The true definition of "linux"... - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on The true definition of "linux"... - Ubuntu ; ray wrote: > > ...Strange - you can't count time either! Who is counting??? I could have pulled it together > without even consulting a dictionary, Who said I used a dictionary? however it is a rather juvenile > exercise ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 85

Thread: The true definition of "linux"...

  1. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    ray wrote:

    >
    > ...Strange - you can't count time either!


    Who is counting???

    I could have pulled it together
    > without even consulting a dictionary,


    Who said I used a dictionary?

    however it is a rather juvenile
    > exercise to begin with.


    This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    Frank

  2. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > >>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    > >
    > >
    > > I'm sure it didn't take you much more than 20 hours with the dictionary
    > > to come up with all those words!

    >
    > Try 30 seconds loser.


    It took you half a minute to come up with three common English words?

    You really are an asstard.


  3. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>Losers
    > >>In
    > >>Nostalgic
    > >>Unity &
    > >>Xenophobia
    > >>
    > >>Frank

    > >
    > >
    > > Aren't you funny.

    >
    > Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.


    You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".

    Yeah Mikey... you bad.

    Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
    non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
    reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
    di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
    Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
    https://www.mixmaster.it


  4. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:40:40 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

    > "lazy me" wrote in message
    > news:13rhr6gmjsleb53@news.supernews.com...


    >> Sounds like the Linux recovery tools... "It just might work, but don't
    >> count on it..."

    >
    > Well that's the trouble with caching stuff.. you never can be certain
    > under "fault" conditions only those you have foreseen and taken care of.
    > Some will never be taken care of as the three fold performance hit of
    > doing it properly can be a problem.


    With today's high-capacity hard drives I'm not sure it really matters
    any more. Life is so much simpler now that I have ample space to image
    my system partitions and archive anything else that's important.

    >>
    >> Here's something I stumbled across a while back:
    >>
    >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/maxview/
    >>
    >> I've never tried it and don't know anything about it except that it
    >> claims to be some kind of paperport workalike.

    >
    > I looked at that and its not very good ATM. My autofeed scanner doesn't
    > autofeed with it and it is not easy like paperport.


    Oh, well. Sorry that didn't help. Linux has so many
    document-management building blocks that I'm sure it's possible to
    combine a few to get the functionality you need. However, I'm more a
    technical guy and not familiar enough with its office-type software to
    make any specific suggestions. I can guess xsane as the scanning front
    end, and maybe Beagle for indexing and search. Don't recall the name
    but I've seen a program around that manages documents as a visual
    hierarchy. For that matter, Nautilus might be configured to handle the
    hierarchy if your documents are saved as files and you use a directory
    tree to organize them. If you wanted to go hog-wild you could set up
    MySQL as a document database, but personally I prefer to keep my files
    on the filesystem where they're easily accessed and manipulated by
    other programs.

    Things are becoming more Windows-like now with big all-purpose
    applications, but old-school Linux was all about small specialized
    applications that you combined like this to get what you needed. So
    instead of an all-around newsreader like Forte Agent it was common to
    use slrnpull or leafnode or INN to download and manage articles, slrn
    or tin or something else for browsing them, and any of a thousand
    editors for editing messages. Not as smoothly integrated as an
    all-in-one package, but OTOH you get to select and tailor the
    individual pieces from an array of choices. To me this is a normal and
    preferred way of working, but having to use three programs to do "one"
    thing drives Windows refugees nuts.

    >> The reason I used Windows 2000 is that it doesn't use WPA. XP and Vista
    >> are a PITA in VM's because you tend to change the simulated hardware a
    >> lot, expand or shrink HD space, enable/disable networking "cards", etc.
    >> Eventually Windows XP/Vista accuses you of being a pirate and then
    >> essentially disables itself until MS decides to let you keep using the
    >> product you've already paid for. I hear MS has relented a little but
    >> they could also change it back again any time they want. This annoying
    >> phone-home-for-approval behavior is built into XP and Vista, but it's
    >> not built into Win2K.

