smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) (11/24/88)
`There is a well of anti-Americanism.' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Amos Shapir <nsc!taux01!taux02.taux01.UUCP!amos> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 88 14:45:41 -0200 To: garth!smryan Subject: Re: Changing Spencer's signature Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,talk.politics.misc In-Reply-To: <1879@garth.UUCP> Organization: National Semiconductor (IC) Ltd, Israel Home of the 32532 Hdate: 4 Kislev 5749 Status: R In article <1879@garth.UUCP> you write: .... Funny it should come from me, but I have actually had to *learn* English... I don't mean to be petty, but if you want to be read seriously, better start writing seriously, or at least filter everything through 'spell'. -- Amos Shapir amos@nsc.com National Semiconductor (Israel) P.O.B. 3007, Herzlia 46104, Israel Tel. +972 52 522261 TWX: 33691, fax: +972-52-558322 34 48 E / 32 10 N (My other cpu is a NS32532) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- An argument technique with all the subtlety of tear gas and plastic bullets. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tracy Tims <uunet!watmath!twltims> Message-Id: <8811150545.AA15266@watmath> To: garth!smryan Subject: Re: Changing Spencer's signature Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,talk.politics.misc In-Reply-To: <1879@garth.UUCP> Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario Cc: Status: R In general I agree with you. If you aren't paying, you're a spectator. Sometimes Henry's agressive comments about the U.S. space program leave me a little uncomfortable. (Although sometimes the situation is more complicated, which is why nations have foreign policy. Our actions don't exist in isolation.) But this amuses me: >- Does Canada still have an Official Secrets Act? I don't keep track of these > things. I do think it is rather tacky for any country which does have such > legislation to critise another which does protect freedom of speech, at > least in principle. > > Our Bill of Rights applies to everybody > within our borders, regardless of citizenship. How often does that occur? > In fact, how many countries even have a Bill of Rights? This is such an apparently typical U.S. view! Because your country has these particularly worded laws (which only seem to be observed when convenient) you think that somehow you are more "free". The attitudes of the people are at least as important as the statutes. And I have news for you. We're pretty free up here! You don't see hordes of oppressed Canadians (or Western Europeans) coming to the U.S. because they aren't free at home. Forgive me (because I don't want this to sound as strong as it will, and I am sure you are a reasonable person) but the two paragraphs above are what us hicks usually think of as "typical American ideological arrogance." There are positive aspects of U.S. culture and politics, but there are negative aspects as well. The same is true for other equally civilized countries. It's just that some of the details are different. Tracy Tims "Help, help, I'm being repressed." :-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm sure this is a comfort to all those of Northern Ireland as the UK Parliament `adjusts' their civil liberties. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Hayman <iuvax!sahayman> To: garth!smryan Subject: Re: Changing Spencer's signature Status: R You know, it's entirely possible that none of *YOUR* tax dollars went to the shuttle program either. So you have just as much right to criticize the shuttle program as anybody else. Sheesh, lighten up a bit. Canada and the US are supposed to be friends. ..Steve hayman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In this country, we don't pick and choose what our taxes are spent on. Friends don't pick at injuries of their friends. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: garth!smryan Subject: Re: Changing Spencer's signature Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,talk.politics.misc In-Reply-To: <1879@garth.UUCP> Organization: McGill University, Computer Vision and Robotics Lab Cc: Status: R In article <1879@garth.UUCP> you write: >My, my, my. > >Aren't we just so full of `I'm so international' posturings. I don't normally respond to this sort of crap, but in this case GROW UP. It appears to me that you are a good reason Americans have such a bad reputation internationally. On the other hand, my girlfriend is from DC, so it can't be all American's. You must just be a jerk. Henry Cox -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deleted were all the Canadian efforts at world peace and understanding such as the peace corps, reliefs, and the futile efforts of the foreign minister to bring peace to the middle east last spring. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Racism on comp.lang.c (was Re: Variable-length messages.) Message-ID: <444@geovision.UUCP> Date: 13 Nov 88 03:48:50 GMT Article-I.D.: geovisio.444 Posted: Sat Nov 12 19:48:50 1988 Date-Received: 20 Nov 88 18:21:42 GMT References: <1695@garth.UUCP> <140@twwells.uucp> <1737@garth.UUCP> Reply-To: pt@geovision.UUCP (Paul Tomblin) Organization: GeoVision Corp, Ottawa, Canada Lines: 32 Summary: International diplomacy is a two way street In article <1737@garth.UUCP> smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) writes: > >Like forgetting about international diplomancy. Also anyone has the right >to decide the internal affairs of other countries even though he does not >have to pay the consequences. Deciding the affairs of other countries? Is that like Reagan coming on Canadian TV to tell us why we have to be good little Americans and vote for Brian Mulroney? Or is that like putting in a signature line talking about our "Unfair" subsidies, like decent Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, and protection for the