Message: 62095
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul
Date: 11/10/89 Time: 21:10:04
Re: ""my husband/wife doesn't understand me", or "I knew it was wrong, but
just couldn't control myself""
You left out "The devil made me do it!" :-)
Message: 62096
Author: Mike Carter
Category: War!
Subject: Cliff
Date: 11/10/89 Time: 22:19:40
Your feeble attempts at reason by equipping your message with personal
attacks only prove your inability to listen..which is important when
you attempt to reason using rational english.
Calling me an asshole, saying things are over my head and inferring
I am stupid is your way of getting people to like your posts...and
understand your arguments.
It seems what little you listen to of the posts gets you into angry fits
of rage. This limits you considerably.
I wonder how much you prentend to know about the bible and what it has to
say about interactions with people.
Keep your hate to yourself. Spread it around on this BBS if you so desire.
But don't ever expect me to respect your posts when they contain such
brash statements and lies so easily typed by your mentality.
Message: 62098
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last..
Date: 11/10/89 Time: 23:56:42
Like Wow! Sorry.... I do not hate Smokers... just the smoke!
To some...when their drive is down...their computer is down...but
Mike is basicly correct. Smoke has never killed a Z-80, 6809, 8088, and
other CPU ICs to date that I know of...
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
P.S. Mike...if I NEVER listen, then WHY did I change the wording of the
ote? You got me wrong partner, I do listen! ("sometimes" in very small
print)
Message: 62099
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Vote
Subject: Adultery
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 01:16:43
The only fair way to settle this is with a vote, where
people can anonymously state their opinion on it. Here is
a suggested set of choices:
Do you commit adultery, and if so why?
(1) I commit adultery because my husband/wife doesn't understand me.
(2) I commit adultery because I can't help it, even though it is wrong.
(3) I have not committed adultery, and don't mind saying so.
(4) I have not committed adultery, and wish I had the chance to.
(5) I do not accept the judgement of the church or the state or
any other curious interloper upon sexual activities between
consenting adults. As such, I find this question unreasonable
and declare that it is none of your business where any of
my activies might fall under your little classifications for
other people's private lives.
(6) None Of The Above
Message: 62100
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: Vote
Subject: Above
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 02:12:44
How come you left out "I do not commit adultry"? Do you assume that
everyone does?
========= Pascal #(u,u)# Yawn! MacProgrammer =========
Message: 62101
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: smoke/computers
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 02:51:41
I have never come across a mainframe facility which allows smoking, and not
merely because of employee health.
Message: 62102
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: On the Lighter Side
Subject: great shirt mystery
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 02:58:38
As for comparative anatomy, where would that make a difference -- unless the
pocket was situated directly over the cleavage.
And I'm sure she's very intelligent, James. Is that supposed to be
relevant, or some sort of bon mot which has flown over my head?
Message: 62103
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: adultery
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 04:41:03
Dean, that sounds like a good vote. After this smoking vote blows over (get
it?), I think Cliff should put it up.
However, you forgot choice 7:
<7> I do not commit adultery, but plan to take it up as soon as I get
married.
Message: 62104
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff Beck
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 04:48:06
Actually, my sister has three breasts. THAT's how it was done.
(And I hope this whole burn-hole/cleavage/my sister's I.Q. debate doesn't
escalate into something nasty between you and Hawley.)
My sister would probably think this whole discussion (get it?) is pretty
weird. Right now she's alive and well in Albuquerque, and she still has the
shirt in question -- hole and all. After she burned my shirt, she bought me
a similar one, and kept the original.
Message: 62105
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ThornBob
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 05:03:45
So those are your criteria for a good, non-biased documentary on MLK? OK.
And if they don't mention any one of the items you mentioned, I guess we'll
all have completely wasted our time, right? Gosh, I never realized the
substantial RISK involved -- it's rather exciting!
Message: 62106
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: "Cures"
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 05:33:27
Lung cancer cures smoking.
AIDS cures homosexuality.
Venereal diseases cure promiscuity.
Child abuse cures healthy nurturing.
Heart attacks cure stress.
Sex cures virginity.
Decapitation cures blindness.
BBSes cure creativity.
Liver schlerrosis cures alcoholism.
Fatal overdoses cure drug addiction.
Religion cures reality.
Genital dismemberment cures rapists.
Divorce cures adultery.
Deafness cures heavy metal.
Sarcasm cures sincerity.
Flatulence cures crowds.
Indiscriminate love cures friendship.
JT cures secrecy.
Theft cures wealth.
Racism cures equality.
Professional wrestling cures intelligence.
Top-40 cures talent.
Time cures infatuation.
Death cures life.
Message: 62107
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/last
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 06:42:18
"Flatulence cures crowds"??? hahahahahahahahahaha. Oh your at it again Zakey
Baby. Funnier than hell! You could have narrowed down your list however by
stating that death cures ALL of it. Of course, it wouldn't be as funny!
hahahahahahahah -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62108
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Mike on Cliff
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 06:44:25
I don't think Cliff is any different than the rest of us voicing his
opinions about smoking or otherwise. We all raise our voices and lower them
later. I also never got the opinion that he hated all smokers either. He
doesn't hate me. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62109
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: All
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 06:48:15
Is anyone out there playing the new game SimCity? If so, lets discuss it.
-=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62110
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Vote
Subject: the ideas...
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 07:05:34
I like the ideas submitted for a ote question... I will go with
Dean's posted question as is, unless he wishes to update it with all these
great suggestions.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62111
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Smoking?
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 07:16:38
Sorry if ANYONE feels offended.... I do NOT hate smokers... There
are even POLITE smokers out there that I have NO problems with. Then there
are those that are rude. But that is life. I guess I should not put any
VIGOR in my arguments about such things as smoking. Sometimes when you lose
someone you cared for to a disease caused by smoking, you get carried away
with emotion. For this I am sorry.
I just feel so helpless and sad... I do NOT wish to loose anymore
friends.... Sniff (tm)
I will draw my arguments to a conclusion, and as Zak put it, "let it
blow over" ha ha ha ha..... (hard to laugh when one hurts)
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62112
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Shooting range...
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 19:15:57
I went out today to just do a practice IQC and an AQC....
I am getting better and better... Watch out Sandy! he he he
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62113
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:17:00
Re: "The only fair way to settle this is with a vote"
I'd like to vote on the question, but I don't feel comfortable with any of
the 6 options. How about this option, "I think adultery is morally wrong,
and I never want to do it."
Hmmmmm. Maybe that's not quite right either. How about this, "I think
adultery is morally wrong, and I hope I never get entangled in it."
How's that sound?
Message: 62114
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:19:27
Re: "I have never come across a mainframe facility which allows smoking"
That's not so uncommon anymore. I work at 3 different stations that do not
allow smoking anywhere in the entire building. If you want to smoke, you
must go outside. One even provides an ash tray right out the back door.
Message: 62115
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:21:01
Re: "unless the pocket was situated directly over the cleavage"
Maybe she wears an iron bra?
Message: 62116
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:28:35
Re: "I guess we'll
all have completely wasted our time, right?"
No, I don't think it would be a waste of our time. The point I was trying
to make was, if the file only accentuates the positive and eliminates the
negative, it falls under the heading of propaganda and not documentary. All
the facts should be presented, good and bad. When any person comes into a
special position, whether it be spouse, president, or holiday, the whole
truth should be known. I don't like it when all the skeletons come piling
out of the closet after the fact.
Message: 62117
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:29:48
Re: "all the cures"
How about "war cures peace".
Message: 62118
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak's list
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 20:40:45
More than a few of those are quite close to home, eh, Zak???
Message: 62119
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Bob T./62114
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 23:34:25
Well, naturally I was refering to smoking within the computer room(s).
Message: 62120
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak/62104
Date: 11/11/89 Time: 23:39:09
KILL!!!!!!!!!
(just kidding). What's to escalate?
Message: 62121
Author: $ Peter Petrisko
Category: Tales & Tall Stories
Subject: WAR
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 04:37:14
"It wasn't that Hitler was a bad man," Mitch started to explain, "he
just went a little crazy. He got a little power hungry, you understand?" I
nodded as Mitch and I drove past the alley by Gilmour High.
