EAGLE Netlist conversion

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:05:34 -0800, the renowned Tim Wescott
<tim@wescottnospamdesign.com> wrote:

Corporal punishment, applied in a consistent and loving manner, is not
IMO physical abuse. _Any_ discipline that's applied in a way that a
child can't predict, that's too severe, or that doesn't give the kid
room to grow, will screw the kid up -- possibly for life (but I'm not so
ready to believe that it'll pop out as psychosis).

So unless the spanking that you're referring to leaves permanent flat
spots on their behinds its just discipline, not abuse.

Cultures where spanking is rare produce kids that are no less screwed
up, IMHO.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:12:08 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:
[]
again, too literal. First DMO'C implies Dems are socialists because they
promote mandatory service, and forced servitude is common in socialist
countries.
-------------
That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat,...

Re-posted because you deleted it:
-------------
That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat, and to do one's equal
share of the work. If you're paid, it doesn't matter if you HAVE
to or not, you have to work to afford to live, even in the simplest
human society or situation, the earth extracts that, and we merely
decide socially how the burden is divided! The Rich want the rest
of us to do THEIR work FOR them so THEY don't HAVE to,

So who gives a fuck what they want? Are they holding you at
gunpoint?
-----------------

Yes. The police as armed threat are the final barrier to ending
the society in which some magically have a right to throw you out
of your houseif you don't pay them monthly tribute. If you are
evicted from YOUR home and combatively act against it you will
be shot. If you pretend it is someone else's home, just follow
the labor and see if they ever worked for it, or if they were
born just as naked and ignorant as YOU were.

Slavery depends on the consent of the slave.

Thanks,
Rich
----------------------------

If that were so there could never have been slavery.

Actually, it takes a LOT of slaves deciding to refuse to
consent before they can survive the attempt to refuse.
The first step in the refusal of servitude is Democracy
to begin to check the abuses of Thief-"Nobility".
The ultimate refusal of servitude is Communism.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:54:22 +1300, Terry Given <my_name@ieee.org
wrote:

Honest though, thats what the guy said. We didnt get on very well. Once
after I got caned (6 of the best) for being disruptive, as I walked back
in somebody asked if it hurt - nah, I said, and was promptly marched
back outside for 6 more. I kept my mouth shut when I came back in, it
was starting to hurt by then

Still, it could have been worse. One of the woodwork teachers used to
take you outside, and make you bend over with your head sticking thru
the doorway whilst being caned, so the whole class looked at your face.
Another would make you bend over and stick your head underneath a desk,
so when you got caned you also smacked your head on the underside of the
desk. One teacher in particular, Harrison Ngatai (we used to call him
Nasty Harry) was banned from caning after managing to draw blood on one
poor bastard - big arms, thin cane. And my buddy Diz(zy Gillespie) got
caned in the back of the head, when Stock missed his arse. A week later
Diz was writing "stock is a wanker" on the blackboard when, unbeknownst
to Diz, Mr Stock walked in, and whacked Diz in the back of the head,
breaking his nose on the blackboard. That was 3rd form french, a real
fun class. One earthquake drill, instead of getting under our desks
(which Stock did) we threw our desks ontop of his, burying him under a
large pile. He used to swear underhis breath at the students, and
eventually left to take up a job at the all-girls school down the road.
6 months later he had a nervous breakdown, apparently the girls made us
look like amateurs

If I was the father of any of these children, I'd have beaten the tar
out of any of these monsters, or would have at least attempted to. If
it's okay in a society to beat up children, I'd suspect a lawyer could
argue that I'd have that right with the ass, er, teachers as well.


The summer break between my 6th and 7th form years, the government
banned corporal punishment in schools. A shame i think - I certainly
learned consequences - do what you must, but pay the price

Corporal punishment for my child is MY right, and MY decision, not
that of anyone else.

