
      Re: self-modifying code, Is it a lost cause? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-05 14:28 +0000

Page 29 of 40 — ← Prev page 1 … 27 28 [29] 30 31 … 40  Next page →


#11982

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-16 13:34 +0100
Message-ID<nju6cv$ju9$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#11979
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>>
>>>> QED
>>>
>>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>>> someone
>>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to 
>>> volunteer
>>> if
>>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>>> application as something I had experience in.
>>
>> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
>> in assembler can fit in anywhere.
>
> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
> layers.

I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

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


#11984

FromAndy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com>
Date2016-06-16 07:49 -0500
Message-ID<slrnnm582o.kda.andyl@azaal.plus.com>
In reply to#11982
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:34:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
>>
>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

So how does knowing assembler (any kind) help you write and optimise SQL? 
Help you design a relational object model?

-- 
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
   - Douglas Adams

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


#12001

From"Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date2016-06-17 12:26 +0100
Message-ID<op.yi68qtwomsr2db@dell3100.dlink.com>
In reply to#11982
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:34:37 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339  
<no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...

>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

When everybody around you acts as a 5 year old child, ask yourself, "Do I  
project myself as an arrogant know it all?"

[fu afc only]

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

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


#12002

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Message-ID<PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#11982
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>>>> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>>>> > "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> >> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>>>> >> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>>>> > None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>>>> > the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>>>
>>>>> QED
>>>>
>>>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>>>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>>>> someone
>>>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>>>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to
>>>> volunteer
>>>> if
>>>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>>>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>>>> application as something I had experience in.
>>>
>>> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
>>> in assembler can fit in anywhere.
>>
>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>> layers.
>
> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.

As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.


Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
out your thinking style yet.

/BAH

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


#12004

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-17 13:06 +0000
Message-ID<dsiavgFkqbiU72@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#12002
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 12:53:17 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:

>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
> 
> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.

But SKIP and JUMP are no-ops, aren't they?

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

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

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


#12006

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-17 14:10 +0100
Message-ID<nk0sr4$b9s$3@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#12002
On 17/06/16 13:53, jmfbahciv wrote:
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM0005356476570F46@aca40726.ipt.aol.com...
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:20160616085931.f25215e149ac75f3cf1584f7@eircom.net...
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 20:58:24 +0100
>>>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> "Ahem A Rivet's Shot" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:20160615171854.49d556ad8fc307257fd9f897@eircom.net...
>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:27:55 +0100
>>>>>>> "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> For how many of the language experiences and software paradigms
>>>>>>>> that you itemise did you undergo a formal training course?
>>>>>>> None of them after I left university. Generally I learned them on
>>>>>>> the job after being hired for the skills I already had.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> QED
>>>>>
>>>>> You have misunderstood. I was hired for jobs using skills I already
>>>>> had at the time I was hired, often enough there would be a need for
>>>>> someone
>>>>> on the team to absorb a new skill (not enough need to hire someone else
>>>>> with that skill) and often enough that would be me (I tended to
>>>>> volunteer
>>>>> if
>>>>> it interested me at all), after which of course I would become the local
>>>>> specialist in $skill and would mention it in my CV for the next job
>>>>> application as something I had experience in.
>>>>
>>>> You continue to confirm more and more that someone with a good grounding
>>>> in assembler can fit in anywhere.
>>>
>>> Not in data base management work.  That requires a different style of
>>> thinking.  A gray area is networking which is data base layers within
>>> layers.
>>
>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>
> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>
>
> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
> out your thinking style yet.

Style there is, but I see little evidence of thinking

>
> /BAH
>


-- 
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead 
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

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


#12018

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-17 20:11 +0100
Message-ID<nk1i1i$rmh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#12002
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>
>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>
> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>
> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
> out your thinking style yet.

I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
to dealing.


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


#12020

FromSteve Hall <sweet_stevie@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-17 19:42 +0000
Message-ID<nk1jr2$rbe$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#12018
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 20:11:43 +0100, gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:

> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>
>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>
>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>
>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>> out your thinking style yet.
> 
> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the
> hand,
> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
> to dealing.

You are ever-so-clever, Gareth xXx.


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


#12025

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-06-17 17:04 -0400
Message-ID<1970214532.487890187.973246.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#12018
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message 
> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>> 
>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>> 
>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>> out your thinking style yet.
> 
> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
> to dealing.
> 

Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to your
level.

-- 
Pete

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


#12027

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-17 22:54 +0100
Message-ID<nk1rif$svd$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#12025
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1970214532.487890187.973246.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>> out your thinking style yet.
>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
>> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the 
>> hand,
>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
>> to dealing.
> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to 
> your
> level.

Yes, it certainly seems that way.

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


#12044

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-18 10:48 +0000
Message-ID<dskn7pFkqbiU83@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#12025
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:04:23 -0400, Peter Flass wrote:

> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>> 
>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>> 
>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>> out your thinking style yet.
>> 
>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the
>> co-respondents in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to
>> be led by the hand,
>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am
>> used to dealing.
>> 
>> 
> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to
> your level.

LOL!



