weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (03/24/88)
In article <136@ccd700.UUCP>, jim@ccd700 (J. Sitek) writes: >them, are nothing more than collegiate buzz-words, and there is a big >bad, corporate world out there that doesn't have time for your shit. Can we drop this "big bad corporate world" cliche already? CJ, like me, is a Berkeley Math Grad Student, and the less us BMGSs have to do with BBCW, the better. You won't find BMGSs lining up to work for Ford Climate Control. Never. ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720 "Heck, I didn't even know they had a university in Houghton Michigan."
jim@ccd700.UUCP (J. Sitek) (03/25/88)
> In article <136@ccd700.UUCP>, jim@ccd700 (J. Sitek) writes: > >them, are nothing more than collegiate buzz-words, and there is a big > >bad, corporate world out there that doesn't have time for your shit. > > Can we drop this "big bad corporate world" cliche already? CJ, like me, > is a Berkeley Math Grad Student, and the less us BMGSs have to do with > BBCW, the better. > > You won't find BMGSs lining up to work for Ford Climate Control. Never. Matt, your posting has nothing to do with the issues being discussed. Why did you post it? You, like your buddy, have not refuted a single point of mine. So, failing that, you resort to flaming Ford. And a pretty feeble one at that. I suggest that since you have nothing to add that is remotely germane to this discussion, or this newsgroup, and since I certainly don't have to defend the most profitable corporation on Earth to you, we terminate this right now. Jim Sitek
silverio@jiff.berkeley.edu (C J Silverio) (03/26/88)
>> You won't find BMGSs lining up to work for Ford Climate Control. Never. > >Matt, your posting has nothing to do with the issues being discussed. >Why did you post it? Because it was relevant to your weak flaming, Sitek old man. >point of mine. So, failing that, you resort to flaming Ford. And a >pretty feeble one at that. I suggest that since you have nothing to >add that is remotely germane to this discussion, or this newsgroup, and >since I certainly don't have to defend the most profitable corporation >on Earth to you, we terminate this right now. Snicker snicker. Is it possible to defend Ford? Or is Sitek copping out? >Jim Sitek Anyway, Sitek, as you have the wit to notice, this is an inappropriate forum. I wonder why you posted here in the first place, but let's leave that issue for now. If you feel you have a legitimate point to defend, follow us elsewhere, to leave the Real Admins in peace to do Real Work. And, BTW, "mister" is a term of respect, and hence not applicable to you, sirrah. ucbvax!brahms!silverio C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
webber@athos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) (03/26/88)
In article <148@ccd700.UUCP>, jim@ccd700.UUCP (J. Sitek) writes: >.... > point of mine. So, failing that, you resort to flaming Ford. And a > pretty feeble one at that. I suggest that since you have nothing to It certainly was feeble. I much preferred the note in alt.flames about the size and significance to Usenet of the ccd700 site. > add that is remotely germane to this discussion, or this newsgroup, and > since I certainly don't have to defend the most profitable corporation > on Earth to you, we terminate this right now. Profitable? Well, I suppose profit is amount of value recieved minus amount of value given. So you want to claim that Ford has ripped off more people than any other corporation? Well, I don't know if I am really sure of that, but I guess I will bow to your greater firsthand knowledge. ------- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)