Counterfeit AMD Microprocessors Discovered

[keith]

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 14:43:06 +0000, RusH wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote : Oh, my. The fools. I don't buy Rolex watches off the streets of Manhattan (or via spam) either. big suppliers are no mexicans selling sh** in the back-alley

A sucker is still a *sucker*. I highly doubt the counterfeit processors
were bought through the "authorized" channels. Ours weren't because there
weren't any in those channels at the time. An authorized disty won't play
such silly games.
Teh K6 frauds we bought were before the LASER signatures, but the fraud was rather obvious. The units in question were turned over to our beagles and then to AMD, and that's the last I head about 'em. ... well, here you can turn yourselfe on a foot at most :). My favourite quote is "this is not ours, we dont have this serial number in our database", forget about supplier stickers, they dont sticker because its too expensive.

Supplier? Why are you buying stuff that's not from the *manufacturer*,
or authorized disty? <that's a rhetorical question>
Most of AMD stock comes from Germany, so I suspect that a big chunk of them is 'fixed', even at big retailers.

Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highly
doubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. I don't know where
their stuff is packaged anymore, but I doubt that it's packaged in
Germany. When we got our counterfeit stuff, AMD was packaging in
Canuckistan. ...which, BTW was the tip-off. The bogus parts had the
wrong substrate markings. It didn't come from Canuckistan.

--
Keith

[RusH]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote :
Supplier? Why are you buying stuff that's not from the *manufacturer*, or authorized disty? <that's a rhetorical question>

well, I dont see any "authorised retailer" list on the www.amd.com
Most of AMD stock comes from Germany, so I suspect that a big chunk of them is 'fixed', even at big retailers. Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highly doubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany.

most of Polish AMD stock, I should be more specific
When we got our counterfeit stuff, AMD was packaging in Canuckistan. ...which, BTW was the tip-off. The bogus parts had the wrong substrate markings. It didn't come from Canuckistan.

Processors I saw were only rebranded, you could see the lack of cache
in cpuz or other program, maybe it was local branch of counterfeit.
AMD move to play with cache sizes and FSB was too tempting not to try
it I guess. I myselfe buy only semprons and unlock cache/mobile.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

[Mike Tomlinson]

In article <pan.2005.01.06.02.50.25.544415@att.bizzzz>, keith
<krw@att.bizzzz> writes
Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highlydoubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany.

Unless I've misunderstood you, AMD's fabrication plant is in Dresden.
Last time I looked, that was in Germany.

--
..sigmonster on vacation

[keith]

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 07:44:25 +0000, RusH wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote : Supplier? Why are you buying stuff that's not from the *manufacturer*, or authorized disty? <that's a rhetorical question> well, I dont see any "authorised retailer" list on the www.amd.com

You don't see any distributors? Note that retailer <<>> distributor.
Most of AMD stock comes from Germany, so I suspect that a big chunk of them is 'fixed', even at big retailers. Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highly doubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. most of Polish AMD stock, I should be more specific

EVen so. I didn't think they packaged stuff in Germany. Perhaps that's
where tehir distributor is??
When we got our counterfeit stuff, AMD was packaging in Canuckistan. ...which, BTW was the tip-off. The bogus parts had the wrong substrate markings. It didn't come from Canuckistan. Processors I saw were only rebranded, you could see the lack of cache in cpuz or other program, maybe it was local branch of counterfeit. AMD move to play with cache sizes and FSB was too tempting not to try it I guess. I myselfe buy only semprons and unlock cache/mobile.

These were chips that they dug out of the scrap somewhere. We noticed
them because they were not packaged where we knew AMD was packaging their
chips. They were AMD floor-sweepings dressed up as real parts. The
counterfeit chip market is huge in these sorts of markets.

--
Keith

[keith]

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:20:25 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article <pan.2005.01.06.02.50.25.544415@att.bizzzz>, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writesHuh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highlydoubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. Unless I've misunderstood you, AMD's fabrication plant is in Dresden. Last time I looked, that was in Germany.

Ok, where do they package the chips? ...or are you buying naked chips?
At least I didn't think they had a packaging plant in Dresden. I could
easily be wrong here, but it would be little unusual. The large packaging
plants are in Canuckistan and the far-east.

