Boycott Gettysburg
From : tom
Q: link to gettysburg photos showing the gettysburg battlefield before superintendent john latschars ego ran amok and ruined it. http//users.snip.net/hart/ we loved gettysburg married there took dozens of week-long trips spent many thousands of dollars there and even considered moving there. but those days are over thanks to park superintendent john latschar. hes ruining the gettysburg battlefield. he calls it restoration. desecration is more descriptive. if we spent another dime wed be supporting the destruction. we refuse. trees are being ripped out wholesale. the deer have been slaughtered. visiting on a november evening is an experience everyone should be able to enjoy but he shortened the decades-old operating hours so youll be ticketed and labeled criminals. he threw up so many one-way signs that traffic in town has become a tourists nightmare. he likes saying the time for comment was during the planning not now. well bozo the public did and continues to comment but you ignore them. tens of 1000s have voiced their concern but you act as though the gettysburg battlefield is your own private domain to use and abuse as you please. it belongs to the taxpayers not an arrogant government-appointed bureaucratic freeloader. gettysburg battlefield ghost hunters have been turned away in droves because he equates them with drug users and drinkers. what a moron. not only is the town losing a fortune toward the local economy the park is losing thousands of watchful eyes from some of the most respectful visitors. those with evil intent will always gain access at night as was proven by recent vandalism. closing the park merely keeps honest folks out. john latschar has in effect given vandals free rein. attendance is lagging. he blames everything except his own bumbling. he constantly moans about never having enough money to fix rotting cannons monuments and buildings yet continues wasting funds on mindnumbingly senseless projects that divide the townspeople and drives others away. its typical government ineptness. looks like john latschar sits around dreaming up new ways to piss people off. if hes not shooting the wildlife cutting down 100s of acres of trees changing the hours or screwing up traffic flow hell devise some other dumbass plan. chances are hell eventually move on to another location leaving his mess and debts behind for someone else. it wouldnt be the first time. whats worse than allowing john latschar to inflict so much damage to the gettysburg battlefield most of you sit idly by and let it happen without so much as a whimper. talk is cheap but a gettysburg boycott speaks volumes. were doing our part. good bye gettysburg. you were our favorite place on earth until john latschar raped you. now youre just a memory. what a pity and disgrace. cassie and tom http//users.snip.net/hart/ .
Replies:
From : acceleron
tom wrote link to gettysburg photos showing the gettysburg battlefield before superintendent john latschars ego ran amok and ruined it. http//users.snip.net/hart/ who uses internet explorer any more your page sucks. .
From : acceleron
is the allen bolt that holds the calipers on 7mm need correct size to do a brake job. thanks in advance. todd .
From : jmc
suddenly without warning tbone exclaimed 09-aug-06 202 am tom wrote link to gettysburg photos showing the gettysburg battlefield before superintendent john latschars ego ran amok and ruined it. http//users.snip.net/hart/ who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. actually i think its more like 90%. but the point is i think that its really bad business to build a website for *one* browser no matter which it is. why block out 10% of potential business just because the webmaster is stupid or not properly trained yea pet peeve. im a webmaster myself. and off topic. unless the superintendent put dodge statues or took them down around the battlefields. or its ruined cause he fixes his ram on one of the battlefields jmc .
From : mac davis
on tue 08 aug 2006 081646 gmt acceleron 380@hotmall.com wrote who uses internet explorer any more your page sucks. i do.. but his page probably still sucks.. mac https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis/woodstuff.htm .
From : tbone
tom wrote link to gettysburg photos showing the gettysburg battlefield before superintendent john latschars ego ran amok and ruined it. http//users.snip.net/hart/ who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. your page sucks. and you are how old maybe 10 -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .
From : acceleron
tbone wrote tom wrote link to gettysburg photos showing the gettysburg battlefield before superintendent john latschars ego ran amok and ruined it. http//users.snip.net/hart/ who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. average computer-semi-illiterate blissfully unaware folks with malware-infested dell pcs. your page sucks. and you are how old maybe 10 a best viewed with internet explorer page is the stuff of 10-year olds. the sucky page could have accomodated any modern browser equally well. even ie if the webmaster didnt try to get too cutting-edge with it. .