Environment. I suspect you voted for Reagan because of his famous "Trees cause more pollution than people" speach. Or was it because of James Watt? Sorry, I know this goes somewhere else, but I didn't start this! Canada is not Grenada, Iran or Nicaragua. Keep your gun-boat diplomacy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apparently my mistake was including a statement about Canada's quest to establish its own identity. The appropriate action for a true internationalist is to attack and insult anybody who disagrees with him. postscript. I really enjoyed all your comments above pointing out who G Dyer is. -- -- s m ryan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As loners, Ramdoves are ineffective in making intelligent decisions, but in groups or wings or squadrons or whatever term is used, they respond with an esprit de corps, precision, and, above all, a ruthlessness...not hatefulness, that implies a wide ranging emotional pattern, just a blind, unemotional devotion to doing the job.....
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (11/25/88)
<Sigh> This looks like a good time to remind Steven Ryan (and newcomers to Usenet who may be reading this) of one of the basic points of net.etiquette. It is considered *extremely* impolite to take private netmail messages from other users and repost them publicly in news articles, without first obtaining the authors' permission. While network security is not flawless, most users operate on the assumption that their mail is essentially private. Users who willfully repost private mail may tend to find their mailboxes rather empty in future, as few of us wish to take the risk of having our conversations broadcast far and wide at the whim of the other fellow. If you specifically want to get mail on a topic so you can report the results to the net, say so in your original posting: "Mail your responses and I will summarize here" is one way to put it. If you get mail you think is worth publishing even though the sender intended it for private consumption, mail a request to post the message (or relevant portions) publicly, and do nothing else until and unless you get a YES answer. Following these guidelines will help net.comity all round. Besides, I can state with authority that Elvis would have wanted it this way! :-) -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
twltims@watmath.waterloo.edu (Tracy Tims) (11/27/88)
I hate it when undersocialized kids get access to the net. Please read this carefully, Steve, and have your mom or dad explain the difficult words to you: 1) Please don't post private mail to the network, unless you have been given permission. This is called "courtesy". Courtesy is something that lets people of differing values and opinions to communicate with each other without ripping each other's lungs out. 2) It's OK for you to be American. It really is. You don't need to feel so defensive about it. One day you will find a sense of inner confidence within yourself that will let you accept the differences of others. Trust me. 3) When you respond to comments made by other people, your response will have greater effect if you address the issue. My comment contained two major points: 1) There are countries in the world who have a similar levels of freedom to the U.S.. The people who live in them are pretty comfortable and are not looking to the U.S. to provide a shining example. This doesn't mean we don't like you. See point 2 above. 2) The implicit statement you made concerning the superiority of the American system in ensuring freedom of speech is perceived by some people as an example of typical American ideological arrogance. An unfortunate perception, but true nevertheless, and one that us big people have to deal with in a productive way. Now while your response was sort of clever, it didn't really say anything about my comments. I think that now is a good time for you to start practicing reason and discourse. If you don't start now, you might never be able to. (Sort of like crossing your eyes and getting them stuck.) Good luck with this, Steve, and I hope Santa brings you something nice for Christmas! Tracy Tims
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (11/27/88)
In article <7921@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >... It is considered *extremely* impolite to take private >netmail messages from other users and repost them publicly in news >articles, without first obtaining the authors' permission. It is also a violation of copyright. When somebody mails you a letter (the law was written with physical letters in mind, but almost certainly would be held to apply to electronic ones too), you own the copy that you receive, but the *author* owns the copyright unless he specifically renounces it or otherwise indicates that the letter is "for publication" (e.g. by sending it to a "letters to the editor" address). You can be sued for publishing a private letter without the author's permission. -- Sendmail is a bug, | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology not a feature. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
shelle@caen.engin.umich.edu (Thomas A Kashangaki) (11/27/88)
People, this is not "sci" ; it is not "space"; and it most certainly is not "shuttle". Could we please use this newsgroup for the purpose that it was created for? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ Thomas A-L Kashangaki | SHELLE@caen.engin.umich.edu ~ ~ University of Michigan | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ~ ~ Aerospace Engineering Department | ~ ~ | ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
von.hall.jr.@raider.MFEE.TN.US (11/29/88)
I agree onward and upward. Lets use the net as a source of info not a source
of flames. We can get that anywhere. Has anyone heard exact times on the
launch. And I'll throw this question out for debate is the Atlantis really
ready for the trip? Why or Why not?
