10/13   http://cbsnews.com - "But on one point, Kerry was disgraceful, and that is
        too weak a word. His mention of Cheney's daughter was gratuitous and
        heinous. I agree completely with Mrs. Cheney, who said tonight,
        'This is not a good man. This is coming from a mom. What a cheap and
        tawdry political trick.'"
        Momma is wrong.  Kerry told it like it was.  The vast majority of
        gay men and women are born that way.  It is not a matter of choice.
        Sorry.  This needs to be said more often by a leading American
        presidential candidate.
        I also happen to remember now that I had lost all respect for Mrs.
        Cheney in her comments about the "sensitive war on terror".
        It's not Kerry who is evil - it's Mrs. Cheney.
        \_ You're missing the point.  There was no need to bring up the
           VP's daughter's sexuality to say what he believed about sexuality.
           It was a weak attempt to split the conservative vote by reminding
           them Cheney's daughter is a lesbian.  Everyone groaned because
           they say it for what it was and it wasn't good no matter how you
           want to spin it.  But Kerry did something far worse which will
           hurt him with women everywhere.  I knew his last answer was bad
           but the women in the room dropped their jaws.  Kitty Dukakis
           anyone?
           \_ No, YOU'RE missing the point.  You and Mrs. Cheney see something
              where there isn't.  The truth is that being gay or lesbian in the
              vast majority of cases is not a choice.  If this splits the
              conservative vote because their brains are so small that they'll
              not turn out to vote because Cheney's daughter is lesbian, then
              that's their problem.  They'd already know this fact if they
              watched the VP debate, anyway.
              \_ Being gay or lesbian IS a choice, dumbass. What are you going
                 to claim next, that abstinence isn't a choice, that being
                 a liberal or conservative isn't a choice, that committing
                 suicide isn't a choice? There isn't anything physical
                 that makes you gay or straight. Some people are gay
                 and end up being bi, some are straight and end up being
                 gay. Just because you have a sexual preference doesn't
                 mean somehow you're branded with it. Certainly some of
                 us have a strong reaction towards something, but
                 making sexual orientation sound like it's a physical
                 attribute is just plain wrong. Unless you want to
                 get into a big debate about the concept of free will,
                 then you cannot simply posit that sexual preference
                 is not a choice.
                 \_ (a) There are genetic gays.  Some animals are born
                    gay.  Did they choose it?
                    (b) I don't think my heterosexuality is a choice in
                    a sense that I don't think I can wake up one day and
                    decide to be gay, and have it be anything more than
                    massive self-delusion. -- ilyas
                    \_ Come on ilyas.  You know those big gay pandas are just
                       lying  to themselves.  We need to bring them in with the
                       LORD!
                 \_ You're simply wrong on this, and it's unlikely that
                    your mind will be changed until you talk about it
                    with someone close to you who is gay.  I hope you will
                    be willing to listen.
                 \_ The emerging scientific (and public) concensus is that
                    homosexuality is largely genetic.  Obviously choosing to
                    engage in gay sex is a choice, but since most people's
                    attraction to the opposite sex seems ingrained, how can
                    you say attraction to the same sex is not also ingrained?
                 \_ Wow.  You *really* need to get out and meet some new
                    kinds of people.
                 \_ Out of curiosity, do you belong to a church that teaches
                    that gays are going to hell?
        \- the "armies of compassion" have been dispatched to come get you.
        \_ I don't think that this statement of yours is a proven fact.
        \_ a big part of the Gay Agenda is to convince heterosexuals that
        \_ a big part of the Big Gay Agenda is to convince heterosexuals that
           they are gay so they can have sex with them.
           \_ Proven schientifically!
                \_ at least my gay friends tell "warn" me about it
                   \_ Hope your gay friends are more comprehensible than you.
                      \_ grammar are teh gay!