--
Keith

[Franc Zabkar]

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:26:31 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> put finger
to keyboard and composed:
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:20:25 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote: In article <pan.2005.01.06.02.50.25.544415@att.bizzzz>, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writesHuh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highlydoubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. Unless I've misunderstood you, AMD's fabrication plant is in Dresden. Last time I looked, that was in Germany.Ok, where do they package the chips? ...or are you buying naked chips?At least I didn't think they had a packaging plant in Dresden. I couldeasily be wrong here, but it would be little unusual. The large packagingplants are in Canuckistan and the far-east.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20050106142242.html

"The microprocessors that were illegally sold might have been stolen
from one of AMD’s three packaging and testing plants in Asia and
shipped to Taiwan for re-marking. The possible source of the defective
chips could be one of AMD’s packaging and testing plants in Singapore
or Malaysia, or in Suzhou, Jiangsu Province (China)."


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

[Franc Zabkar]

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:22:59 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> put finger
to keyboard and composed:
These were chips that they dug out of the scrap somewhere. We noticedthem because they were not packaged where we knew AMD was packaging theirchips. They were AMD floor-sweepings dressed up as real parts. Thecounterfeit chip market is huge in these sorts of markets.

This crap has been going for as long as I can remember. In the early
90's I was offered 80287 math coprocessors that had been scrounged
from the reject bins at Intel's Penang facility.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

[Edmund]

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:26:31 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:20:25 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote: In article <pan.2005.01.06.02.50.25.544415@att.bizzzz>, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writesHuh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highlydoubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. Unless I've misunderstood you, AMD's fabrication plant is in Dresden. Last time I looked, that was in Germany.Ok, where do they package the chips? ...or are you buying naked chips?At least I didn't think they had a packaging plant in Dresden. I couldeasily be wrong here, but it would be little unusual. The large packagingplants are in Canuckistan and the far-east.


AMD Manufacturing Facilities Overview
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/Careers/0,,51_82_628_502%5E505,00.html

[keith]

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:34:09 -0600, Ed wrote:
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 21:26:31 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:20:25 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote: In article <pan.2005.01.06.02.50.25.544415@att.bizzzz>, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writes>Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highly>doubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany. Unless I've misunderstood you, AMD's fabrication plant is in Dresden. Last time I looked, that was in Germany.Ok, where do they package the chips? ...or are you buying naked chips?At least I didn't think they had a packaging plant in Dresden. I couldeasily be wrong here, but it would be little unusual. The large packagingplants are in Canuckistan and the far-east. AMD Manufacturing Facilities Overview http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/Careers/0,,51_82_628_502%5E505,00.html

Yes, this makes more sense:

AMD's back-end manufacturing facilities are located in Penang,
Malaysia; Bangkok, Thailand; Singapore and Suzhou, China.

--
Keith

[Mike Tomlinson]

In article <pan.2005.01.07.15.15.19.480329@att.bizzzz>, keith
<krw@att.bizzzz> writes
AMD's back-end manufacturing facilities are located in Penang, Malaysia; Bangkok, Thailand; Singapore and Suzhou, China.

Thanks all. I'd assumed wafer fabrication and encapsulation into PGA
package would both take place at the same plant, but apparently not.

--
..sigmonster on vacation

[keith]

On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 04:36:41 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article <pan.2005.01.07.15.15.19.480329@att.bizzzz>, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writes AMD's back-end manufacturing facilities are located in Penang, Malaysia; Bangkok, Thailand; Singapore and Suzhou, China. Thanks all. I'd assumed wafer fabrication and encapsulation into PGA package would both take place at the same plant, but apparently not.

That's the obvious conclusion, but packaging is "low tech" stuff and can
be more easily shiped to a lower cost location. The daily output of a fab
isn't a large volume and is easily shipped. I thought it strange that the
wafers made here were sometimes shipped (sometimes hand-carried) to the
far-east for packaging and then back for test. ...seems like a waste, but
the bean-counters own the beans.

--
Keith

[Tony Hill]

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 07:44:25 +0000 (UTC), RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl>
wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote : Supplier? Why are you buying stuff that's not from the *manufacturer*, or authorized disty? <that's a rhetorical question>well, I dont see any "authorised retailer" list on the www.amd.com

Ya didn't look too hard now did ya?

http://www2.amd.com/us-en/sbl/front/1,,,00.html


Ok, to be fair, this list is only for the US/Canada. However Keith
was specifically talking about authorized distributors, of which there
are usually only a handful (or less) in any given country.
Huh? They sell to distributors and direct to manufacturers. I highly doubt that *most* of AMD's stock "comes from" Germany.most of Polish AMD stock, I should be more specific

What do you mean it "comes from Germany"? Is that where they are
assembled? Is that where the Authorized Distributors for Poland are
all located? Or is that where you're gray-market parts are being
funneled through?
When we got our counterfeit stuff, AMD was packaging in Canuckistan. ...which, BTW was the tip-off. The bogus parts had the wrong substrate markings. It didn't come from Canuckistan.Processors I saw were only rebranded, you could see the lack of cachein cpuz or other program, maybe it was local branch of counterfeit.