Von Hall
Computer Science MTSU
Murfreesboro,Tn. 37132
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm O.K. You're O.K.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------von.hall.jr.@raider.MFEE.TN.US (11/29/88)
Was this message really nessecary? There is e-mail. I've got some bad
criticism from e-mail. That is where it belongs. Everything else is public
criticism. Now please on with the business at hand.
Von Hall
Computer Science MTSU
Murfressboro,Tn. 37132
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really it's O.K. to Move on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------greg@proxftl.UUCP (Gregory N. Hullender) (11/30/88)
In article <1988Nov27.003012.28598@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >It is also a violation of copyright. When somebody mails you a letter >(the law was written with physical letters in mind, but almost certainly >would be held to apply to electronic ones too), you own the copy that you >receive, but the *author* owns the copyright unless he specifically >renounces it or otherwise indicates that the letter is "for publication" >(e.g. by sending it to a "letters to the editor" address). You can be >sued for publishing a private letter without the author's permission. Well, people can sue you for almost anything these days, but this notion that a the author of a private letter holds an enforceable copyright in it simply doesn't hold water -- popular though it is on the net. It is true that the author of a work holds a copyright on it just for having created it, but to enforce that copyright he must perfect it, which he does by placing a valid copyright notice on it and registering that copyright with the appropriate authorities. If you distribute copies without perfecting your copyright, you don't necessarily lose it, but you cannot move against an infringer until you *have* perfected it, and you cannot collect any damages for any infringement made prior to your perfecting your copyright. -- Greg Hullender / 3511 NE 22nd Av./Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33308 / uunet!proxftl!greg "People get tired of being trampled on by the iron-shod feet of oppression." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) (11/30/88)
>In article <7921@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >>... It is considered *extremely* impolite to take private >>netmail messages from other users and repost them publicly in news >>articles, without first obtaining the authors' permission. > >It is also a violation of copyright. When somebody mails you a letter >(the law was written with physical letters in mind, but almost certainly Whereas mailing Canadian jingoism instead of posting it is merely cowardice. -- -- s m ryan +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Good day-eh. Je me souviens.| +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) (11/30/88)
> This is called "courtesy". Courtesy is > something that lets people of differing values and opinions to > communicate with each other without ripping each other's lungs > out. Amusing since this original started when I suggested Spencer be courtesied. > 2) It's OK for you to be American. And it's okay for you to be a Canadian. Why do you need to feel so defensive? Why do you feel it is right that Spencer posts snide remarks for Canada yet asking him to stop warrants a deluge of hate mail? > 3) When you respond to comments made by other people, your response > will have greater effect if you address the issue. Yes, indeed. > 1) There are countries in the world who have a similar levels > of freedom to the U.S.. The people who live in them are > pretty comfortable and are not looking to the U.S. to > provide a shining example. In your haste you overlooked my comment on that exact point. > 2) The implicit statement you made concerning the superiority > of the American system in ensuring freedom of speech is Given the recent events of the UK Parliament, it is a superior system for protecting individual freedoms, but, of course, some countries do not wish to give individual that degree of power. Assuming countries must or that parliamentary governments do is arrogance. > I think that now is a good time for > you to start practicing reason and discourse. Perhaps it would help if you read all that written rather than reading a few words and reading in your desired conclusion. Oh, I have learned one thing and that is to attack immediately. I have tried by polite and only have been savaged in return. I made that mistake again in requesting posters in Canada to be polite while making concillatory statements about Canadian identity, and still you feel the need to attack anything which disturbs your blithe ignorance. -- -- s m ryan +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Good day-eh. Je me souviens.| +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) (11/30/88)