10/13   Why Kerry likes to talk about his double-barreled shotgun and doesn't
        criticize non-passage of the assault weapons ban that much:
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31118-2004Oct13.html
        \- gee, if that is the most liberal member of the senate, i suppose
           it means ted kennedy is a bow hunter. --psb

10/13   What does mingus mean?
        \_ Chuck Mingus, famous jazz bass player.
           \_ Hey, that's Charles Mingus to you, pal.
           \_ http://achewood.com/?date=06202003
        \_ http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mingus&r=f
           Also see "minge" (British English), meaning something similar,
           or something nasty or an expression of disgust in general. -John
        \_ Mingus Dew is my favorite Be-Bop Cola!
        \_ mingus.eecs ?

10/13   Small-time politicians say Rape of Nanjing never occurred, causing
        weekly manga series to be suspended:
        http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20041014a3.htm
        \_ The problem is: how many Japanese people are going to read The Japan
           Times, let alone believing it?
           \_ Um, tons.  The Japan Times is a major newspaper in Japan.  The
              Mainichi, on the other hand, is a sensationalist rag.

10/13    CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/14/snap.poll/index.html
         "Early poll: Kerry clear winner in debate"

         CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/13/opinion/polls/main649227.shtml
         "Uncommitted voters pick Kerry"

         Fox: "Three's a Charm, Bush campaign suggests the president
               put in his best debate performance yet"

         ABC: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=163784
         "Last Presidential Debate Is a Draw"

         Summary: CNN/CBS say that Kerry won. Fox and ABC say it's
         a tie. We expected Fox to deny any Bush defeat, but what about
         ABC? Is it yet another subsidiary of Sinclair? Or is it yet
         another Fox alike, co-owned and run by Bush friend/family?
        \_ eh, I watched it, IMO, Kerry won.
        \_ eh, I watched it, IMO, Bush won.
        \_ Fox is aligned with the Bush Corporation.
           ABC is owned by Disney. Traditional family value, conservative.
           We all know Kerry won, but these news broadcast corporations
           can say whatever they want and change how voters vote.
           \_ Traditional family values like homosexuality?
           \_ We all know Kerry won?  Kerry looked stiff as a board and
              did not pass the living-room test.
        \_ ABC's poll had 38% Republicans, 30% Democrats.  Democrats said
           Kerry won, 81% to 5%, Republicans said Bush won, 72% to 12%,
           independents said Kerry won.  So really, ABC's poll says Kerry
           won, it just was skewed by their sample population.  -tom
           \_ CNN said this was the first debate where they had as many
              Democrats watching as Republicans.  Previously the people they
              talked to broke down as the ABC poll.
              I do agree with the suggestion that independents gave it to
              Kerry in all three debates.
        \_ I got calls from two Kerry-supporting friends within minutes of the
           end of the debate, and they both said Kerry won and Bush acted the
           fool.  A blog post by another friend, a Bush-supporter called it
           a big victory for Bush.  Another blogger friend, an Anyone-But-Bush
           fanatic, wrote that it was a slamdunk for Kerry.  It sounds to me
           like no one's convincing the faithful one way or the other.

10/14   I've been getting some errors trying to mark spam in spamassassin
        the last few days. "Cannot open bayes databases [...]
        Inappropriate file type or format." RTFMing seems to indicate
        that I need to migrate my bays_tok database using the BerkeleyDB
        db_dump program, but I can't seem to find this executable. Pointers
        to the program or alternate solutions appreciated. Thanks!
        \_ db3_dump might be what you're looking for -dwc
        \_ did they install spamassassin 3.0 on the machine you're using?
           it seems like in 3.0 the bayes database format changed, so you
           need to retrain.

           need to retrain.