    >
    > I have heard of that but it hasn't happened to me despite changing the
    > RAM and HDD in my machine. I guess I am lucky.


    It's more of a problem on VM's because changing "hardware" is just a
    matter of popping up a menu and ticking off a checkbox. Also you tend
    to start conservatively with a small virtual hard drive to save space
    on your real one, then as you keep adding stuff to the VM you have to
    enlarge it. And if you copy a VM and try to run it alongside the
    original, the VM software usually insists on giving it a different MAC
    addresse.

    >> IMO virtualbox is the best bet for running a VM because, unlike the
    >> free version of VMware, it provides a simple dialog for allowing the OS
    >> running in the VM to access directories on the host OS. However, none
    >> of the open-source versions of virtualbox, including the ones in
    >> Synaptic, have USB support. The closed-source versions does and it's
    >> still free except to businesses. You can get it at
    >> http://www.virtualbox.org. Installation is child's play, especially if
    >> you RTFM (which, of course, I didn't do until everything was already
    >> working).

    >
    > I have run ubuntu in M$ vpc quite well. Not brilliant graphics but this
    > is a notebook anyway.


    I'm not familiar with VPC, but with most VM software you have to
    install a special VM driver package to get decent graphics out of the
    guest OS. If VPC doesn't offer anything like that for Linux, you might
    want to try one of the other VM offerings.

    > Ubuntu doesn't like vpc out of the box and screws up but there are some
    > detailed instructions on the M$ site that tells you what to add to the
    > boot config so it works as it should. It appears to be a ubuntu problem
    > as other linux distros don't need fixing but it doesn't matter as it
    > only requires another reboot and a bit of file editing to fix.


    Ubuntu works fine in all the VM programs I've tried, so I'd say it's
    vpc's problem rather than Ubuntu's. But then, Microsoft made it clear
    early on that you shouldn't try to run Linux in a vpc.


  5. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    George Orwell wrote:

    > Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Losers
    >>>>In
    >>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>Unity &
    >>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>
    >>>>Frank
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Aren't you funny.

    >>
    >>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    >
    >
    > You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".


    hehehe...and you sound like the idiot you are!

    >
    > Yeah Mikey... you bad.


    Yeah, go play with your minkie...LOL!
    Frank

  6. Re: The true definition of "linux"...



    "lazy me" wrote in message
    news:13rjlesll90hf24@news.supernews.com...
    > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 08:40:40 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> "lazy me" wrote in message
    >> news:13rhr6gmjsleb53@news.supernews.com...

    >
    >>> Sounds like the Linux recovery tools... "It just might work, but don't
    >>> count on it..."

    >>
    >> Well that's the trouble with caching stuff.. you never can be certain
    >> under "fault" conditions only those you have foreseen and taken care of.
    >> Some will never be taken care of as the three fold performance hit of
    >> doing it properly can be a problem.

    >
    > With today's high-capacity hard drives I'm not sure it really matters
    > any more. Life is so much simpler now that I have ample space to image
    > my system partitions and archive anything else that's important.
    >
    >>>
    >>> Here's something I stumbled across a while back:
    >>>
    >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/maxview/
    >>>
    >>> I've never tried it and don't know anything about it except that it
    >>> claims to be some kind of paperport workalike.

    >>
    >> I looked at that and its not very good ATM. My autofeed scanner doesn't
    >> autofeed with it and it is not easy like paperport.

    >
    > Oh, well. Sorry that didn't help. Linux has so many
    > document-management building blocks that I'm sure it's possible to
    > combine a few to get the functionality you need. However, I'm more a
    > technical guy and not familiar enough with its office-type software to
    > make any specific suggestions. I can guess xsane as the scanning front
    > end, and maybe Beagle for indexing and search. Don't recall the name
    > but I've seen a program around that manages documents as a visual
    > hierarchy. For that matter, Nautilus might be configured to handle the
    > hierarchy if your documents are saved as files and you use a directory
    > tree to organize them. If you wanted to go hog-wild you could set up
    > MySQL as a document database, but personally I prefer to keep my files
    > on the filesystem where they're easily accessed and manipulated by
    > other programs.