Tom
---------------------

No, it's your child's. That teacher should have been beaten to death
by the children. And if you did the same you should have been killed
as well. Who you are is irrelevant. If a child is beaten to control
him, instead of for an actual brutal crime of bullying or harming
others, then he will turn his life to righteous revenge, and his
creativity and original interests are a completely lost cause at
that point. He will seek out you or people like you and harm you or
them, and you will all deserve it richly!!

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Terry Given wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

If you have to use corporal punishment, you are an unfit parent!

blanket statements are easy to make but inevitably fail the real-world
test. Just what do you do with the child who insists on running across
the road in front of cars?
------------------

You prevent him, you do not hit him. You prevent him till he is old
enough to know better. Being hit does NOT convey your analysis to his
mind, it merely makes him hate your fucking guts.

Such bullshit excuses for child abuse are the hiding place of sick
drunkards and sadists with mental problems.

I ask that because we had an interesting case
publicised in NZ a few years back - a parent was walloping their kids
arse in public, and a neighbour called the police (it is still legal to
smack your kids here). Turns out the kid runs across roads. They fenced
& locked their property, and in this case had locked him inside his
room, but he smashed the window, escaped and was playing chicken with
cars when his mum found him and gave him a hiding. Their defence (apart
from the fact it wasnt illegal) - what the hell else can they do? they
dont want him to die.....
-------------------

The State should kill his parents immediately, as they have raised a
baby that breaks windows and plays in traffic just to get away from
them! Nobody in their right mind believes your tale or their stupid
lies.

I have yet to hit my (9.5yr old) daughter. I doubt the need will arise,
but should it I will not hesitate. I hardly even need to punish her -
when she misbehaves, I explain to her what will happen if she continues,
and that the outcome is entirely her choice. Because I am very
consistent (with a minimal set of rules too) Kate knows I will do
exactly what I say, and almost always chooses to end the bad behaviour.
------------------

You are a sick abusive piece of shit. Hitting others to control them
is a emotional sickness. It is NEVER needed or even vaguely useful,
and it is NOT YOUR RIGHT!

I have found it to be a very effective technique, which has the added
advantage of teaching her about consequences. It didnt start to work so
effectively until she was 5 or so, and had developed a sufficient
vocabulary to understand the conversations; prior to that the bad
behaviour was punished (usually by being sent to bed, even at 10am)
------------------------

I hope she leaves and keeps her children safely away from shit like
you!

Cheers
Terry
----------------------

You're a sick abused and abusive piece of shit.
What was done to you damaged your mind and heart permanently!

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Terry Given wrote:

Clarence wrote:

So beat him up and chain him in the basement? You can I suppose justify any
cruel treatment, You are full of it!

I didnt justify anything, I merely posed a real scenario and asked a
question. YOU suggested beating & chaining in a basement.


Nuts, you are so irrational it is not possible to have an exchange of ideas.
But anyone who would beat their kids should be publicly shamed!

and yet you are. Hmm.


You clearly have nothing of value to say, and no shame!

OK then Clarence, seeing as you are so rational - how would you prevent
this particular kid (IIRC he was 4 and therefore not amenable to
discussion) from playing chicken in traffic.

Or would you refrain from smacking him, then be surprised when he gets
killed?

Cheers
Terry (who has yet to smack his 9-year old daughter)
-----------------------

Simple, you bloody fucking idiot, you disabuse yourself of the notion
that a 4 year old is not amenable to discussion! Being
their child he was probably so physically abused by age 4 that
his reaction was due to disordered emotional functioning. But
even so, the ONLY hope he has of recovering from their abuse is
to be treated properly by DECENT care-givers, so you will need
to spend time with him, watch him, talk to him, and make him know
that you care what he wants, and that he can and should communicate
it. No child does anything merely to be annoying, that is something
only adult-level humans do!

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Terry Given wrote:

Clarence wrote:

[]
OK then Clarence, seeing as you are so rational - how would you prevent
this particular kid (IIRC he was 4 and therefore not amenable to discussion)
from playing chicken in traffic.

Or would you refrain from smacking him, then be surprised when he gets killed?