It was only a few months ago when I transferred to GHS and fell in with
Mitch. He was kind of a loner too, kept to himself mostly. We were
assigned to each other as lab partners, and started hanging out. When I
first went over to his house, he showed me some pamphlets he had laying
around, about communism. Some bad shit there, I had to agree with him. He
told me how his dad once kicked the shit out of a communist when the bastard
tried to burn an american flag. That sick commie deserved it.
Of course, it wasn't just the communists anymore. If Mitch had his
way, he said, we'd split the country straight down the middle. "It's the
only way it could work," he said, "the races weren't meant to mix. It's not
that the niggers and spicks are inferior or anything, we just aren't made to
get along. You understand?"
Mitch knew this dream would never come true on its own. "People need
to wake up." he explained a few days ago. "The point needs to be driven
home." After reading those pamphlets and listening to him all these months,
I couldn't help but agree. After all, a few years back my older brother was
shot by a black guy. This guy thought my brother had sold his buddies bad
crack, and just drove by and shot him. My brother didn't even deal drugs.
When I told Mitch about my brother, he said, "It's those niggers and spicks
in those gangs that are selling drugs and wasting people."
We parked the car about a block from the alley. Mitch said earlier
this was my initiation into the inner circle. After this, the real war
would start and we'd make things happen. I headed towards the alley, while
Mitch got a gas can out of the trunk. In the alley, we found 'Leroy' asleep
on a pile of garbage. We didn't know what his name really was, but he slept
in the alley by GHS and we'd hit him up for cigarettes and shit during
lunch, even though we knew he didn't have any. There he was sleeping like a
baby, an empty bottle of Night Train under his arm. "Lazy nigger," Mitch
mumbled as he poured gasoline onto the bum's clothes.
"You gotta have a first kill. This is war, you understand?" Mitch
turned and said to me. I pulled the matches out of my pocket, and lit one.
I threw it at the guy, and a moment later the blood-curdling screams
started, as the black man ran, lighting up the night sky.
Mitch started after him, pulling a cigarette out of his shirt pocket,
laughing hysterically about how he needed a light real bad.
I sunk to the ground, telling myself I was doing this to save the white
race.
(Just a little something I wrote a few hours before my reading at the Alwun
House last weekend. If you saw this week's New Times, you know the Alwun
House needs your support more than ever. Support local art - support
Alwun.)
Message: 62123
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/smoking regs
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 05:25:51
Computer and electronic oriented establishments are not the only places
that prohibit smoking Bob. THere is no smoking allowed anywhere on the
workroom floor of the Main Post Office, and I know of several postal
substations where the same rule is in effect. Many other workplaces who care
about the health and welfare of their employees are also establishing
smoking restrictions.
Message: 62124
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: various
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 06:14:52
On CURES: People, feel free to add your own. "War cures peace" isn't bad.
I forgot to add "Pornography cures curiosity." Beauregard, a few of those
hit close to home, but not "more than a few."
PETER: Nice story. Like many of my own stories, I wish it had an ending.
THORNBOB: I too hope it's not propaganda-ish. We'll see. However, from
what I've read, it's mostly a compilation of news footage and speeches that
happened during MLK's life. Was his sex life well-publicized then, or did
it come out in the open a while after he died? If the latter, this
documentary (made in 1970) may fall into your propaganda category.
Message: 62125
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Question?
Subject: Brain teaser
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 06:34:07
OK, folks, it's puzzle time. If you don't like puzzles, please abort this
message NOW. ---------------
There were three candidates for the job of Dean of Students. The person who
had to choose one of the three applicants for the job devised a test to see
which of the three was smartest. The test is as follows:
All three people were placed in a room together and blindfolded. While
they were blindfolded, the test-maker drew a colored dot - either RED or
GREEN - on each applicant's forehead.
The blindfolds were removed.
The test-maker then asked the three of them, "Raise your hand if you
see a red dot." They all looked at each other, and all three of them raised
a hand.
The test-maker then asked: "OK, if you know what color YOUR forehead
is, please say so."
All three applicants hesitated.
Finally, one of the applicants responded, "The dot on my forehead is
red."
The test-maker said, "Terrific! You're right! You got the job!"
THE QUESTION IS: How did the correct-answering applicant know that his
forehead was red? The first correct answer wins a prize from Cliff.
[Hint: All three of the applicants' forehead-dots were RED.]
Message: 62126
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Last on Prize?
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 08:06:46
Zak got that wrong... the first correct answer GIVEs Cliff a prize!
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62127
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/the vote
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 08:42:33
How about "I don't believe in adultry if married and would never do it"?
Hmmm .. I wonder if a person can commit adultry if they arn't married??
Isn't that fornacation or something like that? -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62128
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Smoking
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 08:47:20
I read in the paper the other day that the prisoners of Yavapi county cannot
smoke after a certain date. (about a month from now) However, the guards and
prison faculty has a place where they can go to do so. (In the building)
I find this totally 'two faced'. Inhumane treatment. ha. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62129
Author: $ Todd Reese
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: War cures Peace?
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 11:04:23
Hardly. War IS Peace.
Message: 62130
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 14:53:33
Re: "Thornbob"
What's this? A new nick name?
Message: 62131
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 14:56:54
Re: "Adultery"
I stand corrected, but only if you are right.
Message: 62132
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: For sale
Subject: Coffee tables?
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 16:21:19
I am not sure if that is what they are really called... but I have
those two indian style tables with the tile inlay. The tops are two foot
square... Many of you have seen them over at my house in the lower level.
I believe they cost me about $150.00 each when new... I will part with them
for $75.00 each.
Sniff... Time for a change in furniture, they are for SALE!
The room looks a little larger without them... Need space for GTs'...
Yea, that's it! A noble cause...Get Togethers!
Give me a call if interested... 843-3346 Ask for SysOp Cliff.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62133
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Question?
Subject: Zak/puzzle
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 17:27:50
Is it even possible for him to have known? If two of the three had red
dots, and the third was unknown (from his own point of view), then he would
see one of the red dots on the other two, and raise his hand; the other
two, seeing red dots on each other, would also raise their hands. Thus, it
is theoretically impossible for any of the three to logically deduce his own
color -- based on your description.
Now then, go ahead and shoot me down.
Message: 62134
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Answer!
Subject: MacGregor
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 19:12:20
Hi,
I had two versions of 'I have not commited adultery', and a
'None of the Above', so I thought I had not commiting adultery
pretty well covered. I will post a new version and you can let me
know if it still doesn't work for you.
See You Later
Dean H.
Message: 62135
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Vote
Subject: Update
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 19:16:43
The only fair way to settle this is with a vote, where
people can anonymously state their opinion on it. Here is
a suggested set of choices:
Do you commit adultery, and if so why?
(1) I commit adultery because my husband/wife doesn't understand me.
(2) I commit adultery because I can't help it, but I feel it is wrong.
(3) I do not commit adultery.
(4) I do not commit adultery and I condemn anyone who does, no matter
what they may believe.
(5) I do not accept the judgement of the church or the state or
any other curious interloper upon sexual activities between
consenting adults. As such, I find this question unreasonable
and declare that it is none of your business where any of
my activies might fall under your little classifications for
other people's private lives.
(6) None Of The Above
Message: 62136
Author: Tim Tam
Category: News Today
Subject: Deuscthland...
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 19:31:16
Now that the Berlin Wall is down, let's hope we don't see a reunified
Germany once again.....judging from the number of neo Nazi's right here
in Phoenix, Arizona, there must be at least a few still left in Germany,
still faithful to their God, Martyr and Fuehrer Adolf Hitler, and once
we have a reunified Germany.....well, look what happened the last time!
So this is cause for celebration, but let's not get carried away!
Let's settle for a compromise....a free and democratic U.S.S.R.!!!
Message: 62137
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Vote
Subject: Old ote
Date: 11/12/89 Time: 19:42:44
Those who took the time to answer the poll...thanks
19 said they do NOT smoke.
2 said they do Smoke.
1 said they do smoke now, but plan to give it up by the end of the year.