10/14   Summary: Private corporations + interest in outcome +
        broadcast in public medium = conflict of interest.
        My prediction for news coverage-- a total repeat of 2000,
        Fox will again declare Bush as the winner many hours before
        the election's officially over. "We report, you comply."
        \_ Hopefully they'll do it early enough that more Repubs won't vote.
        \_ I sent my professor the above and he said "In Europe we
           learn this in primary school :-).  [Granted, my two main
           teachers were communists.]"
            \_ Media here don't make any claims to being objective.  It can
               get irritating, but hey, there are plenty of reasonably
               balanced sources of information to choose from.  -John
               \_ I don't mind the bias here but I wish the media would
                  stop pretending to be objective when they're not.  I'm
                  ok with yellow rag journalism.  They should just be honest
                  that they aren't objective and let the readers decide.
                  \_ Well, even when they are pretty direct about having a
                     political agenda/bias (or rather, not giving a rat's ass
                     about trying to appear objective) the ultra holier-than-
                     thou attitude of a lot of Euro papers and TV news can be
                     pretty abrasive after a while.  -John
           Earth to ilyas the communist born but turned to ultra left
           wing nut, what do you have to say about the original
           statement on conflict of interest, and what do you have to
           say about my professor's comment?                    -op
           \_ [ actually I changed my mind.  I won't even dignify this
              phrasing with a reply. -- ilyas ]
              \_ so, you're as suprised as the rest of us to see yourself
                 called an "ultra-left wingnut?"  who knew?
                 \_ Earth to poster: read the thread again from the beginning.
        \_ Wow, you've figured out that all media outlets are biased in one
           way or another.  Congrats.
                \_ you're right.  the difference is i think MOST media
                   outlets try to be balanced and fair.  foxnews and co.
                   don't give a fuck.
                   \_ A bias you share is invisible.  Conservatives tend to
                      find a lot of liberal publications (time.com is a good
                      example) pretty grating, but I bet you don't notice,
                      since it all seems reasonable to you. -- ilyas
                      \_ I think the bias in several popular mainstream
                         media outlets, like drudge, fox, wsj opinion
                         page, those fucks at the media research center,
                         is pretty NON invisible and far greater than
                         any secret jewish conspiracy at the nytimes.
                      find a lot of liberal publications (time.com is a good
                      example) pretty grating, but I bet you don't notice,
                      since it all seems reasonable to you. -- ilyas
                         \_ Look, I don't want to argue this again.
                            I ll just paste something laughable from
                            Reuters next time it comes up.  What's your
                            response to the LA times "we ll dig dirt on
                            Arnie but not Davis" thing? -- ilyas
                      \_ And liberals tend to find a lot of conservative
                         publications (time.com is a good example) pretty
                         grating.
                         \_ I think Time is pretty mainstream but is definitely
                            'small-c' conservative in that it doesn't like to
                            rock the boat very much.
                            \_ I also agree that Time is mainstream, siding
                               with the current administration a little,
                               Democrat or Republican.
                               Democrat or Republican.  CNN is like this too,
                               but one increment more.
                               I also find Krauthammer's essays in Time pretty
                               damn stupid, but then again I think the same
                               thing about Safire.
                               \-if you are writing in the motd, i assume you
                                 have an SAT above 1000. why are you reading
                                 TIME? krauthammer is a human-cockroach cross
                                 breed.

10/14   Where's Saddam?
        http://tinyurl.com/livc -John

10/14   Yahoo! News - Debate Inaccuracies Turning Into Classics
        http://csua.org/u/9gz
        This is about inaccurate statements from both sides.
        \_ Hehe.  I think that both camps have learned the Gore lesson of
           2000 almost too well - its better to be consistently inaccurate
           in the same way every time.
           \_ Your little zingers on Gore are boring.  Where was he inaccurate?

10/14   I'm very upset about the overly right wing slant of Fox
        Television and I'd like to inform my friends about it and
        to spread the word. Where can I find the chain letter to
        petition to either boycott or to watch out for Fox broadcasts?
        \_ Hand them a copy of Outfoxed (it's a DVD).  It's boring but
           disgusting.
        \_ Hey, even http://freerepublic.com users hate O'Reilly:
           http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1244924/posts
           \_ Why do you read the freerepublic?  It's a nuthouse.  --cons.
        \_ Focus your energy on the Sinclair boycott.

10/14   PollingPoint, a nonpartisan organization in Palo Alto
        is conducting a survey asking if Fox Television is
        fair and balanced. Answer a few questions and have
        a shot at winning an iPod!!!
http://survey.pollingpoint.com/survey/welcome.php?sn=74&cid=102&rid=1519130
        \_ I remember when this was called Punch The Monkey.
           \_ They should have had one called Stab the Lady.
        \_ d00d, whenever I get to the iPod page in Firefox, the site acts
           like I hit the Submit button before I even enter my e-mail address.
        \_ worked fine for me in windows and firefox
        \_ Gee, I wonder how meaningful the polling results will be.
           \_ But... but... it is non-partisan!  You think there is something
              unscientific about an internet poll?  Why do you hate the
              internet?