Terry
-----------

Those are NOT the only two options, you bloody fucking moron.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:04:58 +1300, Terry Given wrote:

Or would you refrain from smacking him, then be surprised when he gets
killed?

I'd get him inside before smacking him, if I was going to smack him
at all, but all that would teach him is that he lets himself get
captured and dragged inside, he's going to get smacked.
----------------------------------

Hitting teaches only to hate and to hit.

The day your son knocks your ass out on the floor shouldn't surprise
you then. Just hope that he doesn't decide to light the place while
you're unconscious.

I'd wonder, this whole scenario is a little bizarre. Fenced and locked the
yard, locked his room, yet at 4 Years old, he escapes, and goes and does
what he wants anyway. What's wrong with that picture in the first place?
----------------------------

The parents are lying to try to stymie being punished or corrected.


-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:03:14 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:41:59 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

No, registration for the draft is mandatory, and only for men.
The draft itself is inactive. No one is being drafted NOW.
---------
YET!


But Kerry proposed mandatory service for all high school students.
And Democrat Rep. Charles Rangel of NY pushed a bill in Congress
for mandatory military service.
-------------------------
That's ONLY because he KNOWS that if EVERYONE had to serve they would
never tolerate idiots taking us to cultural urban wars. They'd vote
to nuke our enemies instead, as we SHOULD be doing.

So, you really think the whole world should be destroyed?

I didn't know you were _that_ fanatical.

Thanks,
Rich
----------------------------
It wouldn't take a quarter of our early air-burst nuclear tests to
turn Islam into a meaningless religion of a few impoverished bedouins.
We survived those pretty well.

-Steve

Collateral damage?

Tom
--------------

What's your point? We're talking about nuking Islam out of existence
here. If you want we can drop leaflets and ask
who wants to live in the American southwest and become
"Injuns"?

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 17:33:02 +0000, Tom MacIntyre wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:03:14 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com
wrote:

Rich Grise wrote:

On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:41:59 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:

No, registration for the draft is mandatory, and only for men.
The draft itself is inactive. No one is being drafted NOW.
---------
YET!


But Kerry proposed mandatory service for all high school students.
And Democrat Rep. Charles Rangel of NY pushed a bill in Congress
for mandatory military service.
-------------------------
That's ONLY because he KNOWS that if EVERYONE had to serve they would
never tolerate idiots taking us to cultural urban wars. They'd vote
to nuke our enemies instead, as we SHOULD be doing.

So, you really think the whole world should be destroyed?

I didn't know you were _that_ fanatical.

Thanks,
Rich
----------------------------
It wouldn't take a quarter of our early air-burst nuclear tests to
turn Islam into a meaningless religion of a few impoverished bedouins.
We survived those pretty well.

-Steve

Collateral damage?

That's not what's stopping them. What is stopping them is that they
wouldn't be able to get the oil for many years.

Notwithstanding the evil of mass murder on such an incomprehensible
scale.

Thanks,
Rich
-------------------------

The oil is away from population centers, no problem.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

uvcceet@juno.com wrote:

uvcceet@juno.com wrote:

In <418B3FEF.17CF@armory.com>, on 11/05/04 at 08:48 AM,
"R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> said:
--------------
Nazi's are Rightists, like Republicans, YOU go read history!

You come flying in here this AM with twenty posts spouting all kinds of
misinformation and that is okay.
-----------------
Nope, bullshit, I'm informing, YOU'RE disinforming.

You aren't informing anyone of anything, other than you know how to swear a
lot, and make childish comments.
----------------------

You're disinforming again.

You will never live long enough to put forth
a rational argument that Republicans are like Nazis.
-------------------------

I've lived to age 55, are you going to kill me now, you little faggoty
ponce?? And by the way, the well-recognized connect
between Nazi's and Rightists predates my whole life, you idiot.