I hope this is a trend...and smoking will be a thing of the past by
the turn of the century.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
P.S. However, I do not hate Mike Carter or Ann if they continue to smoke
for the next 80 years or so... I wish them well!
Message: 62138
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff Beck
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 04:54:26
I'm not going to shoot you down, but... YOU'RE WRONG!
Cliff, give this man $tatus and then put him in the hantom Zone!
There is a completely logical answer to the puzzle, by the way. In the
words of Kate Bush and Peter Gabriel, don't give up.
Message: 62139
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: ote
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 04:58:59
For those of us who are not married, and therefore not in a position to
commit adultery, do we respond with "I do not commit adultery" or "None of
the above"?
Message: 62140
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak's puzzle
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 05:44:52
The winning applicant knew that the other two dots were red, and he also
knew that each of the others saw his dot, and they also raised their hands.
Therefore, it was a safe assumption to say that his dot was also red.
Close?
Message: 62141
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 05:47:05
Hurray for Yavapai county sherriff's dept.!
They have more consideration for their prisoners than most smoking parents
have for their own children!
Message: 62142
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Todd on war
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 06:55:34
"War IS peace"??? That doesn't make sense. Please explain. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62143
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on tables
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 06:57:04
Remind me at the GT to look them over. I might be interested.
-=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62144
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff/the sm.vote
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 07:01:00
It really wan't a fair vote - you polled a 98% of non-smokers. On other
BBSes, the percentage is just the opposite in some cases. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62145
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul - you missed ..
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 07:03:24
... something! They keep the prisoners from smoking, but the faculity of the
prison still have the right to do so in the building. As I asked, isn't this
quite two faced? -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62146
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann on Smoke Vote
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 08:55:22
But this was a poll of Apollo's users... And you know we got the
smartest and the wisest users around.
For people like M.C., that was a JOKE
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62147
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Ann/Smoking
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 10:22:07
I read the article in the paper. You fail to mention the reasoning why the
prison decided to stop it. They had a prisoner make a homemade rocket out
of matches and start a small fire.
No matches=no smoking. And it is a prison after all. Should we let heroin
addicts shoot up in prison? Do we let alcoholics drink beer? No....
Message: 62148
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Paul/puzzle
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 16:18:54
No. The wording of the puzzle makes it clear that each applicant need only
see a red dot -- not two red dots -- in order to raise his hand. The other
two, each having red dots on their heads, would have had to raise their
hands even if the third man had a green dot, since they would have seen a
red dot by looking at each other.
It seems to me that I have read this puzzle before -- Martin Gardner or
Raymond Smullyan -- and that the wording was slightly different.
Message: 62150
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/the puzzle
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 17:14:08
Zak, your puzzle is unsolvable as stated. Disregarding you clue, if all
three had had green dots, no hands would have been raised, and therefore any
of them would be able to know the color of his own dot, since any reds
mean at least two hands raised. If two of them were red, and one of
them green, then all three hands would be raised; the green man would see
two red dots, and each of the red dots would see the red dot
of the other. If all three of them were red, all three would raise their
hands; this is identical to the result of two red and one green; therefore,
it is impossible to distinguish between a case of three red dots, and two
red with one green, solely on the basis of raised hands . Wait -- let me
amend that. If there were two red and one green, either of the red men
would know their own color, since the only combinations which allow three
raised hands are red-red-red and red-red-green, and since the red men could
see and account for the one green, they would know that they were red. But
the green man would not be able to know his own color in a red-red-green
combo.
If two were green and one red, the red man, seeing two green dots and being
the only one with his hand down, would know his color. But the two greens
would not be able to know.
So again, since the point of view of any man in a red-red-red combo would be
the same as the point of view of the green man in a red-red-green combo
(seeing three raised hands and two red dots), the puzzle can't be solved on
the basis of raised hands (hmmm...)
Message: 62151
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 17:34:59
YES, the winning applicant knew the other two dots were red, and YES, he
knew that each of the others saw his dot and also raised their hands.
But based ojust this, it is not a safe assumption to say that his own dot
was also red. The two others could be raising their hands in response to
each other, right? So you're close, but no cigarette. Sorry.
Message: 62152
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 17:38:48
Whew. I still contend that there is a completely logical answer -- an
answer that you almost stumbled upon. But you missed it. And I won't tell
you the answer until you say "Uncle."
I don't know from where the puzzle originates. A friend of mine in a
college linguistics class is where I heard it from. The teacher asked the
entire class, and told them that anyone who correctly solved it would not
have to do homework. My friend solved it, and the answer makes sense.
But it's a little tricky.
Message: 62153
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak/I'VE GOT IT!!
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 18:00:05
OK, as we know, there are two identical states which allow three raised
hands: red-red-red, and red-red-green. The point of view of any red man in
the triple red combo is identical to the point of view of the green man in
the latter combo.
HOWEVER -- The red-red-green combo would only allow the two reds to solve
the puzzle; NOT the red. Since the puzzle is designed to allow the three
applicants to fairly compete (obviously), that eliminates the red-red-green
combo, and thus they must ALL have red dots.
Yes! YES!! YES!!!!!!
Message: 62154
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Answer!
Subject: Last
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 20:33:48
Or else he knows his is red because if it had been green the other two
would have seen it and figured out that their own dots were red because
there can only be one green. Their hesitation when they can see his dot
shows that all dots are red, since he can see that both of theirs are.
The winner is the first man to take the other's indecision to be an
important piece of data.
See You Later
Dean H.
Message: 62155
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Dean/62154
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 21:33:56
The hesitation could be interpreted in that manner, but it could just as
easily indicate ordinary confusion as it could indecisiveness. That is,
perhaps they were still attempting to analyse the problem. Keep in mind
that some hesitation is a given: we have had the same information as the
applicants, and it has taken a couple of days to solve the puzzle. Not that
it couldn't have been solved sooner, but given the fact that the users of
this bbs are by no means of substandard intelligence, I think that a period
of hesitation is almost unavoidable. (the period is unspecified. It could
be thirty seconds, five minutes, or longer.) What would require
explaination would be a complete absence of hesitation.
Message: 62156
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
Subject: Back to the Future
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 22:29:37
This month 'Back to the Future II' will be released...
Does ANYONE think we can make a fun GT out of this?
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62157
Author: $ Chris Zagar
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Thanks!
Date: 11/13/89 Time: 23:30:48
A letter of thanks to Cliff & Sandy, Rod Williams, David Burkhart, Ann
Oudin, James Taranto, Nick Ianuzzi, Head Quasar, Ralph Blehm, James Hawley,
Dean McCarron, Peter Petrisko, Traci Sibel, Todd Reese, Beaurgard Dog, and
Alan Hamilton.
This afternoon, Cliff dropped off the wedding gift from all of you to my
fiancee, Rita Lynn, and me. Some may be of the opinion that we should have
waited until after the wedding on Saturday to open the present. Well, if
we had, then I wouldn't know to send this message to all of you, would I?
Those of you who aren't listed above are probably wondering who I am and
what I am talking about. Oddly enough, I have what would seem to be two
conflicting attributes: I am the quietest user of Apollo and I am also a
SYSOP of this system. During the past few years, my participation in the
system has dwindled due to a busy work schedule. However, all of Apollo's
truest users got together and purchased a Franklink Mint replica of the
original U.S.S. Enterprise for my fiancee and me for our wedding. It came
with a plaque enjoining me to "live long and prosper" and their names.
They also included a picture of themselves holding the replica.
Thank you all for the wonderful gift. The hardest part is trying to decide
if I am more impressed by the replica or the grouping together for the
photo. Both meant quite a lot to me. Thank you all! SYSOP Chris and Rita
Message: 62158
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: *sigh*
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 03:38:27
Jeff, your answer (62153) made some sense, but is not the correct response.
Dean, your answer (62154) is correct. Congratulations.
Jeff, your criticism of the correct ansnswer (62155) is the same criticism I
had at first. But remember, these people are applicants to be a DEAN OF
STUDENTS at a fine college! They made it this far, so they *must* be smart.