These chips OBVIOUSLY would not have come through any sort of
authorized channel. They were most certainly chips that found their
way into the gray market, where remarked by some scammer and then
filtered back into the market through some shady dealers. Such things
happen regularly.

Occasionally, as might have happened in the Taiwanese case, an
Authorized AMD distributor might have picked up the remarked chips
through the gray-market and sold them as OEM chips. Some of the big
distributors will do this, but it's fairly rare. Most of the proper
distributors will only purchase direct through AMD or will be VERY
careful about any gray market chips they buy and clearly sell them as
such.
AMD move to play with cache sizes and FSB was too tempting not to tryit I guess. I myselfe buy only semprons and unlock cache/mobile.

I only buy boxed processors, so I avoid all this trouble... Err, at
least in theory. I do know that a few years back ('98 or '99 I
think?) there WERE some Intel PII or PIII chips that were being
remarked and than repackaged into proper Intel boxes. I guess some
rather stores were making a bit of cash on the side by reselling the
boxes for these processors AFTER selling the actual chips to users.
However that was pretty short-lived, and I suspect that there just
isn't any money in such a complicated setup these days. Getting the
processors, the boxes, the heatsinks, remarking the chips and then
packaging it all up would probably result in razor-thin profit margins
and products that are pretty easy to track.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[RusH]

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote :
Ya didn't look too hard now did ya?

I did
http://www2.amd.com/us-en/sbl/front/1,,,00.html Ok, to be fair, this list is only for the US/Canada

exactly
However Keith was specifically talking about authorized distributors, of which there are usually only a handful (or less) in any given country.

This is the company i was talking about :
http://www.ab.pl/firma/dostawcy-wg-statusu.php

They were 7th 5 years ago, now they'r hmm 4-5 largest distributor.
No AMD on the list. No Intel either. We bouth processors and ram from
small importers (very handy, you keep independent from central source
and get competitive prices). And I mean few boxes the size of 15' CRT
monitor every week so it were no small pickles.
most of Polish AMD stock, I should be more specific What do you mean it "comes from Germany"? Is that where they are assembled?

No, they were imported mostly from Germany. Suposedly from authorised
distributor (but you never know for sure when price is the main
factor).
Is that where the Authorized Distributors for Poland are all located? Or is that where you're gray-market parts are being funneled through?

Thats the second Polish source of all pc parts after 3 biggest
distributors.
proper distributors will only purchase direct through AMD or will be VERY careful about any gray market chips they buy and clearly sell them as such.

'very careful' is not the phrase i'm familiar with. 'VERY cheap' -
now that sounds about right.
at least in theory. I do know that a few years back ('98 or '99 I think?) there WERE some Intel PII or PIII chips that were being remarked and than repackaged into proper Intel boxes. I guess some rather stores were making a bit of cash on the side by reselling the boxes for these processors AFTER selling the actual chips to users. However that was pretty short-lived, and I suspect that there just isn't any money in such a complicated setup these days. Getting the processors, the boxes, the heatsinks, remarking the chips and then packaging it all up would probably result in razor-thin profit margins and products that are pretty easy to track.

but selling computers with overclocked processors as faster
counterparts is still a common practise. Most come from small shops,
stickered up so you cant open the case without voiding your
guarantee. Of course nobody reasonable will buy unopenable computer
case, but we live in unreasonable world (can you spell supermarket
computer buyers ?).
And its a BIG busines, big enougth for ECS. False advertised ECS
K7SOM+/L7VMM3A overclocked durons with fixed PRO something +500-
1000MHz texts, ECS Wallmart notebooks with fixed CPU strings and so
on.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

[Tony Hill]

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:30:44 +0000 (UTC), RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl>
wrote:
Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote : However Keith was specifically talking about authorized distributors, of which there are usually only a handful (or less) in any given country.This is the company i was talking about :http://www.ab.pl/firma/dostawcy-wg-statusu.phpThey were 7th 5 years ago, now they'r hmm 4-5 largest distributor.No AMD on the list. No Intel either. We bouth processors and ram fromsmall importers (very handy, you keep independent from central sourceand get competitive prices). And I mean few boxes the size of 15' CRTmonitor every week so it were no small pickles.

I'm not sure I follow you here. Is the above company the
(non-authorized) distributor that you are buying chips from, or are
you with that company and you buy from another one?
most of Polish AMD stock, I should be more specific What do you mean it "comes from Germany"? Is that where they are assembled?No, they were imported mostly from Germany. Suposedly from authoriseddistributor (but you never know for sure when price is the mainfactor).