From : some guy
acceleron wrote who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. no theyre people that need to buy plane tickets or do banking over the net or run intra-office web-based apps all of which like it or not was designed to function properly with ie. average computer-semi-illiterate blissfully unaware folks with malware-infested dell pcs. your wrath should be aimed at those running the malware infection platform known as xp. 100% of home computers by rights should have stayed with win-98 instead of migrating to xp. during xps golden years 2002-2004 it was wide open to 1/2 dozen infection routes just by being connected to the net. the spam explosion came because of so many exploitable xp systems becoming available to hackers. windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. .
From : acceleron
some guy wrote acceleron wrote who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. no theyre people that need to buy plane tickets or do banking over the net or run intra-office web-based apps all of which like it or not was designed to function properly with ie. same people! they can click the ie icon and then theyre just along for the ride. most webmasters have outgrown the best viewed with internet explorer phase though thats pretty old. average computer-semi-illiterate blissfully unaware folks with malware-infested dell pcs. your wrath should be aimed at those running the malware infection platform known as xp. 100% of home computers by rights should have stayed with win-98 instead of migrating to xp. during xps golden years 2002-2004 it was wide open to 1/2 dozen infection routes just by being connected to the net. the spam explosion came because of so many exploitable xp systems becoming available to hackers. windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. insidious isnt it so many pcs get tossed after a couple years when they seem to be too slow and their owners are clueless. so they buy a new dell and the infection process starts over. .
From : js
some guy wrote acceleron wrote who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. no theyre people that need to buy plane tickets or do banking over the net or run intra-office web-based apps all of which like it or not was designed to function properly with ie. actually those kind of sites are usually pretty damned universal. its been a long while since ive hit any brick-walls when surfing with firefox. my pet peeve is macromedia flash. 95% of the time its used in obnoxious ways the other 5% of the time it requires flash v9 which isnt available for linux i dual-boot kubuntu and xp on my laptop average computer-semi-illiterate blissfully unaware folks with malware-infested dell pcs. your wrath should be aimed at those running the malware infection platform known as xp. 100% of home computers by rights should have stayed with win-98 instead of migrating to xp. during xps golden years 2002-2004 it was wide open to 1/2 dozen infection routes just by being connected to the net. the spam explosion came because of so many exploitable xp systems becoming available to hackers. windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more hell i right now have a single legitimate application using 550mb ram radio propagation prediction app covering a huge area at an unreasonably high resolution and this copy of thunderbird is eating 38mb ram... of course back when win98 was king i was running nt4 and eventually win2k and cursing every new peripheral that *only* had a usb connector.. i guess theres no reason to rub in the many issues found in the 9x ip stack over the years. winnuke pepsi etc... plus who can ever forget the error exception 0e bsods that everybody seemed to get... i think a copy of memtest86 would have been a big help with curing most of those... hell win 3.1 booted in about 1.5 seconds on a pentium 166 with a decent for the day 4200 rpm hard drive why not go back to using it instead js .
From : jmc
suddenly without warning some guy exclaimed 09-aug-06 216 pm acceleron wrote who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. no theyre people that need to buy plane tickets or do banking over the net or run intra-office web-based apps all of which like it or not was designed to function properly with ie. huh most decent banking ticket-selling and intra-office stuff works just fine on firefox or other browsers if designed properly. i do all my banking using firefox. i do all my shopping using firefox. i do all my surfing using firefox. if i come across an ie-only site i write the webmaster then they lose my business. so sorry youre incorrect. in my experience - and yes mine is skewed im surrounded by geeks and am one myself - theres a very high percentage of computer literate folks that use firefox or opera or konqueror as their primary browser - anything but ie. the few geeks that use ie truly like it even with its security problems and non-compliance with web standards. the rest who use ie simply dont know any better. ive created many converts among that group try it youll like it... theres simply no valid excuse - none - for coding a web page to work on ie only. ignorance or laziness. ok im off my soapbox now. just to say something on topic the dealer in australia can do the recalls for my dakota i had to put off since the one in the uk wouldnt. but its taking gawdawful long to get the parts! jmc .
From : acceleron
js wrote some guy wrote windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. .
From : moparman
js wrote some guy wrote windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. hmm like living in the stone age i see. what do you drive a d-3 cat or a peugeots -- moparman---remove clothes to reply --scud coordinates 32.61204 north 96.92993 west-- .