You are just a sad,
tired, broken little man who has no job,
----------------------------

Error, I have TWO jobs, idiot.

no life,
--------------

Gee, and *I* thought this was it!

no loved ones,
----------------

Just because YOU don't suck my dick doesn't mean I don't get that,
dip-shit.

and beyond usenet, no life.
------------------------------

You seem to have a dismal opinion of Usenet, where you spend
SOOO much time trying to oppose me.

Disinforming????
--------------------

Yeah, you, shit-mind.

Everyone seems to want to publicly embarass
themselves in this group, why would you be any different.
-------------------
You're a contentless posturer.
{the rest of your posture deleted]

You see? When you are caught, and have to defend, you simply lash out with a
swearing tantrum, or you attack the messenger.
---------------------

Your posture was your only message, you stupid little prig!
You speak some cut-n-paste toss-off line and THEN you WHINE
that you "caught" me and I "have to defend"!! FROM WHAT?????
There WASN'T ANYTHING!!

That is absolutely the method of the liberal,
----------------------

To respond against contentless posturers? I agree!!

except you are a conservative,
---------------

Make up your mind, for Gawd sake!
Last *I* looked, a Communist was NOT a "conservative"!!

bent on stirring the pot here
and making comments that even you don't buy into.
---------------------

You're searching for the word disingenuous, but you don't know it
because it's what YOU are!

Nice try, but it takes a
real liberal to use the standard form of attack in the most persuasive manner.
-------------------------

More cut-n-paste toss-off lines.

Nope. Bullshit. You don't like being called what you are, therefore you liken
it to being called a nigger, which is disinforming and disingenuous and
dishonest.

Nah, I am not a Republican,
------------------------

Let's guess, you're a Lee-Bur-Tair-eean!
That's just an ignorant baby Republican.

so your attempt to classify me as a Nazi is
-------------------------

Right on the money.

impotent, not unlike yourself.
----------------------------

Since I just squirted my jiz in this lady's cunt, (Lady: "Hi!")
you're a liar, but you don't even know it!

You don't even know what a Nazi is. You were
only born about twenty years ago, so how could you possibly know what Nazi
even is?
------------------------

Nope, 55 years ago this winter, shit-mind.

Before you regurgitate venom all over the list because of this post, just stop
and think about maybe keeping it on an even keel and see if you can voice an
opinion without attaching racist, bigoted comments to it?
-------------------------
And NOW you're trying to UTILIZE your phony argument.
Calling lying criminals like you a lying criminal is not in any way"
bigoted".

Here again, the troll cannot defend his position, so he attacks and tries to
insult the messenger.
-----------------------

Message, I see no message! Only your posturing.

Just thought it might add an air of civility and class to the group........
g

John
------------------------
For that to happen you'd have to be tortured to death here horribly.

You are not very good at this usenet stuff.
-----------------

You've been playing on the 12 y/o comeback group, I see!
{remainder of your best cut-n-paste deleted]

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Terry Given]

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

Clarence wrote:


[]

OK then Clarence, seeing as you are so rational - how would you prevent
this particular kid (IIRC he was 4 and therefore not amenable to discussion)

from playing chicken in traffic.


Or would you refrain from smacking him, then be surprised when he gets killed?

Terry

-----------
Those are NOT the only two options, you bloody fucking moron.

-Steve

Hi Steve,

I am not a "bloody fucking moron" as you so eloquently put it. The key
aspect of the paragraph is "how would YOU prevent..."

In other words:
"OK mister, so you want to stop the parent from smacking in this
instance. what do you suggest they do instead"

and no suggestion has been forthcoming. This leads me to conclude
Clarence is a member of the (m)Oral Minority - the naysayers who would
forcibly rule out a course of action (in this case smacking) without
concerning themselves what might replace it.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Terry Given]

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Terry Given wrote:

Tom MacIntyre wrote:


If you have to use corporal punishment, you are an unfit parent!

blanket statements are easy to make but inevitably fail the real-world
test. Just what do you do with the child who insists on running across
the road in front of cars?