(Actually, it would have been better to specify a period of time for
hesitation.) The hesitation is the key. This exercise shows what a
critical role perspective plays in analyzing situations...yeah, yeah.
Anyway, Dean, I guess you get to be the Dean of Students on Apollo BBS. How
fitting.
So, to repeat: The winner knew that his dot was red because of the
hesitation of the other applicants. A little hesitation would be natural,
but it would be very easy to see that if you saw one green dot and one red
dot on the other person's head, and all three can see a red dot, then one's
OWN dot MUST be red. Since neither of the other two applicants (who we
assume are somewhat intelligent) were quick to say they were red, the
winning applicant concluded that he must NOT have a green dot, or else
somebody would have figured it out by now. So, by process of elimination,
he knew his dot was red.
However, Jeff's response that it would not be a fair test unless they all
had the same color is not a bad answer. Maybe my friend will be able to
get off the hook for even MORE homework!
Message: 62159
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: War!
Subject: Another puzzle...
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 03:47:28
OK, here's another...
You have three boxes. One is labeled "20 apples." One is labeled "20
oranges." One is labeled "10 apples, 10 oranges." The boxes used to
contain contents which matched their labels. However, some idiot prankster
switched things around, so that now all the boxes' labels are wrong, though
the contents are still 20 oranges, 20 apples, and 10 of each.
The PROBLEM: You have to determine what the correct labels are for each
box. You can't actually look inside a box, but you can pull one piece of
fruit out at a time.
What is the minimum number of pieces of fruit you need to remove before you
can accurately determine the contents of all the boxes? What strategy do
you use? Why?
Good luck!
(Jeff Beck, this is your chance to redeem yourself.)
P.S. The labels are still "20 apples," etc. But no label correctly
identifies its contents. Each box is incorrectly labeled.
Message: 62160
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 03:58:20
You don't have to remove any fruit. Place the crates in separate rooms, let
them begin to rot, and the odors will guide you.
Message: 62161
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Ann/"faculity"
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 05:25:44
Prisons don't have "faculities" (sic) Ann. They have staffs.
And yes, it is unfair to prevent prisoners from smoking and not the staff,
although a small room has been set aside for the staff addicts. If the
building is to be smoke free, it should be so for all.
Message: 62162
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: James H./smoking
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 07:39:18
No to all your questions - but prisoners have always been able to smoke
including in Yavapi county. The article also didn't sound like they
particularly did it because of the match/rocket incident either. But to let
the staff smoke - I still say is two faced. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62163
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Question?
Subject: Zakey
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 07:41:07
What puzzle? Hahahahahaha -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62164
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
Subject: MLK
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 16:50:32
I would like to know how many are coming to the MLK video GT
Thursday night? Please say something......
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62165
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Nick
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 17:02:54
But it's plastic fruit!
Message: 62166
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Question?
Subject: GT
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 17:03:53
Yes, let Cliff know so he can buy an appropriate amount of beer.
The GT will be at Cliff's, this Thursday (Nov. 16) at 8:00 PM.
Message: 62167
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 19:36:57
Re: "MLK GT"
Two Thornburgs are planning to come. What were we supposed to bring?
Message: 62168
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak/1st puzzle
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 20:09:17
Actually, my answer is the definitive one. Think about it: The period of
hesitation was not specified. Some hesitation is a given, even among smart
people. Did your friend (the one who solved the puzzle) come up with the
answer instantly, or was there a period (of undetermined length) of
hesitation? Being smart enough to qualify as a final applicant for a
position such as Dean of Students does not require a special talent for
solving logic puzzles. Unless someone had developed such a talent, or had a
genius for solving such puzzles intuitively, then some hesitation is a
given. I suggest that you have your friend ask the Dean of Students at his
school the same question, and see if there is a period of hesitation, or
indeed, if the problem is solved in the same sitting.
Since a period of hesitation could either indicate confusion or hesitation,
that is not a definitive way to solve the puzzle. But the Dean would not
have given a test that discriminated against one of the three applicants
(much less made it impossible for an applicant to solve the puzzle).
Therefore, by my reasoning, red-red-red HAS to be the answer.
Message: 62169
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Zak/puzzle 2
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 21:01:07
You would only need to remove one fruit to determine what boxes contained
what -- as long as you removed that fruit fom the box labeled "10 of each".
Now you know that the box labeled 10/10 is mislabeled (as are they all). So
if you remove an apple from that box, you know that the box contains 20
apples. If you remove an orange from that box, you know that the box
contains 20 oranges.
For example: Box 1 is marked 10/10. Box 2 is marked 20 apples. Box
3 is marked 20 oranges. Let's assume that the fruit removed from box 1 is
an apple. This means that box 1 contains 20 apples. Box 3, marked 20
oranges, must contain 10 of each, since box 1 contains the apples and box 3
is incorrectly labeled. This means that box 2 contains 20 oranges.
If instead you had pulled an orange from box 1, you would know that box 1
contained 20 oranges. Box 2, marked 20 apples, must contain 10 of each,
since box 1 contains the oranges, and box 2 is incorrectly labeled. This
means box 3 contains 20 apples.
There are only two ways for three unique boxes , with three correspondingly
unique labels, to be completely mislabeled. It is easy to see this if you
diagram, although it turns out to be completely irrelevant to the solution
of the puzzle.
Message: 62170
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Mark/Puzzle
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 21:16:17
The hesitation was given as part of the puzzle, while the fairness of
the test was assumed by you with no direct evidence. Lets try another one
with a different approach:
A human resources director was faced with choosing which of three
equally qualified executives would be promoted to fill a vacant position.
All three candidates were logical and intelligent, and any of the three
would be a good choice. The problem was resolved by having the three
participate in a game where reason and chance would each play a part.
They were seated single file, so that the first was facing a wall, the
second could see the first, and the third could see both the others.
They were shown a box containing three red hats and two white hats. One hat
was placed on each of their heads so that none could see the color of their
own hat. The one who could explain what color hat they had on, and how they
knew it, would get the promotion.
The back player, who could see the other two, was asked first and could
not answer. The middle player, who could see only the one in front, was
then asked and could not answer either. The front player, who could see
nothing, was asked and answered correctly to win the promotion.
What color hat did the front player have on, and how could it be known?
Message: 62171
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Dean/Zak's puzzle 1
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 22:22:26
Yes, it is a fact that the hesitation was part of the puzzle text. It is
not logical to assume, however, that every portion of text in a logic puzzle
is germaine to the puzzle. It could merely be story description.
The fairness was not assumed, it was implied by the puzzle. In order for
the puzzle to have a definite solution which requires no assumptions (such
as the assumption that the hesitation indicated a reluctance to aid the
others, rather than ordinary bafflement), the test must be fair.
Dean Of Students is an administrative position. It requires administrative
skills. An aptitude for logic puzzles is no more a requisite for the job
than an aptitude for physics. The solution of such a puzzle is only
"obvious" in retrospect, or to someone with experience in solving analogous
puzzles, or someone with a natural intelligence for solving such puzzles.
Message: 62172
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Dean/your puzzle
Date: 11/14/89 Time: 22:48:37
The front player (facing the wall) had to have been wearing a red hat. Since
there were three red hats, and only two white hats, the back player could
only have known the color of his own hat if the two players in his sight had
both been wearing white hats. At this point, only a red-red or red-white
combination is possible for the middle and front player. The middle player
knew that the back player could not answer, and thus that either his hat or
the front player's hat was NOT white. If the front player's hat was white,
then the middle player would know that his was red. Thus, the front
player's hat was red, because the middle player could not answer.
The front player knew that since the back player could not answer,
his hat could not be white. The front player also knew that since the
middle player could not answer, his hat had to have been red.
Message: 62173
Author: John Berger
Category: Joke
Subject: GOODBYE!
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 01:48:03
I am the first one.
The first person to leave Apollo permanently. For good. Never to return.
Ask yourself, "Why?" Why do you continue to be yanked around on the
whims of a dictatorial maniac? Your very presence FUELS his crumbling
personality. Without users most BBSes wouldn't exist.
ARE YOU A NERD? ARE YOU A LOSER? Why do you choose to hang around
computer nerds, losers and geeks? Maybe it's because misery loves company?