If a company is flying the AMD logo as an authorized distributor they
sure as hell better be one, otherwise they could quickly find
themselves in hot water. Of course, for some fly-by-night operation
this might not be a worry since they'll be gone before anyone notices,
but this is why no one in their right mind would by parts from such a
fly-by-night shop.
Is that where the Authorized Distributors for Poland are all located? Or is that where you're gray-market parts are being funneled through?Thats the second Polish source of all pc parts after 3 biggestdistributors.


Well, here is the list of AMD Authorized Distributors in all of
Europe:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_3559_710%5E773,00.html


There are 8 shops listed in Poland, though the one you mentioned above
is not one of them. Note that a lot of these places are not so much
Polish companies, but rather international companies with offices in
Poland.
proper distributors will only purchase direct through AMD or will be VERY careful about any gray market chips they buy and clearly sell them as such.'very careful' is not the phrase i'm familiar with. 'VERY cheap' -now that sounds about right.

If they are an authorized distributor, they will be very careful or
else their lose their authorization. If they are not an authorized
distributor than they will throw any bargain-basement trash out that
they can.
at least in theory. I do know that a few years back ('98 or '99 I think?) there WERE some Intel PII or PIII chips that were being remarked and than repackaged into proper Intel boxes. I guess some rather stores were making a bit of cash on the side by reselling the boxes for these processors AFTER selling the actual chips to users. However that was pretty short-lived, and I suspect that there just isn't any money in such a complicated setup these days. Getting the processors, the boxes, the heatsinks, remarking the chips and then packaging it all up would probably result in razor-thin profit margins and products that are pretty easy to track.but selling computers with overclocked processors as fastercounterparts is still a common practise. Most come from small shops,stickered up so you cant open the case without voiding yourguarantee. Of course nobody reasonable will buy unopenable computercase, but we live in unreasonable world (can you spell supermarketcomputer buyers ?).And its a BIG busines, big enougth for ECS. False advertised ECSK7SOM+/L7VMM3A overclocked durons with fixed PRO something +500-1000MHz texts, ECS Wallmart notebooks with fixed CPU strings and soon.

Sure, there are shysters and scammers everywhere in the computer
industry. That's why Intel and AMD have authorized distributors in
the first place. If they could trust every fly-by-night shop then
they wouldn't have to worry about validating their partners.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[RusH]

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote :
This is the company i was talking about :http://www.ab.pl/firma/dostawcy-wg-statusu.phpThey were 7th 5 years ago, now they'r hmm 4-5 largest distributor.No AMD on the list. No Intel either. We bouth processors and ramfrom small importers (very handy, you keep independent fromcentral source and get competitive prices). And I mean few boxesthe size of 15' CRT monitor every week so it were no smallpickles. I'm not sure I follow you here. Is the above company the (non-authorized) distributor that you are buying chips from, or are you with that company and you buy from another one?

This is the company I was working 5 years ago. The situation havent
changed a lot since then.
If a company is flying the AMD logo as an authorized distributor they sure as hell better be one

I know 3 Polish authorised AMD distributors (action.pl ntt.pl and
incom.pl), and none of them is the the company I'm talking about.
otherwise they could quickly find themselves in hot water. Of course, for some fly-by-night operation this might not be a worry since they'll be gone before anyone notices, but this is why no one in their right mind would by parts from such a fly-by-night shop.

In my experience nobody gives a flying rats ass about company being or
not being authorised. Price and the level of service counts, not the
logo. For example authorised AMD distributor (action.pl) likes to screw
even its big customers when it comes to servicing parts. AMD processors
have almost no guarantee (even BOX ones). There is virtually no benefit
from buyind AMD there, and others have better prices (if you want <100
processors a week).
Well, here is the list of AMD Authorized Distributors in all of Europe: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_35 59_710%5E773,00.html

ok, want to hear a funny thing ? I'm >5 years in PC busines, live in
Warsaw (WARSZAWA) ... and NEVER EVER heard about first 5 firms from
that list. EVER.
Now that I checked 1 of them is a Germany company contact sales office,
one is an international company contact sales office, and the rest are
some kind of multicompany contact sales offices (selling
AGD/RTV/PC/electronics stuff). Maybe one of them even has a storage so
you can actually buy instead of waiting 1-2 days for delivery + you get
to talk with someone when RMAing, but I wouldnt count on that.
Note that a lot of these places are not so much Polish companies, but rather international companies with offices in Poland.