[Misleading short URL deleted]
\_ if you mean the shortened version of Trudeau's long link of the day, please
   feel free to go fuck yourself        .
   \_ You claimed it lead to "Doonesbury" which it did not.

[useless empty recap purged]
        \_ Bud Day doesn't approve of censorship.
           \_ Bud Day did not watch his buddies die face down in the muck so
              this fucking strumpet...
              \_ I bet BUD DAY makes GREAT quesadillas.

10/14   This is getting down right irritating.  Doonesbury link shortened
        for motd readers *again.*
        http://csua.org/u/9h0
        \_ Doonesbury's not been funny, witty, informative or thought-
           provoking in about 20 years.  Why do you bother?
        \_ This has nothing to do with Doonesbury.

10/14   I see lots of post-debate links below.  Rather than respond to
        each one since they all say pretty much the same thing and the
        posters following add nothing new, here's my take: whoever you
        were already voting for is who won for you.  Nothing significant
        happened.  Fox is still slanted right.  The other news channels
        are still slanted left.  Life goes on.
        \_ Watch CNN or MSNBC lately?  They're all Fox-lite now.
        \_ Mr. Obvious but questionably accurate statement man, you also have
           added nothing new.

10/14   Small quote from http://economist.com article about mcdonalds:

        "The company is now testing small hand-held devices, which can be
        used like electronic clip-boards by those making the rounds.
        Failures to check, say, the temperature inside a refrigerator
        (the devices are fitted with a probe) or to scan a location barcode
        (they have a scanner too) when checking the play area, will be recorded.
        If too many incomplete checks build up, the device can automatically
        alert the local manager by ringing his mobile phone."

