Let's change the reason for the war to something relevant.

It's clear that some of our latest invaders thrive on conflict and an opportunity to prove that they are right. But are they intelligent? CPR and Andy Ray seem to be a day late (actually 6 months) and a dollar short.

I think we could start some threads about things which are happening NOW, maybe have some good debates, and maybe learn to understand topics from more than one perspective.

Suggestions are welcome, here are a few that I wonder about...

Global warming... I think we are in serious trouble.

The election... The Libertarian (Harry Browne) is clearly the man for me, but how can we change the system so that the best man can win, instead of the one with the most bucks?

Missile Defense System... Do you think we should go ahead with it? I'm undecided, but leaning toward yes, if it can be done in a way that does not make good nations feel so threatened as to become more threatening to us. Will need to be handled very delicately and intelligently.

The Napster case... I applaud Napster technology. There is room for negotiation and a way to make it good for everybody. I will never buy another Metallica record because I think they have proven themselves to be greedy dictatorial Nazis.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 11, 2000

Answers

DISCUSS AMOUNGST YOURSELVES:

If Doomers and Preppers were so smart, why were they so wrong about Y2k? Try it. It might help.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), July 11, 2000.

I will never buy another Metallica record because I think they have proven themselves to be greedy dictatorial Nazis.

Why, because they want to get paid for their work? I suppose there's room for negotiation, but in the meantime, people are distributing their music and the band isn't seeing one penny of it. Is that fair?

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 11, 2000.

How much money is enough for Metallica? If they are not happy being multi-millionaires, will they be happier being billionaires?

The funny thing is that the lesser known groups are very supportive of Napster, because it gives their fans a chance to sample their music without having to pay 98% of the profit to the recording industry. Most loyal fans are willing to buy music after they have a chance to listen, but they don't like giving all the money to greedy Hollywood pigs.

It will be much easier and fair for artists to download their CDs to customers over the Net for a few dollars instead of the $15-$20 we pay for hard copies, and the musicians will make more money.

Metallica is trying to eliminate this technology instead of using it to their advantage.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 11, 2000.

CPR, get a clue, you're a day late and a dollar short.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 11, 2000.

Acually, creep is 6 months late and $600,000 short :-)

But then, he's been shorting OIL for quit sometime now.

-- Netghost (ng@no.yr), July 12, 2000.

The weather is a good topic Hawk. The weather is different these days.

Sorry but that American election stuff is too boring for me.

I think the hottest military topic is Jerusalem. When I see Yassir Arafat on my television I know there is stress.

-- Will (righthere@home.now), July 12, 2000.

This place must be just the way we like it else we'd change it.

Kinda scary aint it?

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), July 12, 2000.

How much money is enough for Metallica? If they are not happy being multi-millionaires, will they be happier being billionaires?

Are they multi-millionaires? People seem to have this idea that famous musicians are automatically fabulously wealthy. In many cases, the record companies get most of the profits and the musicians are not nearly as wealthy as you think.

Regardless of this, does the mere fact that they may be multi-millionaires due to the sales of their music mean that now they must give it away for free?

The funny thing is that the lesser known groups are very supportive of Napster, because it gives their fans a chance to sample their music without having to pay 98% of the profit to the recording industry.

Exactly, and that's what's so great about Napster. And if a lesser known band wants to make their stuff available on Napster, that's great too. But unfortunately, many artists who do not want their stuff there are finding it there anyway.

Most loyal fans are willing to buy music after they have a chance to listen, but they don't like giving all the money to greedy Hollywood pigs.

Some might go out and buy the album, but let's face it, if the opportunity arises in which you can get an entire CD worth of music off Napster for free, many will simply stick with that and never go out and buy it.

It will be much easier and fair for artists to download their CDs to customers over the Net for a few dollars instead of the $15-$20 we pay for hard copies, and the musicians will make more money.

This may be true, however as it stands, people are downloading the CDs and artists are getting nothing as opposed to "a few dollars."

Metallica is trying to eliminate this technology instead of using it to their advantage.

I don't think they really want to eliminate the technology, I think they want to stop people from giving away their work. They deserve to make a living just like anyone else.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 12, 2000.

I will never buy another Metallica record because I think they have proven themselves to be greedy dictatorial Nazis.

As someone who was listening to Metallica since 1983 this comment seems funny. While the Nazi part is ridiculous, you'd realize their greed by their complete sell-out on almost every album they have released since Maste of Puppets.

-- Butt Nugget (catsbutt@umailme.com), July 12, 2000.