    If it were a company system I might do something but its just my bills and
    stuff so its not really worth the effort. It would certainly cost me much
    more in time than the solution I am using (i.e. more than a couple of
    hours).

    >
    > Things are becoming more Windows-like now with big all-purpose
    > applications, but old-school Linux was all about small specialized
    > applications that you combined like this to get what you needed. So
    > instead of an all-around newsreader like Forte Agent it was common to
    > use slrnpull or leafnode or INN to download and manage articles, slrn
    > or tin or something else for browsing them, and any of a thousand
    > editors for editing messages. Not as smoothly integrated as an
    > all-in-one package, but OTOH you get to select and tailor the
    > individual pieces from an array of choices. To me this is a normal and
    > preferred way of working, but having to use three programs to do "one"
    > thing drives Windows refugees nuts.


    The big apps are being driven by the people that think they need to crush
    M$. Shame really as there are many things they could do to make linux much
    better rather than re-inventing another wheel^w window manager.

    >
    >>> The reason I used Windows 2000 is that it doesn't use WPA. XP and Vista
    >>> are a PITA in VM's because you tend to change the simulated hardware a
    >>> lot, expand or shrink HD space, enable/disable networking "cards", etc.
    >>> Eventually Windows XP/Vista accuses you of being a pirate and then
    >>> essentially disables itself until MS decides to let you keep using the
    >>> product you've already paid for. I hear MS has relented a little but
    >>> they could also change it back again any time they want. This annoying
    >>> phone-home-for-approval behavior is built into XP and Vista, but it's
    >>> not built into Win2K.

    >>
    >> I have heard of that but it hasn't happened to me despite changing the
    >> RAM and HDD in my machine. I guess I am lucky.

    >
    > It's more of a problem on VM's because changing "hardware" is just a
    > matter of popping up a menu and ticking off a checkbox. Also you tend
    > to start conservatively with a small virtual hard drive to save space
    > on your real one, then as you keep adding stuff to the VM you have to
    > enlarge it. And if you copy a VM and try to run it alongside the
    > original, the VM software usually insists on giving it a different MAC
    > addresse.


    If you get Vista SP1 it is supposed to remove most of that stuff.
    I can't really try it as there are a limited number of things I can change.

    >
    >>> IMO virtualbox is the best bet for running a VM because, unlike the
    >>> free version of VMware, it provides a simple dialog for allowing the OS
    >>> running in the VM to access directories on the host OS. However, none
    >>> of the open-source versions of virtualbox, including the ones in
    >>> Synaptic, have USB support. The closed-source versions does and it's
    >>> still free except to businesses. You can get it at
    >>> http://www.virtualbox.org. Installation is child's play, especially if
    >>> you RTFM (which, of course, I didn't do until everything was already
    >>> working).

    >>
    >> I have run ubuntu in M$ vpc quite well. Not brilliant graphics but this
    >> is a notebook anyway.

    >
    > I'm not familiar with VPC, but with most VM software you have to
    > install a special VM driver package to get decent graphics out of the
    > guest OS. If VPC doesn't offer anything like that for Linux, you might
    > want to try one of the other VM offerings.
    >
    >> Ubuntu doesn't like vpc out of the box and screws up but there are some
    >> detailed instructions on the M$ site that tells you what to add to the
    >> boot config so it works as it should. It appears to be a ubuntu problem
    >> as other linux distros don't need fixing but it doesn't matter as it
    >> only requires another reboot and a bit of file editing to fix.