Yust remember that those offices are 2 sales people + a nice woman. No
stock on the site, no service, no nothing. I can do the same buing from
Germany distributor.
If they are an authorized distributor, they will be very careful or else their lose their authorization

yes, 'very careful' means denying guarantee, because AMD processors
dont die on their own (thats action.pl policy wright there), they die
becaus you brake them intentionally :)
but selling computers with overclocked processors as fastercounterparts is still a common practise. Most come from smallshops, stickered up so you cant open the case without voiding yourguarantee. Of course nobody reasonable will buy unopenablecomputer case, but we live in unreasonable world (can you spellsupermarket computer buyers ?).And its a BIG busines, big enougth for ECS. False advertised ECSK7SOM+/L7VMM3A overclocked durons with fixed PRO something +500-1000MHz texts, ECS Wallmart notebooks with fixed CPU strings andso on. Sure, there are shysters and scammers everywhere in the computer industry. That's why Intel and AMD have authorized distributors in the first place. If they could trust every fly-by-night shop then they wouldn't have to worry about validating their partners.

Maybe I will repeat - ECS, Wallmart. Do those names sound fly-by-night
to you ?

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

[The little lost angel]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:11:56 +0000 (UTC), RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl>
wrote:
In my experience nobody gives a flying rats ass about company being ornot being authorised. Price and the level of service counts, not thelogo. For example authorised AMD distributor (action.pl) likes to screweven its big customers when it comes to servicing parts. AMD processorshave almost no guarantee (even BOX ones). There is virtually no benefitfrom buyind AMD there, and others have better prices (if you want <100processors a week).

I'll second RusH on this one. The friends I know who work in
retail/reseller outfits almost never buy from the distributors listed
at AMD. They told me that the unlisted distributors almost always give
better pricing and the time it takes to RMA an AMD processor is the
same indeterminable long wait either way.


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[keith]

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:21:01 +0000, The little lost angel wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:11:56 +0000 (UTC), RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl> wrote:In my experience nobody gives a flying rats ass about company being ornot being authorised. Price and the level of service counts, not thelogo. For example authorised AMD distributor (action.pl) likes to screweven its big customers when it comes to servicing parts. AMD processorshave almost no guarantee (even BOX ones). There is virtually no benefitfrom buyind AMD there, and others have better prices (if you want <100processors a week). I'll second RusH on this one. The friends I know who work in retail/reseller outfits almost never buy from the distributors listed at AMD. They told me that the unlisted distributors almost always give better pricing and the time it takes to RMA an AMD processor is the same indeterminable long wait either way.

If you deal with the devil, you takes your chances. That's the bottom
line here. Even though I like a good deal, I *never* buy OEM or "gray"
processors. OTOH, I have bought gray sound cards, and the like (no choice).

--
Keith

[RusH]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote :
If you deal with the devil, you takes your chances. That's the bottom line here. Even though I like a good deal, I *never* buy OEM or "gray" processors. OTOH, I have bought gray sound cards, and the like (no choice).

Do you really think that fifth national parts distributor is 'gray'?
Especially when they have beter service than the others (instant
exchange of broken ram etc).

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

[Robert Redelmeier]

RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl> wrote: keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote : If you deal with the devil, you takes your chances. That's the bottom line here. Even though I like a good deal, I *never* buy OEM or "gray" processors. OTOH, I have bought gray sound cards, and the like (no choice). Do you really think that fifth national parts distributor is 'gray'? Especially when they have beter service than the others (instant exchange of broken ram etc).

He may not be. Anti-gray laws vary across Europe, both in the
writing and enforcement. Gray is explicitly legal in the US.

Business in Europe and America isn't the same. Lower barriers
to entry in the US mean more shady "fly-by-night" outfits
(PriceWatch bottomfeeders) that Keith is rightfully leary of.
Polish firms may be more protective of their reputations
than their short-term profits.

I don't know if Poland is more like the Russian anarchy
or the German overcontrol.

-- Robert

[RusH]

Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote :
I don't know if Poland is more like the Russian anarchy

no
or the German overcontrol.

no again. Government cares about the highest bidder, but sometimes acts
like a schizofrenic and fuks everybody over. Very unstable environment
+ tax law changes almost every month + poor infrastructure
(roads,internet).
Sure, we have one of the highest GDP in UE, but nobody likes unstable
economy.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.

[Robert Redelmeier]

RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl> wrote: no again. Government cares about the highest bidder, but sometimes acts like a schizofrenic and fuks everybody over.

Hey! That sounds like governments everywhere. :)
Very unstable environment + tax law changes almost every month + poor infrastructure (roads,internet). Sure, we have one of the highest GDP in UE, but nobody likes unstable economy.