        Why am I suddenly thinking of that short story about fastfood
        management software taking over the world? -- ilyas
        \_ because you're an idiot?
           \_ Do I need to use defending Ilyas, wrong as he sometimes is, as
              an excuse to tear you a new bunghole yet again, anonymous motd
              drug addict?  -John
              \_ hehe, you said 'bunghole'
           \_ w00t!
        \_ ilyas, I thought you said that Marshall Brain thing was off-base.
           Did you change your mind?
           \_ Yeah, I thought it was complete crack, but I still thought of it.
                -- ilyas
              \_ Check out Fast Food Nation if you're at all interested.  I
                 think the Marshall Brain thing is crack too, but that book
                 shows how McDonald's is a real pioneer in this sort of thing.
                 They call it "deskilling," and they are very very good at it.
                 The less skill is required for a job, the more easily
                 replaceable the workers become.
                 \_ I steer clear of both McDonalds and books like Fast Food
                    Nation (both make me ill).  I think deskilling is good, not
                    bad, because it increases overall productivity which in the
                    long term is a good thing.  I don't think McDonalds is
                    sinister.  On a slightly unrelated note, I was watching
                    this nature show which was talking about how adaptable the
                    bears are.  These days, bears don't even hunt anymore, they
                    just hang out near dumps and eat junk food leftovers.  And
                    since it's highly nutricious, they pack on weight for the
                    since it's highly nutritious, they pack on weight for the
                    hibernation, have more young, and in general do very well.
                    I found that very funny.  Someone should clue in those
                    bears about the vast evils of junk food. -- ilyas
                    \_ I made no judgement about deskilling good or bad.  I do
                       think you're being close-minded about the book though.
                       Give it a shot.  It isn't just a partisan rant, there's
                       a ton of interesting facts in it.  You will probably
                       disagree with his ultimate conclusions (that fast food
                       has changed our culture in negative ways, and with the
                       blessing and active help of the government), but you
                       may learn a lot of stuff too.  He doesn't necessarily
                       argue that McDonald's is "sinister."  He's far too
                       smart for that. [sigh, restored]
                       \_ You don't understand.  I _don't_ think it's partisan
                          trash.  I don't want to read it because I think it
                          will make me physically ill (it talks about a fair
                          number of icky things).  -- ilyas
                          number of icky things).  I haven't thought about
                          the overall effect of fast food on our society.
                          I can certainly see how it affected us badly.  But
                          at the same time you can't underestimate the positives
                          of cheap nutricious food.  I think the positives and
                          of cheap nutritious food.  I think the positives and
                          the negatives are simply incommensurable in this case.
                            -- ilyas
                          \_ Fast food is neither cheap nor nutricious (unless
                          \_ Fast food is neither cheap nor nutritious (unless
                             you're including $1.10 chinese food, which is
                             just cheap).
                             \_ See above about bears. -- ilyas
                                \_ This doesn't prove that fast food is
                                   nutritious; it says nothing about the
                                   long term health effects on the bears. Also,
                                   without a substantiating source with real
                                   scientific credibility, this is anecdotal
                                   and has no logical place in a serious
                                   discussion.
                                   \_ I use 'nutritious' in the good old
                                      fashioned sense of 'has calories, you
                                      eat it -- you get fatter' sense.
                                      I don't have any hard scientific evidence
                                      on long term effects of fast food on
                                      bears.  But I am not sure you can hold it
                                      against me, since no one will fund this
                                      kind of research.  People who study
                                      bears know bears do very well on
                                      junk food, you can disbelieve them if you
                                      want.  The issue with bears is they
                                      need lots of calories before winter,
                                      which junk food provides in spades (i.e.
                                      it's nutritious and plentiful).  Also,
                                      to a bear, a shorter lifespan but more
                                      offspring is a good tradeoff.  -- ilyas
                                      \_ Bears are far more versatile than we
                                         are so I wouldn't be surprised if they
                                         do fine on junk food. Their preferred
                                         behavior is to forage anyway, as
                                         opposed to "hunt". However, it's also
                                         the case that human activities have
                                         reduced many natural bear food sources
                                         and shrunk the amount of contiguous
                                         habitat available for their natural
                                         activities. I don't really see much
                                         significance to this whole bear thing.
                                         The lifespan comment is ridiculous.
                                         \_ The significance to this whole
                                            bear thing is that under my
                                            definition, junk food is very
                                            nutritious -- it lets a giant
                                            of an animal go without food for
                                            an entire season very easily.
                                            This kind of nutritiousness is a
                                            huge positive in many
                                            situations for people, say people
                                            who are extremely poor and
                                            malnourished.  (They may not be
                                            able to hibernate, but they
                                            certainly get a lot of value out
                                            of this kind of food).
                                            Sure, it doesn't
                                            have fiber, vitamins, essential
                                            minerals, etc. etc.  But you take
                                            care of that AFTER you make sure
                                            you don't croak from calorie lack.
                                            I am just saying the crude
                                            advantages of junk food are
                                            significant and cannot be
                                            discounted.  Comment about
                                            'ridiculousness' ignored due to
                                            lack of explanation and because
                                            attacks are lame.  Btw, I don't
                                            think there is any difference
                                            in food versatility between us
                                            and bears inherently -- we are
                                            both omnivores.  Any sort of
                                            heightened sensitivity of ours
                                            is probably due to the fact
                                            that natural selection stopped
                                            for us, and our sensitive
                                            stomachs aren't dying out
                                            anymore. -- ilyas
                                 Well you also didn't explain the lifespan _/
                                 thing... it would seem your comment applies
                                 to humans as well. And bears can eat grass
                                 and other stuff we can't, so presumably can
                                 fill some needs that way. I also think your
                                 assumptions about the inherent "value" in
                                 this food may not be realistic when compared
                                 to the cost of cooking food from basics,
                                 leaving aside the whole "hidden costs"
                                 argument someone else alluded to. (I think
                                 also bears can live entirely on meat/fat,
                                 like carnivores, and unlike humans. Though
                                 I've heard weird things about Inuits.)
                                 \_ He's redefined 'nutritious' and then
                                    argued from that stand point.  It
                                    recontextualizes the discussion, and
                                    imposes far less vigorous constraints on
                                    the point he's trying to argue.  As long
                                    as you let that happen, he's going to
                                    'win' the debate.  It's a clever tactic,
                                    though it's not a strictly logical one.
                                    I also like how he ignores the fact that
                                    bears and humans have significantly
                                    different needs from their food, so
                                    equating humans to bears is also a far
                                    less rigorous point to have to 'prove'
                                    especially considering that no facts to
                                    back up the initial opinion about junk food
                                    being 'good' for bears have been provided.
                                    The assertion that no one's done a study
                                    or research into the impact of human waste
                                    on bears is almost laughably unlikely.
                                    \_ Nutrition = a process by which organisms
                                       obtain energy (nasa.gov).  Nutritious =
                                       providing nourishment (dict).  I am
                                       redefining nothing, I am making concrete
                                       what I feel is a reasonably vague
                                       definition.  I can just feel the
                                       venom dripping from your fangs, you
                                       poor sap.  When did you become so
                                       cheerless and morose?  I don't know
                                       definition.  I don't know
                                       what shadowy evil you think I am up to
                                       with my evil evil debating tactics,
                                       but all I am trying to say is that
                                       high calorie food does a lot of good
                                       in certain rubber-hits-the-road
                                       situations, and the harm junk food
                                       causes has to be balanced again this
                                       good.  P.S.  Read my assertion about
                                       what's not getting funded again.  I
                                       think you are trying to pull a fast
                                       one here. -- ilyas
                                       \_ Nice.  I've reduced you to ad
                                          hominem attacks.  You've rather
                                          misrepresented me in your
                                          interpretation of my attitudes and
                                          motives.  If it means this much to
                                          you to be right, then okay.  I've
                                          challenged your style of agrument,
                                          and you've responded by
                                          comparing me to a snake.  Okaaaaay.
                                          \_ Ok, fair enough.  What about the
                                             rest? -- ilyas
                      |      \_ Well, one definition of nutritious would be
                      |         'contains calories and protein' which I'd say
                      |         is generally true.
                                \_ This is specious and largely irrelevant.
                             \_ High fat, high salt, low fiber == not healthy.
                                However they're not forcing people to eat it.
                                \_ Huh?  I've never made any claims about
                                   anyone being forced to eat anything.  What
                                   are you talking about here?
                             \_ Fast food is massively subsidized in many
                                ways, if we had to pay the actual costs the
                                system wouldn't work -- see oil.
                                   \_ I'm just saying, people buy the unhealthy
                                      food in droves knowing it's unhealthy.
                                      Given this desire I don't think the
                                      industry is at fault. I'd be in favor
                                      of restricting child-targetted marketing.
                                      Oh and I wasn't really talking to you,
                                      just elaborating on the general subject.
                Here you go.
                <DEAD>www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Health/What's_In_Meat_FFN.html<DEAD>