------------------
You prevent him, you do not hit him. You prevent him till he is old
enough to know better. Being hit does NOT convey your analysis to his
mind, it merely makes him hate your fucking guts.

Such bullshit excuses for child abuse are the hiding place of sick
drunkards and sadists with mental problems.



I ask that because we had an interesting case
publicised in NZ a few years back - a parent was walloping their kids
arse in public, and a neighbour called the police (it is still legal to
smack your kids here). Turns out the kid runs across roads. They fenced
& locked their property, and in this case had locked him inside his
room, but he smashed the window, escaped and was playing chicken with
cars when his mum found him and gave him a hiding. Their defence (apart
from the fact it wasnt illegal) - what the hell else can they do? they
dont want him to die.....

-------------------
The State should kill his parents immediately, as they have raised a
baby that breaks windows and plays in traffic just to get away from
them! Nobody in their right mind believes your tale or their stupid
lies.



I have yet to hit my (9.5yr old) daughter. I doubt the need will arise,
but should it I will not hesitate. I hardly even need to punish her -
when she misbehaves, I explain to her what will happen if she continues,
and that the outcome is entirely her choice. Because I am very
consistent (with a minimal set of rules too) Kate knows I will do
exactly what I say, and almost always chooses to end the bad behaviour.

------------------
You are a sick abusive piece of shit. Hitting others to control them
is a emotional sickness. It is NEVER needed or even vaguely useful,
and it is NOT YOUR RIGHT!

Where do you get "I beat my daughter" out of that paragraph, idiot!

I will spell it out very clearly, as you seem to have a rudimentary
grasp of english:

"I have yet to hit my daughter" means, quite simply, that I HAVE NOT HIT
MY DAUGHTER. I didnt think american was that far removed from english....

I have found it to be a very effective technique, which has the added
advantage of teaching her about consequences. It didnt start to work so
effectively until she was 5 or so, and had developed a sufficient
vocabulary to understand the conversations; prior to that the bad
behaviour was punished (usually by being sent to bed, even at 10am)

------------------------
I hope she leaves and keeps her children safely away from shit like
you!



Cheers
Terry

----------------------
You're a sick abused and abusive piece of shit.
What was done to you damaged your mind and heart permanently!

-Steve

Steve, you seem to have a wide variety of problems, not least of which
is your reading comprehension.

I guess this is why everyone ends up telling you to fuck off, and stops
reading your posts.

Terry

 

[Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su]

"Terry Given" <my_name@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:2onjd.4704$op3.178435@news.xtra.co.nz...
[snip]

As an adult I think it has
made me a bit paranoid, in that I am constantly aware of who and what
is
around me at all times, always looking for the attack (thats come in
handy a couple of times . Mind you I approach driving the same way
(Im
a motorcyclist) and thats been REALLY helpful.

I agree. A guy I knew said two things to me that I'll never forget,
both after getting off his motorcycle after a difficult ride thru
crowded rush-hour traffic. He said, "What we need is a good
old-fashioned plague!"

And the other was that he was worried about ending up as an organ donor
because of idiot drivers.

Cheers
Terry

 

[Andre]

Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message news:<5n7oo0dtimpg41bnar6j47go69khij74bd@4ax.com>...

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:21:29 -0500, "DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote:

Good, then DON'T say any more.

"Frank Bemelman" <f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote in message
news:418ab322$0$36861$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
[snip]
Accordingly, the first step toward getting freedom and justice in
Palestine
and reducing anti-American feelings abroad is to stop all U.S. financial
aid
to Israel, until there is a long-term solution in place. "

I have no more to say.


Naaah! Just give Israel some neutron bombs, to minimize the physical
damage ;-)

Isn't that a bit of overkill?

Last I heard, Arafat was being kept in a quantum entanglement
generator- so he's in a superposition of dead and not dead- kinda like
Schrodinger's Cat.

-A
"Bother" said Pooh, as the inertial dampeners went offline at warp...