My sympathies. Sooner or later, some bright party is going
to realize that people like stability more than the perfect
policy. One usual thing in America is "grandfathering",
something started under an old tax code is allowed to continue
under that treatment. For taxes to be suddenly increased
could be considered an unconstitutional "taking" (5th Amend).
The new code only applies to new things.

-- Robert

[keith]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:51:23 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
RusH <logistyka1@pf.pl> wrote: no again. Government cares about the highest bidder, but sometimes acts like a schizofrenic and fuks everybody over. Hey! That sounds like governments everywhere. :) Very unstable environment + tax law changes almost every month + poor infrastructure (roads,internet). Sure, we have one of the highest GDP in UE, but nobody likes unstable economy. My sympathies. Sooner or later, some bright party is going to realize that people like stability more than the perfect policy.

Absolutely. When the tax laws are up in the air, the economy goes into
hybernation. Once they're resolved (either way) things get back to
normal. In this case, bad news can be better than no news.
One usual thing in America is "grandfathering", something started under an old tax code is allowed to continue under that treatment. For taxes to be suddenly increased could be considered an unconstitutional "taking" (5th Amend). The new code only applies to new things.

That sounds great in theory, but what about Clinton's retroactive tax
increase?

--
Keith

[keith]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 03:03:44 +0000, RusH wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote : If you deal with the devil, you takes your chances. That's the bottom line here. Even though I like a good deal, I *never* buy OEM or "gray" processors. OTOH, I have bought gray sound cards, and the like (no choice). Do you really think that fifth national parts distributor is 'gray'? Especially when they have beter service than the others (instant exchange of broken ram etc).

Apparently counterfeit parts got in somehow. That is considered fraud
here in the US. If it were an authorized disty their authorization would
be pulled instantly. They can't afford to play that game.

Before you ask, I don't pay the bottom-feeder price. I buy from reputable
dealers who are known for service, if not necessarily the best price.
Debugging crap isn't something I like to do, at least on my time and money.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: That sounds great in theory, but what about Clinton's retroactive tax increase?

Well, nothing's perfect. Least of all taxation. Income Tax
would be unconstitutional and had to be authorized by the 16th
Amendment. That gives something of a loophole from "takings".

Still, these sorts of things are generally viewed as unfair.
Stranding investments is resented. And if it is your
regret today, it may be mine tomorrow. I wonder how the
Congresscritters that caved to Clinton's pressure fared,
and what his leverage was?

-- Robert

[keith]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:07:50 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: That sounds great in theory, but what about Clinton's retroactive tax increase? Well, nothing's perfect. Least of all taxation. Income Tax would be unconstitutional and had to be authorized by the 16th Amendment. That gives something of a loophole from "takings".

Retroactive is still...
Still, these sorts of things are generally viewed as unfair. Stranding investments is resented.

Rather like a fiend who is stuck with real-estate
limited-partnership losses that he has to pay capital-gains on. ...or my
mother who lost *real* money in mutual funds, but still had to pay capital
gains on the same funds. One shouldn't have to pay gains until and unless
they're realized. Of course I'm a radical conservative and don't believe
in any gains or corporate taxes. Capital gains taxes are double-taxed (or
worse) and the consumer pays all corporate taxes. Both are rotten.

And if it is your regret today, it may be mine tomorrow. I wonder how the Congresscritters that caved to Clinton's pressure fared, and what his leverage was?

Unabashed liberalism. He quickly learned the lesson, though most of his
cronies still haven't. Dick Morris is a good read on Clintonism. The man
isn't stupid. Out-of-control certainly, but not stupid. The same can't
be said for the rest.

--
Keith

[keith]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:53:37 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Retroactive is still... ... unconstitutional. Article 1 sec 9: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed".

Apparently the Constitution is null and void for "voluntary" tax payments.
...or my mother who lost *real* money in mutual funds, but still had to pay capital gains on the same funds. She could probably refile, recovering past gains against current losses. But it takes specialized knowledge.

Nope. Same year gains and losses. The gains are realized when the fund
gains. The losses are taken when you get out. Both can happen in the
same tax year, amazingly enough.
One shouldn't have to pay gains until and unless they're realized. That's the problem with open-ended mutual funds. They're realizing profits all the time. Better off with closed ended like Birkshire-Hathaway.

If you have $100K/share. ;-) This was *not* always the case. At one
time the gains weren't realized until you had cash in hand.
Of course I'm a radical conservative and don't believe in any gains or corporate taxes. Capital gains taxes are double-taxed (or worse) and the consumer pays all corporate taxes. Both are rotten. So you're liberal enough to believe in other Income Taxes? :) Many Euro nations have no/reduced cap gains tax, but very few legislatures are smart enough to realize that ALL corporate taxes are paid by consumers.