Doesn't it seem like most BBSes have become a SINKHOLE for assholes,
nerds, and other forms of human scum?
IT GOES ON... Each generation breeds a new batch of obnoxious,
psychotic, deranged, or braindamaged BBS geeks who will complete the endless
cycle of nerd-dom; A SELF-PERPETUATING endless infinite stream of losers
that will never END!
PREDICTABLE and unchanging... You just know what they're going to say
and do. Aren't you sick of it all? Isn't it all too phony? WHY SUBJECT
YOURSELF to this? Do you think you need to be treated this way by maniac
SYSOPS and nerdy USERS?
Did you intend to spend HUNDREDS of dollars on a computer setup just to
get treated like SHIT from a bunch of assholes on a BBS?
YET -- DAILY you submit yourself to their rules, their authority, and
their WAYS! SOON you'll become like them!
(cont.)
Message: 62174
Author: John Berger
Category: Joke
Subject: GOODBYE! cont.
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 01:55:33
BREAK the cycle... I have. I think it's ALL BULLSHIT! I don't care
if I offend anyone. Someone's GOT to do it.
I will not log onto BBSes that support dictators, reading of private
mail, zapping (unless message is illegal), repressive rules. That is why
*I* do not log on to Apollo or the MCSO, just to name a few. I REFUSE to
hang around computer nerds and geeks!
Get a REAL LIFE...
Get real friends...
A BBS is NO SUBSTITUTE for a social life...so WHY DO YOU MAKE IT ONE?
Remember, WITHOUT YOU - they wouldn't have anyone to kick around, or have a
shoulder to cry on...
BBSes are ELECTRONIC SERFDOM... Dragging you down to their level.
Don't you want to be just like them? Look at them! Who do you want to be
today? Who do you want to be? IT'S TIME TO PUT YOUR CLOTHES ON AND FACE
THE WORLD!
I'd love to start a MASSIVE boycott of BBSes! Then the SYSOPS would
have to LISTEN to US for a CHANGE!!!
If you are interested in helping with legal BBS subversion, boycotting,
BBS protests, Democratic Systems, send me E-MAIL! Give me your suggestions.
::::::::::::::: John Berger ::::::::::::::::
Message: 62175
Author: $ Nick Ianuzzi
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 04:10:01
Done babbling? Ok, now go away.
Message: 62176
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Answer!
Subject: MLK GT
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 05:28:11
Can't come. Have a play rehearsal that evening.
Message: 62177
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Question?
Subject: John Whatsisname
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 05:34:26
John WHO???
Never heard of this guy until the moment he says goodbye! Won't HE be missed
though?
Gooodbye forever, leave me E-mail? Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Message: 62178
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on GT
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 07:41:55
I will be there. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62179
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: John or whoever
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 07:48:34
How can we send you E-mail when you clearly stated you are gone for good?
And I say, good goodbye with no regrets. You sound like you excaped from tha
that bobby hatch down on Van Buren. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62180
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Reading E-Mail?
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 09:10:20
I do NOT read E-Mail... On Apollo it goes into a GREEKING mode when
a person is sending private mail, or reading his private mail that was sent
to him. Geesh! Besides... I never heard of that user before?
The only real rules on here is not to send illegal & profane posts!
I do not see how I am 'Oppressive' in any way. Besides, it is you guys who
decide what to talk about and what SIGs you want.
That John (what's his name) has got a ego problem if he thinks that
SysOps are out to control him. Oh-well, he has the right to his opinion!
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62181
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Answer!
Subject: MLK movie GT
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 09:57:54
Tomorrow night (thursday) @ 8:00 PM..... You need not bring
anything....but yourselves!
See ya then
P.S. I just KNEW Pual Savage would not be coming... Just knew it!
Message: 62182
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: Answer!
Subject: Cliff/Back to the Fu
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 10:06:56
That would be interesting. I was thinking of picking up advance tickets for
the first evening.
Message: 62183
Author: $ Gary Jones
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Goodbye
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 10:48:32
What ever happened to "don't let the door hit you in the @$$?"
Message: 62184
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Answer!
Subject: Puzzle
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 11:24:51
Todd Reese (in Email) and Mark (as Jeff Beck) have both given the correct
answer to the hat puzzle. Note that such puzzles do not have to be fair in
every way to the participants by definition. If the front player lands a red
hat, that player wins, regardless of the skill of the other two. The back
player can only win on the unlikely combination of both white hats landing
in view. If the assignment of dots in the first puzzle were done completely
at random, this would not be unfair to anyone, and only the red-red-green
combination would give any player a disadvantage, of all the combinations
which could randomly occur.
The dangers of assumption as a habit of mind are pointed out in another
mild way by Mark's assuming that candidates for an executive postion must be
male, although no reference to gender had been made in the puzzle.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 62185
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Joke
Subject: John Berger
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 13:29:18
For the sake of argument, lets take the messages entered by 'John
Berger' at face value. Here is a person who erroneously thinks he is
the first to leave Apollo in such a manner, and gives the character of
the BBS and its users as his reason. Should we be unhappy about it?
In a way, yes.
It seems that this person might be suffering from the impoverished
social existence he attributes to the rest of us. The idea that using
BBS's somehow deprives one of outside contact, or that people met
through Apollo would be somehow substandard to people met in other ways,
would only occur to someone who had looked to the BBS for 'a life', as
they say, and found it wanting. It may be unfortunate for such people,
but BBS's in general can not always be counted upon to nurture and
fulfill the needs of those who come in starved for reinforcement.
A new user here will find that some active users are easier to talk
to than others, and some are easier to influence than others. Many people
here have strong opinions on a wide range of issues, and all have their
own convictions in some areas. One may learn, not only from airy opinions,
gently swayed, but from the mighty slapping of stout convictions as well.
If we read his cry for revenge against this miniature society where he
did not find what he needed, we can easily see that his reaction to any
other possible society of thinking people will be the same. His tearful
farewell to the injustices Apollo reads just like a suicide note if the
role of the BBS is replaced with the world at large.
Classified as a oke, old in form and content,but pitiful as always.
Message: 62187
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 17:27:00
Re: "John (what's his name)"
Actually, John logged onto the wrong BBS and sent that message. He really
does like the Apollo BBS. That message was intended for another BBS which
shall remain unnamed.
Good grief John, can't you do anything right?
Message: 62189
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 18:18:08
Well, logically, such puzzles (when defined as a method by which to select
the most qualified applicant) must be fair, otherwise, they are false
tests. In the hat puzzle, it is not true that if the front player lands a
red hat, that player wins. If they are all equally logical, as your puzzle
states, then the rear and middle player, knowing that they cannot win by not
guessing, and knowing that by not guessing they might aid the other(s) in
solving the puzzle, would simply guess the color of their hats. For the
rear player, this is a 50/50 proposition; it is hardly logical or
intelligent to automatically forfeit by not guessing, since to guess right
means winning, and to guess wrong has the same result as not guessing (at
least, for the guesser).
I did not assume that the players were male. That I used a masculine
pronoun means nothing. I refuse to go through the silliness of typing (or
saying, for that matter) "he/she", and it is gramatically acceptible to use
the masculine "his" as a generic pronoun when referencing a person of
indeterminate sex ("player").
a random selection of dots in the first puzzle would have a 50 percent
chance of being unfair, since there are four combinations, two of which are
biased against at least one of the players (red-red-green and
green-green-red).
Message: 62190
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Dean/cont.
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 18:24:41
My chief complaint against such logic puzzles is that the scenario given is
itself illogical. If a test were devised to choose the most qualified of
several applicants, common sense would dictate that the test must be fair to
the applicants individually. If a random selection is desired, then a
simple coin flip would eliminate the need for complex logic puzzles.
It seems to me it is myopic at best to devise a logic puzzle which is absurd
in its very framing. Surely the same priniciples can be demonstrated within
a rational framework.