10/14   No media bias here!  Nope!  (The link is to a lame news site, but
        it's the first I found that quoted the ABC memo in it's entirety.)
        http://csua.org/u/9ha
        \_ what's wrong with that memo?  -tom
           \_ It said they should criticize Great Leader!

10/14   Did anyone catch Bush saying "You know, it's pointless/unreliable/
        whatever to quote outside... oh, never mind. Let me quote blablabla".
        That was so funny. His notes have to be prepared by someone else.

[contentless wind removed]
        \_ BUSH: In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote
           leading news organizations about -- oh, never mind. Anyway, let me
           quote the Lewin report.  [http://csua.org/u/9he]
           \_ They repeated my claims that Saddam had WMD, so you can see how
              unreliable the mainstream press is.
                \_ i do find it amusing that bush keeps critisizing kerry
                   for believing his iraq lies
                   \_ He believed me, now he doesn't.  He's a flip-flopper.
                      We need a president who has the courage to believe his
                      own lies in the face of overwhelming evidence.
                      \_ Thank you! I couldn't have said it better myself!
              \_ They were not lies.  Every Senator, Congressman, President
                 Clinton, his staff, Dems, Reps, everyone, repeated the
                 exact accusations at one time or another.  That you have
                 a selective memory on this issue indicates self-delusion.
                 \_ Wow, you know what everyone in the world said. You must
                    have a super big brain. Funny, I remember posting in
                    the motd that SH probably did not have any WMD. My
                    memory must be faulty. As for the self-delusional
                    charge, please look up the psychological term
                    "projection." Here is what Barbara Lee really had
                    to say about SH and WMD:
                    http://www.counterpunch.org/lee0930.html
                    I defy you to find one quote where she claimed that
                    he had them.
        \_ Yes, I laughed out loud.  "not so sure it's credible to quote
           leading news organizations about -- oh, never mind".