Good topic! Hmm@hmm.hmm, I agree with you in some areas but there are a couple points I would like you to consider:

First, I feel Napster's argument that their service provides one- to-one sharing is legitimate, and I am reasonably confident it will hold its own in the courtroom.

Second, you wrote, "Some might go out and buy the album, but let's face it, if the opportunity arises in which you can get an entire CD worth of music off Napster for free, many will simply stick with that and never go out and buy it."
The effect this is really having is debatable. Both Napster and the Record Biz have come forward with statistics showing MP3 sharing is helping and hurting record sales, respectively. I have met people on Napster who download files just to decode them into .wavs and burn them onto CDs, but I have also met a great number of people who haven't the time, know-how, or interest to do so, or who prefer better than 128hz digital sounds, so they buy CDs after "previewing" select songs.

Third, you also wrote, "Exactly, and that's what's so great about Napster. And if a lesser known band wants to make their stuff available on Napster, that's great too. But unfortunately, many artists who do not want their stuff there are finding it there anyway."
This is a definite downside. In my opinion Napster has done well in addressing unauthorized MP3s. Try downloading a Metallica file, for example -- you are banned promptly.

-- aqua (aqu@fin.a), July 12, 2000.

Hi Hawk,

I'm totally interested in the implications of breaking the speed of light. I think it will make space travel faster and we can actually explore new galaxies and get back within a reasonable amount of time. I've done some searches on it, but come up with...well, not much.

RE: Harry Browne. He's a good guy, but he doesn't have what it takes today to run a successful campaign (sp?). The Dems are LOUD; the Reps are LOUD; The Libs are quiet and modest. Doesn't work in today's society. They need a more vocal front man.

Global warming: It's happening and there ain't nothing we can do about it (yet, anyway).

Also, as Anita, I'm interested in mapping the genome and all, but I just don't have enough time to read EVERYTHING out there about it. I wish Anita would start a thread with her opinions on it, so we could all learn just a "little" bit more and perhaps that would spark our attention enough so that at least I (and others) would spend some time doing some more reading about it.

Metallica is so...errr, Metallica...yada, yada and all that.

Mar

-- Not now, not like this (AgentSmith0110@aol.com), July 12, 2000.

Hawk, does it really bother you that CPR and Andy Ray post? To each his own I say. You don't have to click when you see their by-line.

We've already had threads about global warming and you're an idiot.

Missile Defense isn't decided on whether or not other countries "feel" anything, you idiot. Military doesn't care about how they feel, they do their thing to DEFEND our country. Do it make sense? In a word, No. Too costly for what you get. But it does make good research.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000.

It's clear that some of our latest invaders thrive on conflict and an opportunity to prove that they are right. But are they intelligent? CPR and Andy Ray seem to be a day late (actually 6 months) and a dollar short.

Hawk,

First, I don't consider myself nor CPR as one of the "latest invaders;" nor do I believe you lumped us into that category. Second, I know that something other than what has been (correctly) classified as "neener-neener" posting could be achieved from myself (and perhaps from CPR as well), if the historically-proven indefensible meme was simply laid to rest by it's defenders.

What do I mean by this?

I mean that the facts are in: there was never a reason to prepare for a catastrophic Y2k.

Personally, if that (rather obvious, in hindsight) point had been simply conceded, I would not have had any reason at all to continue posting the predictions and historically-proven false drivel of the doomers from last year.

I am uncertain why the defenders of the meme are unwilling to admit this. Instead they defend their former position with diversions - citing the money spent by institutions, the cumulative programming experience of a handful of extremists, the statements of others who have (now) been proven false, and/or a claim that I did not make a good enough logical case for my position in the debate (which is simply false) - and calim they were merely the victims of "overwhelming evidence." Balderdash.

Also, and for the record, I never "spammed" the old forum. I would appreciate it if the doomer Hysterium regulars would admit this fact. The spamming of others was a reaction to an unfairly (fascistic) implementation of the (ever-changing) "policy" by the sysops at the Hysterium, which would not be tolerated by yourself nor any thinking individual - therefore the defense of these actions is unacceptable, and good enough reason for me to continue here for at least another 18 months.

And, while I'm at it - I did not author the code for which I am credited at having posted at the DeBunkers forum. Additionally, sysyman got things so confused with his demonstrated propensity for leaping to conclusions with the barest of data at the Hysterium that Chuck had to smack him down to shut him up about sysman's perception of an "agreement" that I would not post (the truth about Y2k) there anymore. Sysyman is up on his soapbox about another supposed "agreement" lately...

As for being "a day late (actually 6 months) and a dollar short" - I am prepared to continue posting until 020101 for any who will read these words of doomers as an object lesson, in the hopes of preventing a similar misleading in the future. Therefore, I believe myself and CPR to be "right on time."