In article <3feb2236.298d@dl298d.engin.umich.edu> shelle@caen.engin.umich.edu (Thomas A Kashangaki) writes: > >People, this is not "sci" ; it is not "space"; and it most certainly is not "shuttle". >Could we please use this newsgroup for the purpose that it was created for? Why not keep track of the original controversy? Is it polite for person posting from Canada (hence presumed Canadian) to make snide remarks about a system for which he is not (presumably) forced to pay taxes for? Money and how it is spent is very important to understand why the US space program is where it is and where it is going. -- -- s m ryan +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Good day-eh. Je me souviens.| +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
sl148033@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Kevin_Clendenien) (11/30/88)
In article <2045@garth.UUCP> smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) writes: > >Is it polite for person posting from Canada (hence presumed Canadian) to make >snide remarks about a system for which he is not (presumably) forced to pay >taxes for? Money and how it is spent is very important to understand why the >US space program is where it is and where it is going. >-- > -- s m ryan The amount of money one has contributed to a particular endeavor has no effect on whether a particular criticism is polite, or not. The fact that you have paid taxes, some of which has been given to NASA, gives you some input as to how that money is spent (you know, elections and all.) But, it doesn't make it polite to say 'NASA has its head stuck up its ass.' If our space program is truely strong, and on the right track, then we should be able to handle criticism from abroad (although I have to make a conscious effort to remember that Canada isn't part of the U.S. They are about the best ally that a country could ask for, bar none.) Anyway, I have never found Henry to be impolite. His criticisms are usually very valid, and I wouldn't be surprised if many of the NASA people on the net actually build on some of his ideas. Of course, most of this is irrelevent. Even if someone on the net chooses to be impolite (many names spring to mind) they still deserve a chance to express their views. If their views have no merit, than people will just ignore them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- sl148033@silver.UUCP Kevin Clendenien Still waiting for a PRO space exploration candidate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
twltims@watmath.waterloo.edu (Tracy Tims) (12/01/88)
>> 2) It's OK for you to be American. [Tracy] > >And it's okay for you to be a Canadian. Why do you need to feel so defensive? >Why do you feel it is right that Spencer posts snide remarks for Canada yet >asking him to stop warrants a deluge of hate mail? [Steve] Steve, I am going to respond to you because I think it is the responsibility of every adult to help the mentally disadvantaged whenever possible. Your latest posting fills me with compassion and concern. Here is a direct quote from my private letter to you, which you had previously (and very, very thoughtfully indeed) made available to all the other nice people reading news: In general I agree with you. If you aren't paying, you're a spectator. Sometimes Henry's aggressive comments about the U.S. space program leave me a little uncomfortable. (Although sometimes the situation is more complicated, which is why nations have foreign policy. Our actions don't exist in isolation.) [Tracy] Please do not take this as a criticism, because anyone can make a mistake, especially with such complicated material as this. You seem to have gotten your concepts backwards. I am not saying it is right that Henry Spencer "posts snide remarks for Canada." In fact, I am agreeing with your concerns, although perhaps not completely. Perhaps if you read this part of my letter over again six or seven times you will see what I mean. Don't be afraid to have your special-ed teacher help you with it. She/he won't laugh at you, and neither will I. >> 3) When you respond to comments made by other people, your response >> will have greater effect if you address the issue. [Tracy] > >Yes, indeed. [Steve] > >> 1) There are countries in the world who have a similar levels >> of freedom to the U.S.. The people who live in them are >> pretty comfortable and are not looking to the U.S. to >> provide a shining example. [Tracy] > >In your haste you overlooked my comment on that exact point. [Steve] Actually, Stevie (do you mind if I call you that?), I did not overlook your comment on that exact point. Here it is: "I'm sure this is a comfort to all those of Northern Ireland as the UK Parliament `adjusts' their civil liberties." [Stevie Ryan] I suppose you thought this was a politically and morally astute counter- example, didn't you? And perhaps I could see where you got that idea. But if you examine my statement, I asserted that there were countries where the natives felt they were free. (This is a "paraphrase" of my original statements. A