Message: 62191
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: pronouns
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 18:45:13
From "The Elements of Style" :
"The use of "he" as pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple,
practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language. "He"
has lost all suggestion of maleness in these circumstances. The word was
unquestionably biased to begin with (the dominant male), but after hundreds
of years it has become seemingly indispensible. It has no perjorative
connotation; it is never incorrect. Substituting "he or she" in its place
is the logical thing to do if it works. But it often doesn't work, if only
because repetition makes it sound boring or silly . . . No one need fear
using "he" if common sense supports it. The furor recently raised about
"he" would be more impressive if there were a handy substitute for the word.
Unfortunately, there isn't -- or at least no one has come up with one yet.
If you think "she" is a handy substitute for "he", try it and see what
happens. Alternately, put all the controversial nouns in the plural and
avoid the choice of sex altogether, and you may find your prose sounding
general and diffuse as a result."
Message: 62192
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: last/he
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 19:35:00
Wow, you should try reading one of the feminist style books
Message: 62193
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Berger
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 21:14:15
I think he has some good points. If I don't get my own SIG by Thanksgiving,
I'm quitting Apollo too.
Message: 62195
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Answer!
Subject: Last on JT
Date: 11/15/89 Time: 22:39:58
You can have the COSmos SIG! Zak came up with a subject, name and
interested users for his SIG. What do you have to offer?
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62196
Author: $ James Hawley
Category: News Today
Subject: Comdex
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 00:37:21
The portion of Comdex that I attended was interesting. In one of the Atari
dealers booth, a salesman for Migraph (hand scanners) asked Jack Tramiel if
he owned an Atari. Very funny.
I met Jerry Pournelle and talked with him for a couple of minutes. He
seemed to enjoy playing Populous on a Mega ST. I asked him what he thought
about the future of the Atari ST line. He stated that he thought they were
going in the right direction and with a lot more potential.
Message: 62197
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: Question?
Subject: Fair Question
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 05:43:23
I think it was Jeff Beck who pointed out the artificiality of the puzzles
that have been posted here recently. Well, here's a non-artificial one:
Hazel and her sister Heather are the same age (give or take a few
minutes), but are not twins. How can this be, since neither was adopted,
nor are they half-sisters?
========= Pascal #(O,O)# Hoot! MacProgrammer =========
Message: 62198
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff!
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 05:56:45
You just KNEW Pual (sic) Savage wold not be coming, huh?
Any time you don't think my excuses from your Gts are valid, please feel
free to check on them. This evening, beginning at 7 PM, I will be found in
the sanctuary at Sweetwater Church of the Valley on N. 43rd Ave., rehearsing
or church's Christmas play with a bunch of other people. If you don't want
to put forth the effort to come over and see, the number is 978-5511.
If you don't want to put forth the effort to call, shut up.
That happens to hold a much higher priority for me than watching a
propaganda film about Martin Luther King.
Message: 62199
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Cliff on sigs.
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 07:41:49
Talking about us deciding on the sigs. we want - how about Zak's movie sig?
That would be a lot of fun. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62200
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: War!
Subject: Paul
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 09:59:26
I did not mean to get an attack from you telling me to "Shut UP"...
Have fun at your rehearsal (and I DO believe you) HONEST! Better
you be there then here.....that is for sure.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
P.S. I love getting the first post I read in the morning telling me to
'Shut Up'..... starts my day off like you would not believe.
Message: 62201
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Politics
Subject: Paul on MLK
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 10:12:58
Paul is probably right about the film just being propaganda to show
the good side of King. I just wonder how much of his womanizing they will
talk about and if they will mention his involvment with the Communists, in
the fact he always surrounded himself with Communists advisors.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62203
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Answer!
Subject: Steve/puzzle
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 14:41:22
They were not twins, but two sisters of a group of triplets (or quadruplets,
etc.)
This may not be the answer you are looking for, but it is valid.
Alternately, they could be nuns.
Message: 62204
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: MLK video
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 16:32:29
I'm glad so many of you have already decided it is propaganda. You may be
right, though:
PROPAGANDA: The spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose
of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person.
If you walk away from this video with the general feeling that the civil
rights movement was a good thing, or that MLK was a good man, then the video
will have qualified for that moniker. The question is, what difference does
it make? Why not take the raw information at face-value, and leave it at
that? If anything, such a video is trying to persuade you that MLK did a
lot of good for the civil rights movement, not that adultery is acceptable.
Cliff, what do you make of MLK's having known communists (if this is true)?
If the video doesn't go into detail about MLK's sex-life (and it might not,
since the focus is not on his personal relationships, but on his public
influence), will it have been a waste, or a big piece of propagandish
garbage? I don't think so. I think you guys are being overly simplistic
about the whole thing.
Message: 62205
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Sex in politics
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 16:41:00
[excerpts from "The Sex of Politics," an article in the December issue of
Reason magazine. By David Brudnoy.]
Lately storied of sexual indiscretions have been fatal, or at least
damaging, to the careers of American politicians. It was not always so.
True, what was standard in the court of Louis XIV has not been so cavalierly
accepted in the United States. Still, the private lives of past American
leaders rarely had a decisive impact on their public effectiveness.
The 15th president of the United States, James Buchanan, who had
neither wife nor children to inflict upon the adoring masses, suffered for
years from innuendo. His best friend, Sen. Wm. Rufus De Vane King, was
called "Miss Nancy" by Andrew Jackson and "Aunt Fancy" by others. The
president knew that his own nickname, at least in some circles, was "Mr.
Nancy."
One of Buchanan's better-esteemed predecessors, Thomas Jefferson, was
thought by contemporaries to have made one of his slaves, Sally Hemmings,
his mistress. Historians argue the subject to this day.
While her husband Franklin was sleeping with her social secretary,
Eleanor Roosevelt was drawn intimately, maybe very intimately, to her
lesbian friend Lorena Hickok, to whom she wrote on one occasion: "Hick
darling...Oh I want to put my arms around you...I want to hold you close."
President Warren Gamaliel Harding his his mistress in a White House
cloakroom. One of John Kennedy's good buddies, Washington Post editor Ben
Bradlee, says JFK frolicked in the White House pool with naked maidens.
Message: 62206
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Sex in Politics
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 16:47:39
According to many biographers, JFK's mistresses included Judith Campbell,
the moll of Mafia honch Sam Giancana.
When Grover Cleveland was running for president, the Republicans were
eager to make hay from Cleveland's admission that he had fathered a child
out of wedlock. They taunted him: "Ma, ma, where's pa?" But when
Cleveland won, his party, the Democrats, twitted the GOP: "Gone to the
White House, ha, ha, ha!" Now, aren't you glad you asked?
Maybe you didn't ask, but these and many other tales out of school from
the world of politics inspired comment in theirr day and engage scholars and
civilians alike today. We've learned that General Dwight Eisenhower wanted
at one point to divorce Mamie and marry his driver. General George C.
Marshall, his superior, was furious and sent Ike back onto the parth of
righteousness with a chiding letter. Ike went on to carry himself and Mamie
into the presidency. Who knows if Eisenhower's wartime fling with the
lovely driver, were it known then to public and press, would have kept him
from the presidency as Gary Hart's hanky-panky derailed the playboy of the
good ship Monkey Business.
As Cleveland's case shows, even wide public knowledge of infidelity
didn't necessarily prove catastrophic to a political career 100 years ago.
JFK's buddies and the press maintained a strict silence during his
lifetime; even three decades ago not everything dicey about an American
president turned into common gossip.
Message: 62207
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Sex in Politics
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 16:55:57
Today? Today the nation indulges in an orgy of moralistic
pontification. Not only the "love that dared not speak its name," as
homosexuality was once called (and which now can't shut up), but
hetersosexuality too, if not comfortably ensconced within marriage, surfaces
to muddy the political waters, if that's possible.
In Massachusetts, the impotent Republicans devote themselves to
rehashing the amours of Sen. Edward Kennedy -- always good for a giggle,
albeit useless in preventing Teddy from merrily returning to the Senate
election after election with vote totals hovering around 59 percent -- and
to fulminating about the Bay State's two acknowledged homosexual
congressmen, Gerry Studds and Barney Frank. The late summer scandal that
filled many columns and dominated the talk shows, pushing almost everything
else to the back pages, concerned Rep. Frank, who would have us believe that
he let an excess of kindness expose him to betrayal.