By the way, I agree with you on the Napster case, and share your leanings on the election and the missile defense system.

Vindicated Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (andyman633@hotmail.com), July 12, 2000.

Anyone who fails to defend their copyright, according to U.S. title 17, and the Bern Convention, stands to lose it completely. How much money Metallica is making is immaterial to the precedents that could be set by not going after the Napsters of the world.

Do I think CD's cost too much. Yes. But as an author, I am much interested in having nothing dilute my works. Any artist with integrity is going to defend their copyright to the fullest so as not to have it diluted.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), July 12, 2000.

Agent Smith, thanks for reminding me of the speed of light subject, another excellent topic! I haven't heard squat since the news leaked over a month ago. I have a feeling the military jumped all over this like white on rice. Can just imagine what they will do with it.

Maria, everytime you speak yo prove how ignorant you are. Read any of the discussion about the missile system and you will see that China and Russia are strongly opposed, fearing it will start another nuclear arms race proliferation of weapons. Clinton even went to Russia specifically to speak to Putin about this. Their feelings are VERY important, and are in fact the reason that the decision has not yet been made. You must be an orphan or have really gutless parents, because any real parents would have smacked you upside the head for your lack of respect for others. You're the rudest dumbest little ignorant skanky cunt on this entire forum.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 12, 2000.

Hawk,

Why do you label CPR and Andy Ray as invaders? As you know so well this forum was created at the same time as the Queasy Board to give those that respected uncensored free speech a place to roost. The Polly/Doomer camps were very well defined then and if my memory serves me correctly, you were one of the most outspoken members of the EZ board and you came over to this forum as an invader quite often. You were smart enough, when you came under attack by the lunatics over there, to abandon that freak show and become a regular here. Now you and I have had our little scuffs in the past but I think you realize that you have my respect even if we dont always agree.

When you consider the many months of abuse heaped on CPR and Andy Ray by the Church of Yourdon, where else but here would you expect them to reside? This is not a reincarnation of the old TB2000 and any attempt to head in that direction will be furiously resisted.

And Hawk, you need to avoid the use of the C word when speaking to the ladies. It is beneath your intelligence and crosses the line of offensive language IMHO. I have been known to heavily punctuate my retorts with words of questionable origin but there should be some threshold that we dont cross. Thats All.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), July 12, 2000.

Hawk, you ignorant slut! I know more than you on the topic of missile defense. How many years have you worked in this arena? Being a military person and, after an honorable discharge, a DoD consultant for over twenty years, I think I've earned the right to have an opinion on military defense that shouldn't be attacked as you have. But I guess that only proves how truly ignorant you are.

I love the way you talk to me, you idiot. Keep up the *good* work.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000.

Hawk is a psychiatrist's goldmine. He is just repeating the words he heard at home every day as a child. Poor kid.

Get help Hawk, I can see you have (ever so-)brief moments of consciousness, so perhaps there is hope for you.

-- cin (cin@cin.cin), July 12, 2000.

"And Hawk, you need to avoid the use of the C word when speaking to the ladies."

Ra, I do. We're talking about Maria here. She is a far cry from a lady as you can see by her initial response to this thread.

"He is just repeating the words he heard at home every day as a child."

Nice try cinloooony. I was raised Catholic and profanity was not tolerated. As I left the guidance of my parents I learned that it is best to call them as you see them.

Maria is a dumb cunt. I think you are too, and that's why it irritates you so much. You want to get revenge on all the men in your life who told you what you really are... a worthless low-life tramp whore with illegitimate children to prove it. Instead of trying to change all the men, get a clue, it is YOU who needs to change.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 12, 2000.

Hawk is right. Lets take a look at the women who post here.

The majority of them arent married but are living with men. Many have children out of wedlock. Some are married but have children from othermen. Internet forums are full of trash but this place has more than most.

-- (We@r protection around these.women), July 12, 2000.

Lol, Hawk you are a piece of work. Your attacks on people who happen to disagree with you is priceless. Name calling is your only way of communicating and I really feel sorry for you. Have a nice life, #$*!head.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000.

Folks, excuse me while I back out of this corner.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), July 12, 2000.

"Lol, Hawk you are a piece of work. Your attacks on people who happen to disagree with you is priceless. Name calling is your only way of communicating and I really feel sorry for you. Have a nice life, #$*!head.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000."

Talk about LOL!! How about ROTFLMAO?? That's more like it!!

This just goes to show you what a fucking brainless twat that Maria is....

I start a perfectly respectable thread with the intent of having some intelligent conmversation, and what does the dumb cunt do?? In her very FIRST response, she comes out calling me an idiot several times, and refuses to show any interest in discussing the subjects, because she is TOO FUCKING DUMB!!