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 09:13:10 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:12:08 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

That's merely fuzzy thinking. "Involuntary Servitude" is slavery
without pay. Everyone has to work to eat,...

I was responding to "Everyone has to work to eat."

That is not true, unless you consider begging or dumpster-diving to
be "work."
----------------------------
In a decent society there are no "dumpsters" because everything is
owned, not cast-off,

So where do you toss your leftovers? Everything down the disposal,
just to make sure they starve to death to protect you from any
reminders that not everybody is born with a silver spoon in
their mouth?

and diving is trespass/theft, and begging is
illegal because it is harrasment/intimidation/theft and because
it is seeking to live without working, which is a crime.

OK, your true stripes come out.

You believe that people should be forced to conform to the
fantasies of R. Steve Walz.

That's nazi.

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:57:23 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

I think you simply grossed him out. Some courses of action should
simply be prohibited on penalty of death,

So nobody has the right to do anything, but you have the right
to kill whoever you want to.

That's real sane.

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:17:40 +1300, Terry Given wrote:

R. Steve Walz wrote:

Had my father hit me even once, I'd have turned from everything and
become a criminal set lifelong on revenge against anyone who got in
my way. Know ye that you are blessed with a world in which my father
was a sensible man, or I'd have killed or maimed several of you and
yours by now! Seriously!

So the only reason you are not a homicidal axe-wielding maniac is
because your father never once smacked you, but a single spank would
drive you over the edge.

Having read your posts on this thread, I am inclined to agree with your
own character assessment - you are dangerously unstable.

So is the F-16, if the attitude control computer breaks. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 09:27:39 +0000, R. Steve Walz wrote:

No, it's your child's. That teacher should have been beaten to death
by the children. And if you did the same you should have been killed
as well.

Well, you sure do prescribe a lot of death for someone who espouses
non-violence.

If two kids on the high-school playgroung get into a fistfight and
one of them turned 18 yesterday, do you have him executed?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:24:04 -0800, Tim Wescott wrote:

Rich The Philosophizer wrote:


I was going to say something marginally similar, just more along the
lines of it's a correlation, which doesn't imply causation. They
could both be things that are caused by something else, like they're
symptoms of some underlying thing, or something.

But Smoking doesn't cause Cancer either, but almost everybody blames
it anyway.


I hope you're being sarcastic about the smoking comment.

Nope. I'm dead serious.

I coded documents in two, count'em, two, tobacco litigations. I have
seen the documents that refute the so-called "scientific studies" that
"proved" that smoking "causes" cancer. And I have seen the documents
that _show_ that the antis' reports are bogus. But they got buried,
because the antis had an agenda to push. These documtents used to be on
the internet, but they've apparently taken those pages down. They were
on the tobacco companies' websites, so they were probably forced to
take them down.

And that's still notwithstanding that smoking does not cause cancer.

One of the studied that got buried, which was published in the Lancet
or maybe the British Medical Journal, showed a correlation between
personality type and cancer that was so strong, that in the same
data set, the distribution of smokers/nonsmokers was below the noise
level. And it wasn't the only study that showed that correlation.

And the personality type that gives itself cancer is characterized
by rigidity of thinking and lack of emotional outlet, which is perfectly
logical, when you really look at the big picture.

Yes, it's a correlation with no causality indicated in the data
presented in the news report. Either the workers only found correlation
and just assumed a causal link, or there was more research than is being
reported.

Whenever you're dealing with humans it makes the double blind
experiments hard to get by the ethics panels.

Tell me about it!

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Rich The Philosophizer]

On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:52:20 +1300, Terry Given wrote:

mum at a cafe having lunch/coffee with friends, sprogs abound. Adults
talking, kid comes up and says "mum, mum..." mum ignores kid for 5
minutes or so, then screams at kid to be quiet, and gives kid a wallop.

What's this guy supposed to do? Lacking a time machine, of course:
http://www.punchbaby.com/media/gitfakt/clips/ads/condoms.mpg

Cheers!
Rich