    >
    > Ubuntu works fine in all the VM programs I've tried, so I'd say it's
    > vpc's problem rather than Ubuntu's. But then, Microsoft made it clear
    > early on that you shouldn't try to run Linux in a vpc.
    >


    M$ have linux tools that make managing linux in VPC easier so they are
    supporting linux, maybe not ubuntu?


  7. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >
    >
    >> ...Strange - you can't count time either!

    >
    > Who is counting???
    >
    > I could have pulled it together
    >> without even consulting a dictionary,

    >
    > Who said I used a dictionary?
    >
    > however it is a rather juvenile
    >> exercise to begin with.

    >
    > This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    > Frank


    Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

  8. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    ray wrote:
    > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>...Strange - you can't count time either!

    >>
    >>Who is counting???
    >>
    >> I could have pulled it together
    >>
    >>>without even consulting a dictionary,

    >>
    >>Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>
    >>however it is a rather juvenile
    >>
    >>>exercise to begin with.

    >>
    >>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>Frank

    >
    >
    > Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.


    Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!
    Frank

  9. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:55:59 -0800, Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>ray wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    >>>
    >>>Who is counting???
    >>>
    >>> I could have pulled it together
    >>>
    >>>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    >>>
    >>>Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>>
    >>>however it is a rather juvenile
    >>>
    >>>>exercise to begin with.
    >>>
    >>>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>>Frank

    >>
    >>
    >> Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

    >
    > Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!
    > Frank


    Hardly - you don't see me whimpering like a baby.

  10. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>ray wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    > >>
    > >>Who is counting???
    > >>
    > >> I could have pulled it together
    > >>
    > >>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    > >>
    > >>Who said I used a dictionary?
    > >>
    > >>however it is a rather juvenile
    > >>
    > >>>exercise to begin with.
    > >>
    > >>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    > >>Frank

    > >
    > >
    > > Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

    >
    > Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!


    Do you honestly believe what you're doing resembles "payback"?

    *chuckle*

    Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
    non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
    reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
    di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
    Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
    https://www.mixmaster.it


  11. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    ray wrote:
    > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:55:59 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    >>>>
    >>>>Who is counting???
    >>>>
    >>>> I could have pulled it together
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    >>>>
    >>>>Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>>>
    >>>>however it is a rather juvenile
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>exercise to begin with.
    >>>>
    >>>>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>>>Frank
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

    >>
    >>Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!
    >>Frank

    >
    >
    > Hardly - you don't see me whimpering like a baby.


    hehehe...you didn't even have to duck to miss that one..LOL!
    Frank

  12. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    George Orwell wrote:

    > Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    >>>>
    >>>>Who is counting???
    >>>>
    >>>> I could have pulled it together
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    >>>>
    >>>>Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>>>
    >>>>however it is a rather juvenile
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>exercise to begin with.
    >>>>
    >>>>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>>>Frank
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

    >>
    >>Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!

    >
    >
    > Do you honestly believe what you're doing resembles "payback"?


    Hahaha...well I'm eliciting the response I wanted.
    Bigger *chuckle*
    Frank

  13. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > George Orwell wrote:
    >
    > > Frank wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>ray wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Losers
    > >>>>In
    > >>>>Nostalgic
    > >>>>Unity &
    > >>>>Xenophobia
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Frank
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>Aren't you funny.
    > >>
    > >>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    > >
    > >
    > > You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".

    >
    > hehehe...and you sound like the idiot you are!


    Why don't you just go with "momma" jokes, lamer?

    Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
    non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
    reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
    di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
    Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
    https://www.mixmaster.it


  14. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    George Orwell wrote:
    > Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>George Orwell wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Losers
    >>>>>>In
    >>>>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>>>Unity &
    >>>>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Frank
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Aren't you funny.
    >>>>
    >>>>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".

    >>
    >>hehehe...and you sound like the idiot you are!

    >
    >
    > Why don't you just go with "momma" jokes, lamer?


    You tell me...lamer...seeing as how I have not idea what you're
    referring to.
    Frank

  15. Re: The true definition of "linux"...



    ray wrote:
    > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >> ray wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> ...Strange - you can't count time either!