"Hawk, does it really bother you that CPR and Andy Ray post? To each his own I say. You don't have to click when you see their by-line.

We've already had threads about global warming and you're an idiot.

Missile Defense isn't decided on whether or not other countries "feel" anything, you idiot. Military doesn't care about how they feel, they do their thing to DEFEND our country. Do it make sense? In a word, No. Too costly for what you get. But it does make good research.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000."

THEN (and this really takes the cake), she accuses ME of name-calling because I defended myself against her degenerate low-life insults! ROTFL!!! ROTFL!!!!

"Lol, Hawk you are a piece of work. Your attacks on people who happen to disagree with you is priceless. Name calling is your only way of communicating and I really feel sorry for you. Have a nice life, #$*!head.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 12, 2000."

This stupid tramp is so unconscious of her own actions that she is not even aware of what she does!! UN-FRICKING-BELIEVABLE!!! Truly a head case if there ever was one! LOL!!

Well, this is the same psycho that threatened to kill Ed Yourdon, so at this point, nothing she does should really suprise me.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 12, 2000.

This thread is an awesome example of why sticking to the topic, preferably a real one, is so important. I hate to see wasted energy.

-- Will (righthere@home.now), July 12, 2000.

Well, this is the same psycho that threatened to kill Ed Yourdon

Actually, she never threatened to kill Ed Yourdon.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 12, 2000.

Yes, it started out as a good thread until DUMBSHIT Maria, the fucking stupid troll skanky cunt, came along.

hmmmm, she did threaten to kill Ed Yourdon, but she did not use the word kill, something like... "don't be suprised if he is attacked and dies" (paraphrasing). I remember that thread.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 12, 2000.

hmmmm, she did threaten to kill Ed Yourdon, but she did not use the word kill, something like... "don't be suprised if he is attacked and dies" (paraphrasing). I remember that thread.

As do I. You can find it here. The relevant quote is as follows:

My personal opinion is that there will be at least a few who have changed lifestyle, denied themselves for the last year or two to prepare, that will go off the deep end. I wouldn't be surprised if Eddie needed to move because of threats on his life.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 07, 1999.

This was not a threat, it was a prediction. One which, interestingly enough, turned out to be incorrect.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 12, 2000.

I hate to change the direction of this thread from women on this forum and their personal lives/body parts, but wasn't there a test recently of the missile defense stuff that failed miserably? [Stuff is the technical term that describes whatever it was that failed, BTW.] I know that part of the Libertarian platform is the elimination of U.S. military intervention across the globe, concentrating on a missile defense system, but we're not there yet.

It bothers me when a platform relies on assumptions that a missile defense system will automagically appear and work because that's what OUGHT to happen. It bothers me when a platform relies on assumptions that folks will be charitable and privately support the children of folks who were unable to find work once kicked off the dole. It bothers me when a platform relies on assumptions that businesses will not pollute their own property. [I fell for that one once when I got a new puppy. "They won't shit in their bed." Wanta bet?]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 12, 2000.

Anita ...there was private charity before government took it over and I would bet it was far more positive.

Puppies who poop their beds should be sued for interfering with quality of life....

The only reason a Libertarian accepts government is to protect life and property and that's all..

-- Will (righthere@home.now), July 12, 2000.

Will:

"Anita ...there was private charity before government took it over and I would bet it was far more positive."

I bet it was, as well, but comparing days when families lived together in the same home for three generations and families today is comparing apples to oranges. Comparing small communities wherein everyone knew everyone else to communities today is doing the same. Big government may have helped society get us INTO this problem, but abolishing these programs is NOT the solution, IMO.

I do the best I can to help out my aged mom, for instance. I do the best I can to help out my kids as well. I'm not opposed to charity, but it begins at home [as my mom always said.]

Per the Libertarian platform, medicare/medicaid would be eliminated. My mom has had occasion to use medicare. It only approved PORTIONS of her bills, but she had private insurance to back that up...to the tune of ... I can't find the bill now, but something like $350 for 2 months. There's NO prescription coverage under medicare, but there IS a 10% reduction under her private insurance. Those prescriptions cost another $750 or so every 3 months [WITH the discount.] She's epileptic due to a car accident some 40 years ago, can't see real well, can't walk real well [even with a walker], so she needs to live somewhere where folks are available 24/7 so as to avoid falling down, hitting her head, etc., and laying there for long periods. She lives in an "assisted living" facility, which charges almost $2,000/mo. She receives perhaps $800 in social security "benefits" to pay for all this/month. She had significant savings, but they've dwindled to so little that I've had to contribute a significant portion of MY income to help pay her bills.