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

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

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


#12048

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-06-18 12:07 +0100
Message-ID<nk3a06$qk1$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#12044
On 18/06/16 11:48, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:04:23 -0400, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>>
>>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>>
>>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>>> out your thinking style yet.
>>>
>>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the
>>> co-respondents in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to
>>> be led by the hand,
>>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am
>>> used to dealing.
>>>
>>>
>> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to
>> your level.
>
> LOL!
>
>
>

"inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used to dealing."

I am sorry, this is something, up with which I will not put.

If you cannot construct a proper English sentence, what hope is there 
that you can construct valid PERL syntax?


-- 
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social 
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the 
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

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


#12049

FromBob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date2016-06-18 11:16 +0000
Message-ID<dskoriFkqbiU85@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#12048
On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 12:07:06 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 18/06/16 11:48, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:04:23 -0400, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>>>
>>>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>>>
>>>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't
>>>>> figured out your thinking style yet.
>>>>
>>>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the
>>>> co-respondents in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have
>>>> to be led by the hand,
>>>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am
>>>> used to dealing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to
>>> your level.
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>>
>>
>>
> "inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used to
> dealing."
> 
> I am sorry, this is something, up with which I will not put.
> 
> If you cannot construct a proper English sentence, what hope is there
> that you can construct valid PERL syntax?

Actually, the ability to write semi-gibberish probably helps with writing 
Perl!  :-)




-- 
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub 
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

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


#12053

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-18 12:40 +0100
Message-ID<nk3c0c$5fa$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#12049
"Bob Eager" <news0006@eager.cx> wrote in message 
news:dskoriFkqbiU85@mid.individual.net...
>
> Actually, the ability to write semi-gibberish probably helps with writing
> Perl!  :-)

Somewhere on the net is a list of English grammar rules where every
statement very cleverly breaks the rule it quotes, the apposite one
here being, "a preposition is not something you should end a sentence with"

"And do not start a sentence with a conjunction"  etc  etc


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


#12060

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-18 13:00 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005358CAE1691C1@aca4460c.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#12025
Peter Flass wrote:
> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>
>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>
>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>> out your thinking style yet.
>>
>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
>> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
>> to dealing.
>>
>
> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to your
> level.
>
<grin>

/BAH

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


#12073

FromPeter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date2016-06-18 11:49 -0400
Message-ID<1101022687.487957665.542800.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#12060
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass wrote:
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>> 
>>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>> 
>>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>>> out your thinking style yet.
>>> 
>>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
>>> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
>>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
>>> to dealing.
>>> 
>> 
>> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to your
>> level.
>> 
> <grin>
> 

I am always astonished, not only by the varied computer experience of
people here but also by the wide range of non-computer interests exhibited.

-- 
Pete

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


#12079

From"gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Date2016-06-18 17:10 +0100
Message-ID<nk3rq2$sh2$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#12073
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:1101022687.487957665.542800.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org...
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to 
>>> your
>>> level.
>>
>
> I am always astonished, not only by the varied computer experience of
> people here but also by the wide range of non-computer interests 
> exhibited.

Anybody who is considering counselling really needs their head examined.

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


#12124

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-19 13:31 +0000
Message-ID<PM000535A145C87EB6@aca400e1.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#12073
Peter Flass wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Peter Flass wrote:
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>>>
>>>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>>>
>>>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>>>> out your thinking style yet.
>>>>
>>>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
>>>> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the
hand,
>>>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
>>>> to dealing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, I guess you'll just have to look elsewhere to find people up to
your
>>> level.
>>>
>> <grin>
>>
>
> I am always astonished, not only by the varied computer experience of
> people here but also by the wide range of non-computer interests exhibited.
>
Yea.  It's almost like my workplace.

/BAH

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


#12059

Fromjmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date2016-06-18 12:59 +0000
Message-ID<PM0005358CA9BCAA94@aca4460c.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to#12018
gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>
>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>
>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>
>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>> out your thinking style yet.
>
> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
> to dealing.

then you seriously have to reexamine your assumptions.

/BAH

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


#12105

FromJimP <solosam90@gmail.com>
Date2016-06-18 16:05 -0500
Message-ID<msdbmb5vnbqibgfq2idegfiovbe2mqp2lp@4ax.com>
In reply to#12059
On 18 Jun 2016 12:59:54 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:

>gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:PM00053578E371E0F0@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com...
>>> gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have taken both of those areas in my stride.
>>>
>>> As in HOP, SKIP and JUMP?  ;-)  It's a joke, son.
>>>
>>> Possibly.  You don't have an OS style of thinking.  I haven't figured
>>> out your thinking style yet.
>>
>> I get the increasing impression that large numbers of the co-respondents
>> in these NG are run-of-the-mill programmers who have to be led by the hand,
>> and are not inspirational and excitable polymaths such as with I am used
>> to dealing.
>
>then you seriously have to reexamine your assumptions.
>
>/BAH

Hold himself acountable for his own attitude ? Not likely.

-- 
JimP.

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


Page 29 of 40 — ← Prev page 1 … 27 28 [29] 30 31 … 40  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.raspberry-pi


csiph-web