paraphrase is the restatement of an idea in a different form.) Your "comment" on the matter I suppose means "oh but look, aren't there countries where perhaps this isn't true?". And a such precious way of stating it! But you see, both your statement and mine can be simultaneously correct. It's O.K. if you are confused by this. Many people who cannot deal with this sort of relationship between ideas go on to lead productive and satisfying lives. Don't give it another thought. If you meant something different by your response, perhaps you should have been just a bit more clear. If you feel that there is an essential weakness in all western political systems excluding the U.S., you should say that, and support your argument in a consistent and (most importantly) coherent way. Don't assume your readers are going to read your thoughts as well. And just a little bit of advice: in a discussion, it is a bad strategic move to immediately occupy the low ground. > >> I think that now is a good time for >> you to start practicing reason and discourse. [Tracy] > >Perhaps it would help if you read all that written rather than reading a few >words and reading in your desired conclusion. [Steve] I have read all that you wrote, and have also noticed the way you deal with others. This line of debate could lead to a comparison between you and I. We should avoid that. You should just go on and live life, as best you can, without making discouraging comparisons between yourself and others. >Oh, I have learned one thing and that is to attack immediately. I have tried >by polite and only have been savaged in return. I made that mistake again in >requesting posters in Canada to be polite while making conciliatory statements >about Canadian identity, and still you feel the need to attack anything which >disturbs your blithe ignorance. [Steve] What a tragedy is life. Here we have Stevie, perhaps in what should be the prime of his life, and the cruel fates have arranged that he should learn only the one thing. Well Stevie, here is the rest of my letter to you. Other readers, please take note of the "cowardice", "Canadian jingoism" and "blithe ignorance". And Stevie, I figured out why you classed my letter as "hate mail". I said "... I am sure you are a reasonable person...". I most humbly apologise for offending you, and I hereby retract my statement. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [The rest of my original letter, just for reference. Ignore freely.] But this amuses me: > Stevie Ryan: >- Does Canada still have an Official Secrets Act? I don't keep track of these > things. I do think it is rather tacky for any country which does have such > legislation to criticise another which does protect freedom of speech, at > least in principle. > > Our Bill of Rights applies to everybody > within our borders, regardless of citizenship. How often does that occur? > In fact, how many countries even have a Bill of Rights? This is such an apparently typical U.S. view! Because your country has these particularly worded laws (which only seem to be observed when convenient) you think that somehow you are more "free". The attitudes of the people are at least as important as the statutes. And I have news for you. We're pretty free up here! You don't see hordes of oppressed Canadians (or Western Europeans) coming to the U.S. because they aren't free at home. Forgive me (because I don't want this to sound as strong as it will, and I am sure you are a reasonable person) but the two paragraphs above are what us hicks usually think of as "typical American ideological arrogance." There are positive aspects of U.S. culture and politics, but there are negative aspects as well. The same is true for other equally civilized countries. It's just that some of the details are different. -- -- Tracy William Lewis Tims University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada twltims@watmath.waterloo.edu, uunet!watmath!twltims
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (12/01/88)
In article <1069@proxftl.UUCP> greg@proxftl.UUCP (Gregory N. Hullender) writes: >It is true that the author of a work holds a copyright on it just for having >created it, but to enforce that copyright he must perfect it, which he does >by placing a valid copyright notice on it and registering that copyright with >the appropriate authorities... Notice and registration are necessary only for *published* works. Copyright on unpublished works, such as private letters, does exist and is enforceable. Really. Consult a lawyer before doing anything rash. -- SunOSish, adj: requiring | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 32-bit bug numbers. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
scott@attcan.UUCP (Scott MacQuarrie) (12/01/88)
In article <2043@garth.UUCP>, smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) writes: > >In article <7921@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: > >>... It is considered *extremely* impolite to take private > >>netmail messages from other users and repost them publicly in news > >>articles, without first obtaining the authors' permission. > > > >It is also a violation of copyright. When somebody mails you a letter > >(the law was written with physical letters in mind, but almost certainly > > Whereas mailing Canadian jingoism instead of posting it is merely cowardice. > -- > -- s m ryan Mr. Ryan, I have had significant dealings with Americans from all parts of the USA and have found them to be, for the most part, extremely likable people. You, unfortunatly, are proof positive that the UGLY american is still in existance. Not only are you bombastic and offensive, you are also unable to use the english language correctly. No one has displayed any jingoism in this discussion of the US space program/ NASA except yourself. Most of the comments are simply an honest and open discussion of the strenghts and weakness of NASA and it's management (or lack thereof). The other parts of this newsgroup (relating to you) are a reaction to your continous stream of boorish comments. I have seen little in anyone's mail (including the private mail that you seem to like to publish), in which any Canadian is attempting to show that Canada is the greatest nation on earth and has the world's state of the art space program - as the word "jingoism" implies. Most of the discussion as been around the point that any non-Americian has the right to discuss NASA's difficulties as much as any Americian and that Canada has contributed to the Space Program as well. If you wish to discuss this further, please move to talk.bizarre, as the rest of us would like to read articles concerning the subject we're here to discuss in the first place - SPACE and SPACE.SHUTTLES, not your inability to articulate in an intelligent interchange of ideas. Scott T. MacQuarrie Senior Technical Consultant, Toronto Branch, AT&T Canada Inc. ____ _______ _____ _______ ------- / __ \ |__ __| / _ \ |__ __| -====------ | (__) | | | \ \ \_\ | | -======------ | __ | | | / \ __ | | --====------- | | | | | | | (\ / / | | ----------- |_| |_| |_| \_____/ |_| ------- Phone: 416-499-9400 (Direct: 756-5124) MAIL: 3650 Victoria Park Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2H 3P7 CompuServe: 73677,102 ATTMAIL: !smacquarrie UUCP: uunet!attcan!scott p.s. My opinions are my own.
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (12/04/88)
I know this much, I would rather read Canadian space criticism than illicitly reposted email any day! :-) -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
gtww2z9z%gables.span@umigw.miami.edu (Jason Gross) (12/04/88)
In article <8073@dasys1.UUCP>, tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: > I know this much, I would rather read Canadian space criticism than > illicitly reposted email any day! :-) > -- > Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff > "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF > will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding) Hear, hear! I am terribly embarrased by Mr. Ryan's comments towards Canadians. As an American, it pains me to think there are those still in this country who still wants everybody to respect us just because we are us, even we if don't warrant that respect. If someone wants to make a comment about something internal to the US, please do so! He/She might give us an idea that we could use. To negate any statement from someone just because they aren't tax-paying citizens of this country is ludicrous! Think of it this way, they are giving advice t us for FREE! It is up to us to make use of that advice. And since we are s superpower, the actions we take can and sometimes do have reactions in our neighbor to the North, so I find it very reasonble that they would take the time to comment/critisize what they think is wrong, particularly since it might affect them (i.e. the acid rain problem, an American problem that severly affects Canada) SO, Mr. Ryan, take your anti-Everybody-Who-Doesn't-Pay-Taxes attitude and take put it where, well, you know. -- Jason Gross Comp Sci Ugrad University of Miami Class of '91 (?) =========================================================================== Four out of five doctors | Mail your invigorating replies to: | Post think that life is the | GTWW2Z9Z%Gables.Span@Umigw.Miami.Edu | No leading cause of death. | (What a lovely address, isn't it now?) | Bills ======================================================== IBM Sucks Silicon!
smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) (12/06/88)
>SO, Mr. Ryan, take your anti-Everybody-Who-Doesn't-Pay-Taxes attitude and >take put it where, well, you know. But I have. See below. -- +---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+ | Multi-culturalism -- just an excuse | When are we going to see | | to keep the minorities satisfied. | Anglo-saxon cultural events. | +---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+