Actually, yes. I prefer it over consumption taxes. Of course I'd prefer
a flat income tax.
Dick Morris is a good read on Clintonism. The man isn't stupid. Out-of-control certainly, but not stupid. The same can't be said for the rest. Including his "wife"?

Most certainly!
Thanks for the pointer to Morris.

Morris was Clinton's soul (Presidency by the poll). He's a very astute
political wonk. He called the last election in July, IIRC.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Retroactive is still...

.... unconstitutional. Article 1 sec 9: "No Bill of Attainder
or ex post facto law shall be passed".
...or my mother who lost *real* money in mutual funds, but still had to pay capital gains on the same funds.

She could probably refile, recovering past gains against
current losses. But it takes specialized knowledge.
One shouldn't have to pay gains until and unless they're realized.

That's the problem with open-ended mutual funds. They're
realizing profits all the time. Better off with closed
ended like Birkshire-Hathaway.
Of course I'm a radical conservative and don't believe in any gains or corporate taxes. Capital gains taxes are double-taxed (or worse) and the consumer pays all corporate taxes. Both are rotten.

So you're liberal enough to believe in other Income Taxes? :)
Many Euro nations have no/reduced cap gains tax, but very few
legislatures are smart enough to realize that ALL corporate
taxes are paid by consumers.
Dick Morris is a good read on Clintonism. The man isn't stupid. Out-of-control certainly, but not stupid. The same can't be said for the rest.

Including his "wife"? Thanks for the pointer to Morris.

-- Robert

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Apparently the Constitution is null and void for "voluntary" tax payments.

Well, of course it is! The Constitution is all about forbidden
coersions. Police searches without warrent are legal if you consent.
Actually, yes. I prefer it over consumption taxes. Of course I'd prefer a flat income tax.

How flat? Poll-tax flat? Or a fixed percentage? I think
I'd prefer a tax on contracts, particularly loans.
Morris was Clinton's soul (Presidency by the poll). He's a very astute political wonk. He called the last election in July, IIRC.

A brave man.

-- Robert

[chrisv]

keith wrote:
Capital gains taxes are double-taxed (orworse) and the consumer pays all corporate taxes. Both are rotten.

Well, someone's got to pay the bills. You could argue for eternity
about the "correct" distribution of the burden...

[keith]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:58:30 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Apparently the Constitution is null and void for "voluntary" tax payments. Well, of course it is! The Constitution is all about forbidden coersions. Police searches without warrent are legal if you consent.

I put "voluntary" in quotes, becasue according to the US government we
have a "voluntary" tax system. We volunteer to not go to prison. Actually, yes. I prefer it over consumption taxes. Of course I'd prefer a flat income tax. How flat? Poll-tax flat? Or a fixed percentage? I think I'd prefer a tax on contracts, particularly loans.

As *flat* as Kansas! Percentage, BTW. Everyone pays, no one (other than
the infirm) gets a ride. A poll tax is interesting only in that people
who don't pay taxes out of their hip don't understand the consequences of
their actions. Example, college students in dorms voting in property tax
increases for city services that the taxpayers have no use for.
Morris was Clinton's soul (Presidency by the poll). He's a very astute political wonk. He called the last election in July, IIRC. A brave man.

Not brave at all. He saw the writing on the wall. Even soccer-moms
turned to the 'R's. You really should read his pieces for the past
year. Well, he hasn't written much for the past three months, since he
was working for Yush. His mid-December article on the Ukraine debacle was
great.

--
Keith

[keith]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:51:00 -0600, chrisv wrote:
keith wrote:Capital gains taxes are double-taxed (orworse) and the consumer pays all corporate taxes. Both are rotten. Well, someone's got to pay the bills. You could argue for eternity about the "correct" distribution of the burden...

Double taxation is simply unfair, any way you cut it. ...not to mention
counter-productive. I suppose you like the death-tax too (even though the
poor sod paid taxes one to three times on that money already).

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: We volunteer to not go to prison.

And enjoy cable TV at Club Fed? Isn't that prohibited under
"cruel and unusual punishment"? :)
Example, college students in dorms voting in property tax increases for city services that the taxpayers have no use for.

Yeah, that's pretty egregious. It might be voter fraud, but
democracy essentially is people taking other peoples money.
Not brave at all. He saw the writing on the wall.

Yes, but to say so in the middle of a camp of Democrats as
rabid as they were in June takes some courage. He'd've
feared being tarred-and-feathered as a turncoat. As I
recall, the rhetoric and mood was extremely divisive.
You really should read his pieces for the past year.