    >> Who is counting???
    >>
    >> I could have pulled it together
    >>> without even consulting a dictionary,

    >> Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>
    >> however it is a rather juvenile
    >>> exercise to begin with.

    >> This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >> Frank

    >
    > Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.




    I don't know why you keep egging him on. On the other ng that I see him
    Alias is the main one to do so. If you would ignore him he would
    dissipate like a fart.
    caver1

  16. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > George Orwell wrote:
    >
    > > Frank wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>ray wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>ray wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Who is counting???
    > >>>>
    > >>>> I could have pulled it together
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Who said I used a dictionary?
    > >>>>
    > >>>>however it is a rather juvenile
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>exercise to begin with.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    > >>>>Frank
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.
    > >>
    > >>Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!

    > >
    > >
    > > Do you honestly believe what you're doing resembles "payback"?

    >
    > Hahaha...well I'm eliciting the response I wanted.


    You like being spanked?

    > Bigger *chuckle*
    > Frank



  17. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Nomen Nescio wrote:

    > Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>George Orwell wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>...Strange - you can't count time either!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Who is counting???
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I could have pulled it together
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>without even consulting a dictionary,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>however it is a rather juvenile
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>exercise to begin with.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>>>>>Frank
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.
    >>>>
    >>>>Paybacks a bitch isn't it...LOL!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Do you honestly believe what you're doing resembles "payback"?

    >>
    >>Hahaha...well I'm eliciting the response I wanted.

    >
    >
    > You like being spanked?
    >

    You like having your nuts crushed?

    Bigger *chuckle*
    Frank

  18. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    caver1 wrote:

    >
    >
    > ray wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:15:05 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>> ray wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> ...Strange - you can't count time either!
    >>>
    >>> Who is counting???
    >>>
    >>> I could have pulled it together
    >>>
    >>>> without even consulting a dictionary,
    >>>
    >>> Who said I used a dictionary?
    >>>
    >>> however it is a rather juvenile
    >>>
    >>>> exercise to begin with.
    >>>
    >>> This entire ng is rather juvenile.
    >>> Frank

    >>
    >>
    >> Fine - leave - then it will be much less so.

    >
    >
    >
    >
    > I don't know why you keep egging him on.


    Sheer stupidity...LOL!

    On the other ng that I see him
    > Alias is the main one to do so.


    Another fukkin lying linux troll.

    If you would ignore him he would
    > dissipate like a fart.


    In your dreams?
    Frank



  19. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank wrote:

    > George Orwell wrote:
    > > Frank wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>George Orwell wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>Frank wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>ray wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>Losers
    > >>>>>>In
    > >>>>>>Nostalgic
    > >>>>>>Unity &
    > >>>>>>Xenophobia
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>Frank
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>Aren't you funny.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".
    > >>
    > >>hehehe...and you sound like the idiot you are!

    > >
    > >
    > > Why don't you just go with "momma" jokes, lamer?

    >
    > You tell me...lamer...seeing as how I have not idea what you're
    > referring to.


    How rhetorically, ironic.

    > Frank



  20. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Nomen Nescio wrote:

    > Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>George Orwell wrote:
    >>
    >>>Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>George Orwell wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Frank wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>ray wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Losers
    >>>>>>>>In
    >>>>>>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>>>>>Unity &
    >>>>>>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Frank
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Aren't you funny.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>You sound just like Michael Jackson singing "Bad".
    >>>>
    >>>>hehehe...and you sound like the idiot you are!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Why don't you just go with "momma" jokes, lamer?

    >>
    >>You tell me...lamer...seeing as how I have not idea what you're
    >>referring to.

    >
    >
    > How rhetorically, ironic.
    >
    >
    >>Frank

    >
    >

    hahaha...translation: you have no fukkin idea...LOL!
    Freakin lamer loser!
    Frank

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast