[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New lit loadings
- To: KellySt@aol.com, hous0042@maroon.tc.umn.edu, T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl, stevev@efn.org, jim@bogie2.bio.purdue.edu, zkulpa@ippt.gov.pl, rddesign@wolfenet.com, David@interworld.com, lparker@destin.gulfnet.com, DotarSojat@aol.com, sl0c8@cc.usu.edu, 101765.2200@compuserve.com, kgstar@most.fw.hac.com, neill@foda.math.usu.edu, pbakelaar@exit109.com, mkshp@ionet.net
- Subject: Re: New lit loadings
- From: zkulpa@zmit1.ippt.gov.pl (Zenon Kulpa)
- Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 21:09:12 +0200
> From kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Tue Jul 23 20:40:29 1996
>
> At 7:56 PM 7/23/96, Zenon Kulpa wrote:
> >> From kgstar@most.fw.hac.com Tue Jul 23 17:30:00 1996
> >>
> >> As you probably know, I've been working up some stuff for LIT. Well I've
> >> just uploaded a bunch of it. New home pages for LITY, Marine sciences,
> >> near earth development, and central library, member lists, etc.. etc...
> >> Please take a look.
> >>
> >> http://165.254.130.90/LIT/
> >>
> >You asked for that... ;-))
> >
> >1. The URL above loads the "Hi there" text and nothing more
> > (as does your LIT imagemap).
> > One must do some guesswork to add "index.html" to the address...
>
> Opps. Try.
>
> http://165.254.130.90/LIT/index.html
>
Yes, I had already figured it out
(as you should have seen from my text above...)
> >3. Some texts on your LIT imagemap are too small/too low contrast,
> > hence hardly readable.
>
> Do you mean the tree on the bottom of the pages?
>
Exactly.
> >4. Congratulations! - you must have worked reeeelly hard:
> > the number of spelling errors is an order of magnitude less
> > that your usual share... ;-)
>
> ??? I though I forgot to even spell check it?
>
Really??? Miracles happen... ;-)
> >And be prepared for another round of Kelly-bashing
> >concerning the one-way missions... ;-))
>
> :) Oooo. Freash meat.
>
> I could never figure out where you were coming from on the pro kamakazi
> flights. Over here were hard pressed to get permision to deliberatly risk
> solder lives in combat. Expending them for anything short of saving a U.S.
> city is unthinkable.
>
> In my cynical periods, I figured you'ld been under the Soviet thumb for too
> long.
>
There may be something in it -
we here must still have some fighting trim left
(you coke-drinking, couch-potato-lying decadents... ;-))
Seriously, though, my problem with this discussion was
that you seemingly were not able to, or do not want to,
understandand the GREAT difference between one-way missions
and suicide missions. Only the latter are "kamikaze";
the former are simply cosmic-distance relocations -
I do not see any suicidal elements in them.
So budling both types of missions under "one-way" heading
and then discussing them together as if both were same-type
suicidal missions (as you do in your Progress Report)
really infuriates me, as simply unfair arguing practice...
-- Zenon