[contentless wind removed]
\_ i'm sorry, but 'wc -l /etc/motd.public' still shows more than 0
   \_ Yah, sorry -- it tends to grow and repopulate at a rate which is hard
      to keep up with.

10/14   I'm having bad experiences with this dealer that has been
        servicing my car lately (poor labor quality, lousy parts, etc)
        What are some ways I can get the word out that this isn't a good
        dealer to bring one's car to?
        \_ Why do you care?  The market will figure it out.  File with the
           BBB if you really care.
                \_ Because they're very incompetent, and when it comes to
                   big dealers like that, the market does NOT figure it out.
                   People see the big name and are drawn to it. And I've
                   already filed with the BBB.
                   \_ So write the automaker, tell them this dealer is a
                      threat to their good brand name.
           \_ The market does not figure it out.  BMW San Francisco sells
              shitloads of cars, but I know people that work in their
              maintainence department.  Bad shit going on there, especially
              involving falsification of repair records.  Apparently it has
              been going on for years, and no consequences have ever come of
              it.
        \_ What make of car?
        \_ Can you tell us the dealer name? If I have the same make, I'll
           know not to take my car there...
                \_ the Long Beach Jeep dealer.
        \_ Consumer Reports?
           \_ Unless it's a national chain it might be below their radar.
        \_ Write the corporate offices and complain. Post on Yahoo stock
           message boards. These kind of things get attention.
           \_ I base all my investment decisions on advice from Yahoo stock
              message boards, and now I'm rich, rich I tell you!
              \_ Does anyone remember a TV commercial about someone seeing an
                 advice on some message board telling him to buy VBNM stock,
                 which turns out it's just a fat person sitting on those keys
                 while laughing at the desk?
              \_ Laugh all you want chowderhead, but I posted a complaint
                 I had with a car repair job from Midas on the stock bulletin
                 board and had an offer to fix it for free.
                 Corporate investor relations do monitor these things.
                 Don't believe me? Here is the URL:
                 http://csua.org/u/9i1

10/14   Star Wars Question.  If Star Wars takes place long long ago in a
        Galaxy Far Far away, does that mean Han, Luke, Liea, etc. aren't
        human?  If so, then what are they?  What planet is their race from,
        or are they multiple different races that can interbreed, ala Star
        Trek?
        \_ Ilyas, tell us about the Star Wars!
        \_ If you're wondering how they eat or breathe, or other science facts,
           just repeat to yourself "It's just a show, I should really just
           relax."
           \_ And when is MST3K going to do Episode 1?  It's certainly ripe
              for it.
        \_ Mmm, hot alien sex.
           \_ Chebacca! Huh! What a wookie!
              \_ "Han? Could wear the bath rug again baby?"
        \_ Here's 3 explanations:
           1. "A long time ago..." is just a storytelling figure of speach,
              the whole story is set in fantasyland.
           2. Convergent evolution produced a species that looks just like
              humans.
           3. They're really supposed to be aliens but Lucas didn't have the
              right special effects to show that.  When the Super-Duper Special
              Edition comes out they will all be replaced by Ewoks.
              \_ The blasters will be replace with flashlights.
              \_ I was just asking because there is now a pretty large body
                 of Star Wars literature, and I thought maybe there would be
                 a Star Wars buff on the motd familiar enough with it to
                 know.
                 \_ We're pretty big dorks around here, but none of us are at
                    Comic Book Guy level.  Well, except maybe for that loon
                    that only likes Star Trek movies, but I suspect his Star
                    Wars knowledge is crowded out by sexual fantasies involving
                    Seven of Nine.
                        \_ I prefer Jadzia. She was a hottie. - st movie guy
                           \_ Agreed, but don't forget Ensign Lefler
                              (Ashley Judd)
                 \_ I think the real answer is that it's just not relevant. Who
                    are the people in dungeons & dragons things? I guess in
                    some fantasy, the people are some kind of ancient
                    precursors to ourselves like in Tolkien. But most of the
                    time there's no attempt to tie anything to our reality.
                    It's safe to assume none of them are really human per se.
                    \_ If you look on the Dungeon Master's Guide, page 28,
                       it is clear that humans are intended to be human.
                       Unlike, elves and dwarves, which are not.
        \_ They can be human. Why not? Maybe we are their descendants or
           humans evolved independently in different place or some Great
           Galactic Power seeded the entire universe with humans sometime
           in the ancient past. I see no reason to think that they can't
           be human.
           \_ Exactly, this was all explained in Chase. Prof. Galen's
              aliens seeded the universe with their DNA and Jean-Luc
              figured it all out.
              \_ See TOS episode "Paradise Syndrome" for the first hint,
                 that ep called them the Preservers, TNG used Progenitors
        \_ my explanation is the best. 'a galaxy far far away' does not
           mean far away from our galaxy. it's far away with respect to
           some other galaxy. the galaxy they are referring to is in fact
           our galaxy. similarly, 'long long time ago' is not relative to
           the present. the story is told from the perspective of the
           future. indeed, a future far far away from our own future.
           do i win?
           \_This would explain why there are humans from earth in the
             two ewok adventures movies.  can someone explain tolkien's
             use of potatoes, a new world foodstuff?, in lord of the rings?
             \_ Valinor = new world.  Duh.
             \_ To which I have nothing to add except, damn, it's fun shooting
                ewoks in Star Wars BattleFronts.
                \_ Do you get to shoot Gunguns too?