...
Years ago, when the Ayatollah Khomeini turned up as Time's Man of the
Year although Pope John Paul II seemed to many a worthier candidate, many
Time readers canceled their subscriptions, confusing "great" with "good" and
assuming that to be the former one must also be the latter. So, for those
of that mentality [hi Cliff, Bob!], Alexander couldn't be Great because he
was bisexual, nor the Sistine Chapel ceiling a magnificent work of art given
Michelangelo's sexuality, nor Whitman's poetry sublime for the same reasons,
nor the innumberable licentious kings and queens and presidents and...
Message: 62208
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Sex & Love
Subject: Sex in Politics
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 17:01:37
...spiritual leaders [!] worthy of admiration owing to their energetic
heterosexual promiscuity.
Whether America is better off today, with our ravenous journalists
prowling the land is zealous search of sexual shenanigans among the pols,
whether we're a happier nation when careers dissolve into nothingness as
the bedroom becomes an appropriate subject for political discussion -
whether this s *progress* - is up to each of us to decide. Perhaps this
morbid dwelling on the sex lives of our leaders and would-be leaders serves
the same function as bread and circuses always do for the masses,
distracting us from serious things and from the supposed legitimate purposes
for which we bring some people forward to leadership.
-------------------
Cliff, Thornbob (your new nickname): I do hope you took the time to read
the above.
Message: 62209
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Paul
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 17:27:45
Re: "I will be found in the sanctuary at Sweetwater Church of the Valley on
N. 43rd Ave., rehearsing or church's Christmas play with a bunch of other
people."
But Paul, if you are in your clown suit, how will we really know it's you?
(big smile there Paul)
Message: 62210
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 17:33:34
Re: "JFK's mistresses included Judith Campbell, the moll of Mafia honch Sam
Giancana."
Now we know who shot JR, er, I mean JFK. It was the Mafia!
Message: 62211
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 17:38:03
Re: "So, for those of that mentality [hi Cliff, Bob!]"
Re: "Thornbob (your new nickname): I do hope you took the time to read
the above."
Yeh, I read the above. Just what is it you think I said that is wrong?
Message: 62212
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Whitman, et al.
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 20:00:25
I'm not at all well researched in this matter, but is it an established fact
that Whitman was homosexual? I understand that he preferred the company of
men, addressed them in florid terms of endearment, and so forth. It is
difficult to estimate the prevalence of homosexuality in that period because
in both Britain and the U.S., there was a fashion for intense male
friendships. As Herman Melville put it, provided they fell short by as
little as one degree "of the sweetest sentiments entertained between the
sexes," they were considered perfectly acceptable.
And what about Michelangelo? Is there any direct evidence (personal letters
, etc.) indicating in a definitive manner that he was homosexual? I have
never seen the Sisteen Chapel paintings, but it seems to me that, given its
location and its commission by the church, any indications of homosexuality
contained therein could only be ambiguous, at best.
Message: 62213
Author: $ Steve MacGregor
Category: Answer!
Subject: Jeff Beck
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 21:15:24
Yes, your answer was correct -- Hazel, Heather, and Holly are triplets. I
hadn't thought about their being nuns as a possible solution, though.
========= Pascal #(O,O)# Hoot! MacProgrammer =========
Message: 62214
Author: Mike Carter
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Comdex
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 21:29:58
What's even funnier than Trammiel 's personal Atari ?
It's watching 200,000 stuffed shirts and three-pieced suits battle
each other in an elbox-to-elbow race to grab the freebies and still
look dignified. Now that WAS funny.
Message: 62215
Author: $ Todd Reese
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: John Berger
Date: 11/16/89 Time: 22:33:40
Actually, and with no disrespect intended, I believe Rich Fohl was the first
$tatus User to permanently leave Apollo.
Message: 62216
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
Subject: MLK
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 00:52:53
Re: The Great MLK Film GT!
The GT ended at 12:45 am... Thanks Zak for the idea. And thanks to
those who came and made it an enjoyable evening for Sandy and I.
Yawn.... time for Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Message: 62217
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 01:21:49
RE: Just what is it you think I said that is wrong?
That a man who cheats in his private life would by necessity also cheat in
his public life. And that they cannot be judged separately.
Does "Thornbob" bug you?
Message: 62218
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Beck
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 01:27:17
I'm not sure if he was homosexual, but there is evidence that he very much
hated women. I don't know about Whitman. The article doesn't specifically
say that they were homosexual, but that they had something unusual or
possibly unacceptable about their sexuality. (Kind of sneaky of the writer,
actually.) He might have been better off using Leonardo da Vinci and
Virgina Woolf as examples.
Message: 62219
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Question?
Subject: Leonardo
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 01:56:27
I take it there is some definitive proof that he was homosexual. What is
it? Also, misogeny is not evidence of homosexuality. For all I know, any
of these people *might* have been homosexual. But it seems to me that,
often, because of modern attitudes and even the deliberate desire to
generate "great" examples of homosexuals, ambiguous facts are skewed and
interpreted as positive evidence of this or that. Turn of the century
biographers pointed out that Whitman "bathed in eau-de-cologne", that he was
"fond of cooking", that he possessed an "infantile configuration" (boyish,
perhaps), "delicate skin", that there was "something womanly in him" (read
sissy) and that he harbored an "attitude and behavior toward sex that could
not be considered normal." One physician asked, with great delicacy, "could
he have been eunuchoid?" He lived something of a bohemian life and for a
number of years wore an enormous stud of pearls. None of this, however, is
evidence for homosexuality.
Message: 62220
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Clapton...er, Beck
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 02:27:04
I wasn't trying to use his misogeny to prove his homosexuality, just
pointing out that he had an unusual sexuality. The same with Whitman. They
may have been full-blooded heterosexuals, for all I know.
I am fairly certain that Leonardo was homosexual, though tangible proof
won't be easy to find. Standard art textbooks give more information about
what he did in the realms of art and science -- not in the realms of the
bedroom. But I clearly remember one of my teachers saying that he was
homosexual. Not that "My teacher said so" is worth anything as
proof...but that's why I believe it to be the case.
You may remember the controversy over the Mona Lisa that arose a year
or so back; Some art historians were claiming that she was a self-portrait
-- Leonardo stylizing how he'd like to look as a woman, or something like
that. These claims were based on the fact (?) that he was homosexual. In
any case, I think those claims were mostly dismissed.
From Gardner's _Art Through the Ages_ : "[Leonardo's] mind and
personality seem to us superhuman; the man himself, mysterious and remote."
Message: 62221
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: War!
Subject: Cliff/first posts
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 05:33:32
I'm glad I made your day.
Message: 62222
Author: $ Paul Savage
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Bob/clown suit
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 05:42:20
Freddie Freckles will be home in the closet and makeup cabinet on those days
Bob, as I don the garb of a Jewish merchant in the Jerusalem temple during
Jesus' time.
I hope poor Freddie doesn't get too lonely. (big smile right back at ya)
Message: 62223
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: M.L.K. et al.
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 08:54:33
This is my personal opinion for what it's worth re: all the scandal printed
about our politicians and M.L.K. ..... for one, I believe about a forth of
it - it's so easy to write such stuff and make lots of moolah off of it once
the person is dead. How much has been made off of Elvis alone? How much
embellishment has been added to these stories for shock value? Because of it
all, we won't ever really know the truth.
Take the example on King ... in all respects, he is an American hero. He
advocated no-violence and only ask for what is right to begin with. He not
only changed the blacks problems - he changed the whites also - made many
turn from prejudice into loving our fellow man - all men! He united them to
a great extent - more so than at any time in history. He helped make America
into a better country - to face up to what it stood for and to act upon
those beliefs. Prejudice and bigotry are ugly and he showed us how ugly it
really was. It was a giant sore upon this land and he helped heal it.