From : chris thompson
some guy wrote acceleron wrote who uses internet explorer any more oh about 95% of the people on the web. and who do you suppose are they the people crowding the middle of the bell curve. no theyre people that need to buy plane tickets or do banking over the net or run intra-office web-based apps all of which like it or not was designed to function properly with ie. actually those kind of sites are usually pretty damned universal. its been a long while since ive hit any brick-walls when surfing with firefox. my pet peeve is macromedia flash. 95% of the time its used in obnoxious ways the other 5% of the time it requires flash v9 which isnt available for linux i dual-boot kubuntu and xp on my laptop average computer-semi-illiterate blissfully unaware folks with malware-infested dell pcs. your wrath should be aimed at those running the malware infection platform known as xp. 100% of home computers by rights should have stayed with win-98 instead of migrating to xp. during xps golden years 2002-2004 it was wide open to 1/2 dozen infection routes just by being connected to the net. the spam explosion came because of so many exploitable xp systems becoming available to hackers. windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more hell i right now have a single legitimate application using 550mb ram radio propagation prediction app covering a huge area at an unreasonably high resolution and this copy of thunderbird is eating 38mb ram... of course back when win98 was king i was running nt4 and eventually win2k and cursing every new peripheral that *only* had a usb connector.. i guess theres no reason to rub in the many issues found in the 9x ip stack over the years. winnuke pepsi etc... plus who can ever forget the error exception 0e bsods that everybody seemed to get... i think a copy of memtest86 would have been a big help with curing most of those... hell win 3.1 booted in about 1.5 seconds on a pentium 166 with a decent for the day 4200 rpm hard drive why not go back to using it instead we never had problems with dos 3.1 or earlier just an observation *grin* -- ---------------------------- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs. js .
From : miles
moparman wrote hmm like living in the stone age i see. what do you drive a d-3 cat or a peugeots why spend the money to upgrade if whats currently running works i maintain about 200 pcs at my work. 50 are running ms-dos. yes you heard right..good old dos. why because these pcs run a single program 24/7 for product testing on our assembly line. they never crash get viruses and they require only low end inexpensive pcs. .
From : some guy
js wrote win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more why are you spreading lies about 98 ive got an office full of pcs with 2.5 ghz pentium-4s with 512 mb of ram and 64 mb nvidia agp cards with 80 gb hard drives running win-98. youve fallen into the trap of judging 98 by the standards of the hardware that was available in the late 90s slow cpus piddly amount of ram buggy motherboard chipsets etc. try running 98 on any motherboard made since 2001 and youll see how stable it is. i guess theres no reason to rub in the many issues found in the 9x ip stack over the years. winnuke pepsi etc... a few harmless dos vulnerabilities. that pales in comparison to the speed at which any 2k or xp system could get hacked into a few years ago just by having a network connection. .
From : chris thompson
we had them send the parts by sail boat should be there by next year. bfg -- ---------------------------- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs. just to say something on topic the dealer in australia can do the recalls for my dakota i had to put off since the one in the uk wouldnt. but its taking gawdawful long to get the parts! jmc .
From : miles
acceleron wrote win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. win98 doesnt make good use of memory. it partitions some of it to store screen and user information such as window locations etc. it is a fixed partition size that does not grow as more memory is added. xp makes far better use. .
From : jmc
suddenly without warning miles exclaimed 09-aug-06 1043 pm acceleron wrote win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. win98 doesnt make good use of memory. it partitions some of it to store screen and user information such as window locations etc. it is a fixed partition size that does not grow as more memory is added. xp makes far better use. yabbut... if someones still choosing to use win98 and its snappy im guessing that the poorer memory use isnt an issue for them my hubby btw still uses win98 and is happy with it. me im running a 64-bit amd system thats a couple years old about to upgrade my kit to a dual-core system with increased ram and a better video card. i use my computer hard it needs the power. jmc .
From : jmc
suddenly without warning some guy exclaimed 09-aug-06 1111 pm js wrote win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more why are you spreading lies about 98 ive got an office full of pcs with 2.5 ghz pentium-4s with 512 mb of ram and 64 mb nvidia agp cards with 80 gb hard drives running win-98. youve fallen into the trap of judging 98 by the standards of the hardware that was available in the late 90s slow cpus piddly amount of ram buggy motherboard chipsets etc. try running 98 on any motherboard made since 2001 and youll see how stable it is. i guess theres no reason to rub in the many issues found in the 9x ip stack over the years. winnuke pepsi etc... a few harmless dos vulnerabilities. that pales in comparison to the speed at which any 2k or xp system could get hacked into a few years ago just by having a network connection. im not a fan of 98 myself but im going to have to second that. its been rock hard stable on my hubbys system which is a couple years old but not as old as his os. jmc .