10/14   Any Thai speaker here?  What does "Nong Jang Thai" as a movie title
        mean?  TIA.
        \_ Hot Thai Sex
           \_ Serious?
              \_ Do a google for: "nong jang" thai

10/14   Got this on my fortune, kinda funny
        "A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for
        democracy, but won't cross the street to vote in a national
        election." -- Bill Vaughan
        \_ cuz you can put a bullet through shit, but not thru bullshit

10/14   Duh.  CompSci team wins Prisoner's Dilemma tournament by cheating
        http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,65317,00.html?tw=rss.TOP
        (Okay, more accurately, the rules were set up to allow this sort
        of completely lame win.)
        \_ One man's cheating is another's innovative solution.
           \_ I would say smart people already thought of this but dismissed
              it out of hand as lame.
           \_ If it's good enough for Captain Kirk ...
        \_ All they did was take the game up a level.  The original winning
           strategy is based on the idea of greater wins over a longer period
           for a single player; the current idea is based on the idea of
           greater wins for a *team* over a longer period without regard to
           the losses.  Future iterations of the game would need to take into
           account net wins/losses for teams or limit the number of entries a
           team could make.  What's exciting is that this is the first time
           it's been shaken up like this in 20 years.
           \_ omfg, I can't believe you think this.  This is so utterly lame
              I am ... urgh, whatever.
           \_ Not quite: The greater wins for an individual AS PART OF A team.
              if you averaged the team score, it was probably very low because
              of the sacrificial behavior of most of the team members.

10/14   http://economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3291632
        Honouring nerd values (Craigslist)

10/14   Robert A. George, Real Conservative, on why he is not voting for Bush:
        http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi%3D20041025%26s%3Dgeorge102504a
        (registration required, try BugMeNot)

**/**   I've never done this before but after my very mild opinion got
        censored a few times by some jerk who replaced it with some bit
        of childish & nasty comments I've had enough.  It is all gone now.
        The motd is a shared resource.  Share it.  Since asking nicely did
        nothing, maybe losing all your stuff will make an impression.
        \_ Bud Day would probably have asked nicely.
        \_ What did you do exactly?

10/14   Green Zone Cafe blows up.
        Terrorists win!  (shorter timer this time)
        \_ Terrorist win, you die.
        \_ One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
           \_ Yermom, though, will always be a slut.

10/14   Swift Boat liars refuted by eye witnesses who have
        no axe to grind:
        http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/print?id=166434