The Libertarians want to eliminate social security. They're suggesting that everyone under 50 simply reap the benefits of the 15% of their earnings on the free market. Um...what about all the money I paid in since I was 16? I lose. For those OVER 50, they're suggesting that they can't claim benefits [even REDUCED benefits] until age 65. I have one brother [who can't help pay my mom's expenses because HE's 63 and living only on social security.] My other brother tries to help with money when he can, but HE has a son who was in a dune-buggy accident some years back, suffered severe brain damage, and is covered under medicaid right now. Medicaid would go away with medicare, so HE'd have to pay for his son instead of his mom.

Is MY family atypical? None of us have ever been on welfare, or even received unemployment compensation. Everyone just worked hard, paid their dues, and now a platform wants to change things so that WE can't get the benefits that others got before us, but assure us that SOMEONE will be charitable enough to help us if we need it, and someone will be charitable enough to help the children of those who have perhaps never worked hard, nor paid their dues.

It's very altruistic, but not very REAListic TODAY.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), July 13, 2000.

Hawk, I take it all back. There is no hope for you. Sad so sad.

-- cin (cin@cin.cin), July 13, 2000.

What is equal to cunt?

In discreption to a male?

Dick? nope.

Asshole? We all have one.

User? Human nature, doesn't count.

Rapist? Possible? By women anyway.

Give me "one" word that has the same filth in reverse and I'll call us "equal"

Sameness is a way to relate, not hurt.

-- tits (justatrool@listen.com), July 13, 2000.

"Hawk, I take it all back. There is no hope for you. Sad so sad.

-- cin (cin@cin.cin), July 13, 2000."

GOOD! Glad to hear it!! I hope this means you are FINALLY going to keep your snotty-ass nose and your lousy fucking bitchy-ass attitude out of my business when I am talking to someone else. I don't intrude on your conversations with others, so just keep your big trap shut and stay the hell out of mine.

Good riddens bitch! You haven't got a chance in hell with any self-respecting man until you change your attitude.

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), July 13, 2000.

Way to jack-off hawk!!!

-- tits (justatrool!@listening.com), July 13, 2000.

Right handed or left?

Which way do you lean?

It has to pull in some direction because your so on it.

-- breasts (justatrool@crying.com), July 13, 2000.

Tits:

Prick would probably be the closest. Though loud mouth fuck-head would do in a pinch if your describing Hawk.

Mommy's calling bed time for you little boy. Time to stop pretending to be that six foot four, bounty hunting he man that you wanna be.

-- Monkey Spanker (monkeyspanker0@angelfire.com), July 13, 2000.

Prick=Bitch

Good try, Spanker!

Nothing ugly.

-- Iforgotmyname (justatrool@--.com), July 13, 2000.

Anita you are constructing your own box,,,,remember your government consumes about half of your efforts....I put in these dots so they can be connected ....see? .....Aren't they cute?

-- Will (righthere@home.now), July 13, 2000.

Come on Hawk,

Which way do lean??

Pull! Baby!

-- tits (justatrool@here.com), July 13, 2000.

This is a kindergarten.

-- aqua (aqu@fin.a), July 13, 2000.

At least we changed the war to something relevant.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), July 13, 2000.

Here I'll change the subject again.

I called him an idiot and hurt his feelings. I called him an ignorant slut (take off from the point/counterpoint Jane Curtin, making a joke) and hurt his feelings even more. I would have liked to discuss missile defense but he feels threatened by my superior knowledge on this topic, so he writes this:

"Maria is a dumb cunt. I think you are too, and that's why it irritates you so much. You want to get revenge on all the men in your life who told you what you really are... a worthless low-life tramp whore with illegitimate children to prove it. Instead of trying to change all the men, get a clue, it is YOU who needs to change.

Hawk has some serious problems. Someone who writes those kinds of attacks on other people probably had a rough childhood. He suffers because his mother didn't breast feed him, his wife left him for a REAl man, his only relationship with women comes from prostitutes who need to be paid highly to be with him because he is so disgusting. He has bottled up rage against women because they find him repulsive. Poor guy, he's so misunderstood.

Hawk, once again you have no logical, rationale, way of thinking. What makes you think I'm trying to change men. WOW what a view into your demented mind. Your flyin high on something alright.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 13, 2000.

LOL!! This is the way Maria "would have like to discuss missile defense"....

"Missile Defense isn't decided on whether or not other countries "feel" anything, you idiot."

LOL, how nice of you to offer!

-- lurker (just @ an. observation), July 13, 2000.