Unfortunately, it's still healing, but certainly better thanks to people
like him. So I say, so what to his personal life. Compared to what he did
that was good, the bad certainly doesn't out weight it. Why must we take our
heros and tear them apart piece by piece? How terrible that we took such a
man and now he's known more for the adultrous affairs he had and his
communist connections than the good he did! In fact, it's always in the same
breath. Never do you hear anymore of just the good. I didn't want to KNOW
all of this scandal and am sorry I do. This man was shot down cruely because
he was trying to make this a better country. He DID make it a better country
and in our zeal for scandal, lets not forget that. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62224
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: More
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 09:10:06
We did the very same thing to Bobby and Jack Kennedy. I've did massive
reading on both and always came to the conclusion they really tried and
wanted to make this a better country. To me, they were the real American
heros of the first class. Yes, I've read all the negative stuff too, but
here again, the bad does not out weigh the good they did. I liked to believe
that Jack and Jackie were the ideal couple that were happy and that Jack was
doing a good job as president. He at least was the last president I had any
faith in. (Bush who?) I wasn't disappointed in finding out about his
personal life - I didn't care what he did. Only that he was my president and
I had faith in him fully. It seems now, with our policians, the media looks
for the dirt first than what the man is capable of. Right now, we don't have
any heros and I miss them to be honest.
I'll even stick my neck out and say that I don't think Mecham was that bad!
He made mistakes, yes, but I think underneath all the media garbage and the
Arizona politicians that didn't want him in office because he didn't agree
with them - he would have made a great governor. Reading between the lines,
I saw a man that really wanted and could have helped this state. But we
stared believing all the garbage and the truth was lost and we won Moffart.
Oh Joy! -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62225
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: The G.T.
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 09:46:38
It was a most pleasant GT last night. Good to see Dean, Beau, Zakey and
James again after a long time. Of course, Bonnie and Bob's presence is
always nice. Thanks for having us Cliff and Sandy. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62226
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: store wars
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 15:39:55
Well, for at least the second time now, Smitty's has taken out a full page
ad in the republic comparing around 70 products ("both regular priced and
advertised specials") to those of Smith's and Albertson's. The ad shows
that Smith's prices are 10% higher than Smitty's, and Albertson's prices are
13% higher than Smitty's.
Contrast this with recent ads by Smith's and Albertson's comparing prices
(Smith's in fact compared over 300 items).
I doubt that it's a revelation to anyone, but it just goes to show you how
price comparisons can be manipulated to "prove" anything.
Message: 62227
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: News Today
Subject: The Jungle -- 1989
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 15:53:25
Donna Bazemore, a former worker at a Perdue Industries poultry plant in
North Carolina testified for a congressional panel, a labor-management
relations subcomittee of the House Education and Labor Comittee. The
testimony came during a hearing on proposed changes to a whistle-blowing
law.
"To start with, the plants are filthy. The floors regularly are
covered with grease, fat, sand, and roaches. Bugs are up and down the sides
of the walls . . . chickens regularly fall off the line and into all the
muck on the floor. The supervisors have workers put them back on the line."
Bazemore said workers are instructed every day to remove tags from hundreds
of chickens condemned for diseases such as tumors and growths on their
intestines. Chicken parts are sometimes removed from a filthy floor drain
and thrown back onto the line, she said.
At Perdue, she said, workers were told that if they spoke to reporters or
the Agriculture department, they would be fired.
Bazemore is now an organizer for the Center for Women's Economic
Alternatives, a support group for workers in the poultry industry.
Perdue Farms responded by issuing a press release calling Bazemore "less
than a model employee."
Rep. Marge Rouksema, R-N.J., said that the matter would be "referred to the
appropriate congressional comittee, as well as the Agriculture Dept.
(as if this could go on without government corruption in the Ag. Dept.)
Message: 62228
Author: Jeff Beck
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Joe Satriani
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 15:58:02
Has anyone heard his new album, "Flying in a Blue Dream" ? I was looking
forward to his next album, until I read that he has left his instrumental
format and sings (his own lyrics) on the album. What percentage of the 18
(!) tracks features his (no doubt) less than dulcimer tones?
Message: 62229
Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
Category: The SYSOP Speaks
Subject: SIG wars
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 16:22:22
Not really... However, let me tell you about a *NEW* SIG on Apollo
that was the brain child of $tatus member Zak Woodruff, the m and Video
SIG. Currently, for as few members that have signed up for it, it is the
busiest SIG on Apollo! Some of the subject matter being talked about is,
Married with Childern, (a sick sit-com (my opinion)), a few TRIVIA questions
have already been posted (and as of this post, no one has answered my trivia
question correctly yet) and a number of other TV/Movie related facts and
gossip.
If you have $tatus, and would like to belong to this SIG....Just
send me a letter in the ost office, and I will promptly set it into your
$tatus profile. If you are not a $tatus Member of Apollo.... Why not read
the <$>cmd file in the ain menu and consider joining.
Yes, Zak is the SigOp of the m SIG, and has selected the
categories himself.
*=* the 'Mighty' Apollo SYSOP *=*
Message: 62230
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Answer!
Subject: last
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 16:42:44
Aw, shucks...
Message: 62231
Author: Mike Carter
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Price wars
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 16:55:32
Yep. Smitty's can manipulate their prices for ONE day and still
be legal on advertising.
If not for the prices, I'd say Smith's has Snitt's beat hands down
for the selection and quality. Then again, who's to say what will
happen 6 months down the road when all of this brohuha dissolves...
Well, there is one good thing amoungst all this...only the
best all-round stores will survive.
Message: 62232
Author: $ Bob Thornburg
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Zak
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 18:27:19
Re: "Does "Thornbob" bug you?"
Not really. I've been called worse.
Re: "a man who cheats in his private life would by necessity also cheat in
his public life"
Well that's close. I probably would have said it a little differently, like
this:
A man who cheats in private life is more inclined to also cheat in his
public life, than a man who does not cheat in his private life.
Message: 62233
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Woodruf
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 19:58:53
I think I once heard David Brudnoy is homosexual. I may be mistaken about
that, however.
Message: 62234
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Mark/Puzzle
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 21:26:20
Neither puzzle said that it was meant to find the most
qualified applicant. It is as obvious that qualifications fall
outside the scope of these puzzles as it is that the whole point
here was to do the puzzles, not to try and advance the state of
human resource management.
If we assume that such a puzzle has to be absolutely fair and
allow equal chance of solution to each player, we are assuming at
least two things too many. First, that those responsible wanted
it to be so, even though they are using a logic puzzle instead of
any realistic method. Second, that those responsible did, in
fact, actually, and without error, come up with a perfect puzzle.
You are wrong in stating that a landing a red hat does not
guarantee victory for the front player in the hat puzzle. It was
stated that the player had to be able to tell the color of hat,
and how they KNEW it. This eliminates guessing as an alternative.
Facing this situation, any player who assumes that the puzzle
is fair to all players would have to conclude that there can be
no way for any of them to win. If the front player believed this,
there would be no reason to listen to the other player's
responses or give them any thought. The front player could just
say, 'No' when asked if the color of the front hat was known.
Message: 62235
Author: $ Dean Hathaway
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Mark/puzzle
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 21:27:08
In the matter of 'his', Professor Strunk has been dead since
1946. His writing may still be the authority on the subject, but
I note that Todd Reese was able to answer the puzzle without
giving any appearance of assuming male gender for the players.
See You Later,
Dean H.
Message: 62236
Author: $ Beauregard Dog
Category: Get-Togethers (GTs)
Subject: MLK GT
Date: 11/17/89 Time: 21:33:15
It was great to see everybody, and to meet Bob and Bonnie. Too bad that
"Bob" and Rod didn't show up.
Message: 62237
Author: $ Zak Woodruff
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Taranto
Date: 11/18/89 Time: 00:27:40
Why are you concerned about David Brudnoy's sexuality?
Message: 62238
Author: $ Ann Oudin
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Jeff/prices
Date: 11/18/89 Time: 07:53:33
Regardless of what the ads say - Smith's is the all around lowest and you
can really save. -=*) ANN (*=-
Message: 62239
Author: $ James Taranto
Category: Chit Chat
Subject: Woodruff
Date: 11/18/89 Time: 09:00:15
If I were concerned with Brudnoy's sexuality, I would remember whether he is
homosexual or not.