Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 36107
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/07/08 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/8     

2005/2/8-9 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Ilyas, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:36107 Activity:very high
2/8     Today's stale, boring-ass motd brought to you by the csua moral
        majority.  Good work, guys.
        \_ Hey, at least I contributed by repeatedly insulting stupid
           Christians.  What have YOU done to make the motd more entertaining
           today? -- ilyas
           \_ huh?  your silliness was exposed, and then you deleted the
              whole thread to cover it up, and that's the smartest thing
              you did today.
              \_ It was?  I did? -- ilyas
                 \_ "Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than
                     to speak and remove all doubt."  -Abraham Lincoln
                 \_ your reasoning went like this: "there are gays animals,
                    so some humans must be genetically gay".  If you can't
                    see how silly that is, I don't know what to say.
                    \_ This is amazing.  I didn't know people like you
                       actually existed here.  I am not sure how I feel
                       about that. -- ilyas
                       \_ heh, this coming from someone who keep calling
                          people stupid.
                    \_ What's stupid about that?  Are you saying all human
                       homosexuals are so by choice?  Are you saying that
                       no animals are gay (I guess homosexual for animals
                       isn't proper usage)?  Tell us, Lassie!  -John
                       \_ huh?  it's pretty obvious what I've said and
                          have not said.  just read.  Ilya's reasoning
                          is silly because it is like, "there are
                          cannibals in the animal world.  Jeffrey
                          Dahmer ate people.  Thus cannbalism must be
                          genetic for Jeffrey Dahlmer."
           \_ Obviously I wasn't talking about you.  You know who I'm talking
              about (the stupid Christians).
           \_ why do you hate Christian, oh so wise Israelyas?
              \_ Not all Christians are stupid.  I'll assume he was only
                 talking about the stupid ones.  --intelligent Xian
              \_ Dude, I give ilyas as hard a time as the next guy, but
                 what's with all the ilyas is jewish talk?  What are you
                 getting at?
                 \_ I am an evil neocon! -- ilyas
                    \_ Right.  You realize you're one of the few who
                       equates being Jewish with being a Neocon, right?
                       \_ Boy, nothing gets by you, does it.  Not even my
                          sarcasm.  I don't equate the word 'neocon' with
                          anything.  It's a non-word.  A non-concept.  It's
                          a label that sounds vaguely negative, used for
                          political ends.  It is devoud of content. -- ilyas
                          \_ I think you mean me when you said "you". That
                             wasn't me. I normally grok sarcasm and I
                             normally sign my posts. To quote yourself, "Meh"
                              -- ulysses
                             \_ I didn't think it was you.  -- ilyas
                               \_ Oh. Well. I'll just wander off now... -- u
                          \_ Irving Kristol (Bill Kristol's father) uses
                             this word to describe the political philosophy
                             he had a hand in creating. I think the
                             term is not incoherent (Orwell, forgive me).
                             http://csua.org/u/40g  - ciyer
                             \_ Perhaps as used by Irving Kristol the word is
                                not incoherent.  It is fairly incoherent as
                                used by most soda denisens and contributers to
                                wikipedia. -- ilyas
              \_ "I am neither russian nor jewish. -- ilyas" KAIS MOTD 35389:6
                 \_ I'm both!  And I'm a fat black woman named Frieda!  -John
        \_ Sorry, I have been busy working. -motd thought leader
2025/07/08 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/8     

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/10/24-2014/2/5 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd, Computer/SW] UID:54746 Activity:nil
9/26    I remember there was web version of the motd with search function
        (originally due to kchang ?).  The last time I used it it was hosted
        on the csua website but I can't remember its url (onset of dementia?)
        now. Can somebody plz post it, tnx.
        \_ http://csua.com
           \_ for some reason I couldn't log in since Sept and the archiver
	...
2012/9/5-11/7 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:54472 Activity:nil
9/4     It looks like there are some issues with wallall at the moment. Any
        plans for it getting fixed? I can run wall, but wallall just gives an
        error.
        \_ Asking questions on the motd will not get any attention from
           any undergrad. You should email politburo or perhaps csua. -ausman
        \_ Asking questions on the motd will not get attention from any
	...
2012/4/23-6/4 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:54359 Activity:nil
4/19    Motd updater thingy seems to be broken, does anyone know why?
        If not, I will take a look later in the day. -ausman
        \_ /etc/motd.public is not getting copied into /etc/motd for a while.
           \_ Now it works and no one knows why. Strange. -ausman
	...
2012/2/6-3/26 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:54301 Activity:nil
2/6     Um, what happened to http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~myname ?
        "The requested URL /~myname/ was not found on this server."
        \_ Try emailing root or politburo. I don't think that the
           undergrads use this machine anymore. -ausman
        \_ Ausman is mostly right. LDAP went down due to an expired cert and
           took down most of the rest of our stuff. It's probably a thing with
	...
2012/2/24-3/26 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:54313 Activity:nil
2/24    What newsreader should I use on soda?
        \_ USENIX? You serious? Everyone switched to RSS.
           \_ I think you mean usenet not usenix.  usenet was generally much
              better than blogs / rss (cf. comp.lang.c, comp.lang.perl,
              the usenet oracle, alt.* with digg, slashdot, etc.)
           link:reader.google.com is the best
	...
Cache (2961 bytes)
csua.org/u/40g -> www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/000tzmlw.asp
News & World Report, August 11, 2003 WHAT EXACTLY IS NEOCONSERVATISM? Journalists, and now even presidential candidates, speak with an enviable confidence on who or what is "neoconservative," and seem to assume the meaning is fully revealed in the name. Those of us who are designated as "neocons" are amused, flattered, or dismissive, depending on the context. Even I, frequently referred to as the "godfather" of all those neocons, have had my moments of wonderment. A few years ago I said (and, alas, wrote) that neoconservatism had had its own distinctive qualities in its early years, but by now had been absorbed into the mainstream of American conservatism. I was wrong, and the reason I was wrong is that, ever since its origin among disillusioned liberal intellectuals in the 1970s, what we call neoconservatism has been one of those intellectual undercurrents that surface only intermittently. It is not a "movement," as the conspiratorial critics would have it. Neoconservatism is what the late historian of Jacksonian America, Marvin Meyers, called a "persuasion," one that manifests itself over time, but erratically, and one whose meaning we clearly glimpse only in retrospect. Viewed in this way, one can say that the historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism would seem to be this: to convert the Republican party, and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable to governing a modern democracy. That this new conservative politics is distinctly American is beyond doubt. There is nothing like neoconservatism in Europe, and most European conservatives are highly skeptical of its legitimacy. The fact that conservatism in the United States is so much healthier than in Europe, so much more politically effective, surely has something to do with the existence of neoconservatism. But Europeans, who think it absurd to look to the United States for lessons in political innovation, resolutely refuse to consider this possibility. Its 20th-century heroes tend to be TR, FDR, and Ronald Reagan. Such Republican and conservative worthies as Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, and Barry Goldwater are politely overlooked. Of course, those worthies are in no way overlooked by a large, probably the largest, segment of the Republican party, with the result that most Republican politicians know nothing and could not care less about neoconservatism. Nevertheless, they cannot be blind to the fact that neoconservative policies, reaching out beyond the traditional political and financial base, have helped make the very idea of political conservatism more acceptable to a majority of American voters. Nor has it passed official notice that it is the neoconservative public policies, not the traditional Republican ones, that result in popular Republican presidencies. Due to this limitation, you may experience unexpected results within this site.