From : paddy oday paddy
on 14 aug 2006 065155 -0700 nosey thundersnake51@gmail.com wrote coal how much cleaner does coal burn than oil id be curious to see an emissions comparison as used to fuel power generation facilities. coal require more scrubbers to be clean but they both give off the same amount of co2 and maybe when oil was 20/barrel it was cheaper to use oil but given oils volitilty and limited supply and price differentail it would still be cheaper than oil even if you spent a lot on scrubbers. the problem is the fer powerfull oil lobby that controls dc more than you know and they do not want to loose that control and let coal step in and current admin is not going to let it happen either b3ecause big oil is a big financer of current controlling party and they do not want to loose their backing. ----------------- thesnoman.com .
From : acceleron
miles wrote acceleron wrote win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. win98 doesnt make good use of memory. it partitions some of it to store screen and user information such as window locations etc. it is a fixed partition size that does not grow as more memory is added. xp makes far better use. yes system resources which can eventually run low if i try to go 24/7 or run too much at once. i really need to reboot to clear that up. and xp still fragments disk space just like my 98. i think unix/linux/osx dont do that. .
From : acceleron
moparman wrote js wrote some guy wrote windows 98 was a security paradise compared to xp. many ie-related security issues are tied to xp and not win-98. win98 has its own set of crappyness. i guess we should have all stuck with pcs slower than 1 ghz 98 has issues with fast hardware and less than 256mb ram iirc 98 cant really use more win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. hmm like living in the stone age i see. what do you drive a d-3 cat or a peugeots im not in an age. i ended up with a mix of old and not-so-old and all of it quality stuff. still using the same ibm click keyboard that came with my 486! i dont like mushy keys. .
From : js
acceleron wrote miles wrote acceleron wrote win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. win98 doesnt make good use of memory. it partitions some of it to store screen and user information such as window locations etc. it is a fixed partition size that does not grow as more memory is added. xp makes far better use. yes system resources which can eventually run low if i try to go 24/7 or run too much at once. i really need to reboot to clear that up. you mean like use the computer and xp still fragments disk space just like my 98. i think yep. whats funnier is microsoft claimed ntfs could not get fragmented back in the nt3.1/3.51/4/win2000 days. eventually they got slapped by reality. at least xps defragmenter improves performance. cant say that for 98s unix/linux/osx dont do that. hrm kinda. all fss can get fragmented its just some are better at placing files. fat was designed around maximizing the ability to undelete files. ntfs isnt that much of an improvement. most unixy oses will defrag on the fly keeping the problem down to a minimum. i just wonder when microsoft is going to get around to releasing a journaling file system. ; js .
From : acceleron
js wrote acceleron wrote miles wrote acceleron wrote win98 is working at 2ghz for me with 512mb ram. performance is plenty snappy. and its all inside a beautiful mac g4 case. win98 doesnt make good use of memory. it partitions some of it to store screen and user information such as window locations etc. it is a fixed partition size that does not grow as more memory is added. xp makes far better use. yes system resources which can eventually run low if i try to go 24/7 or run too much at once. i really need to reboot to clear that up. you mean like use the computer sometimes ill reboot just for the heck of it to see the free resources number climb back up. but its been a non-issue. and xp still fragments disk space just like my 98. i think yep. whats funnier is microsoft claimed ntfs could not get fragmented back in the nt3.1/3.51/4/win2000 days. eventually they got slapped by reality. at least xps defragmenter improves performance. cant say that for 98s why not i use the me defragmenter both work. unix/linux/osx dont do that. hrm kinda. all fss can get fragmented its just some are better at placing files. fat was designed around maximizing the ability to undelete files. ntfs isnt that much of an improvement. most unixy oses will defrag on the fly keeping the problem down to a minimum. wasnt entirely sure so did some reading about that. linux reorders data requests so that fragmentation has little or no effect. i just wonder when microsoft is going to get around to releasing a journaling file system. ; microsoft is waning. their golden age is over. js .