Any good URLs?

-- Robert

[keith]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:26:43 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: We volunteer to not go to prison. And enjoy cable TV at Club Fed? Isn't that prohibited under "cruel and unusual punishment"? :)

Well... Our cable bill (part of that Internet) is $130+/mo, so yes that
is C&U!
Example, college students in dorms voting in property tax increases for city services that the taxpayers have no use for. Yeah, that's pretty egregious. It might be voter fraud, but democracy essentially is people taking other peoples money.

Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The
courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as
assinine as that is. Not brave at all. He saw the writing on the wall. Yes, but to say so in the middle of a camp of Democrats as rabid as they were in June takes some courage. He'd've feared being tarred-and-feathered as a turncoat. As I recall, the rhetoric and mood was extremely divisive.

You haven't followed Dick Morris much have you. He was thrown out of the
Clinton Whitehouse as being just such a person, after getting the bastard
re-elected.
You really should read his pieces for the past year. Any good URLs?


I normally read DM's collumns on the NY Post site, but I did find an
archive by searching for; "Dick Morris" + archive. ;-)

http://caglecartoons.com/archiveColumnist.asp?columnistID={CA079D16-9DF1-49EC-A86B-01A5050C35E7}

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Well... Our cable bill (part of that Internet) is $130+/mo, so yes that is C&U!

Ah, but you live in the Peoples Green Republic, so you
must expect to pay through the nose and other body orifices.
Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as assinine as that is.

I guess it would depend on state law.
You haven't followed Dick Morris much have you. He was

No. His name was new to me.
thrown out of the Clinton Whitehouse as being just such a person, after getting the bastard re-elected.

Oh, a Friend of Hilary :)
http://caglecartoons.com/archiveColumnist.asp?columnistID={CA079D16-9DF1-49EC-A86B-01A5050C35E7}

Thanks.

-- Robert

[keith]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 04:25:58 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Well... Our cable bill (part of that Internet) is $130+/mo, so yes that is C&U! Ah, but you live in the Peoples Green Republic, so you must expect to pay through the nose and other body orifices.

Ouch, do you have to remind me?!! I was wondering why there
weren't more procologists here, but then I remembered that we had
Howie Dean. "This won't hurt, much".
Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as assinine as that is. I guess it would depend on state law.

Nope, it was decided by the SCotUS back when I was in college. You can
declare your residency wherever you are, and are not required to
declare it where you (or your parents) pay taxes. If you meet the months,
you're eligible to be a resident.
You haven't followed Dick Morris much have you. He was No. His name was new to me.

Bill Clinton's polster?
thrown out of the Clinton Whitehouse as being just such a person, after getting the bastard re-elected. Oh, a Friend of Hilary :)

Was. He's burned many sheets from the Lincoln bedroom.
http://caglecartoons.com/archiveColumnist.asp?columnistID={CA079D16-9DF1-49EC-A86B-01A5050C35E7} Thanks.

I've been reading him for perhaps six years, maybe more. In some ways
he's changed, some not. His insights into Bill and Hill are great though.
He's got them pegged (he was their boy).

--
Keith

[Felger Carbon]

"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz... Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters.
The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms.
....as assinine as that is.

College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are
legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms
(more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for
them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle
residence?

[keith]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote:
"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz... Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as assinine as that is. College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence?

This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is only
temporary, after all. *Should* a transient population dictate programs
(and thus the taxes to support them) they have no reasonable expectation
of paying a dime for? The answer today is "tough, don't live in a college
town". Is that the right answer. Felg, remember, this sub-thread is
about "right", not "is". We don't have a flat tax, but I suggest that a
flat tax is "right", certainly not "is".

--
Keith

[Felger Carbon]

"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.15.19.08.29.302282@att.bizzzz... On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote: "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz... Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered
voters. The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their
dorms. ...as assinine as that is. College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their
dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine
for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence? This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is
only temporary, after all.

A 4-year residence (for a ~20yrold) is a *temporary* residence? Back
when I was tracking such stuff, the average California resident moved
every 3 years.

"Right"? Keith, who made you king of the world? ;-)

Seriously, I believe college students are adults and are entirely
logical to declare their long-term principal residence as their legal
residence.

[keith]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 20:18:16 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote:
"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.19.08.29.302282@att.bizzzz... On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote: "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz...>> Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The> courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as> assinine as that is. College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence? This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is only temporary, after all. A 4-year residence (for a ~20yrold) is a *temporary* residence? Back when I was tracking such stuff, the average California resident moved every 3 years.

They'/re only in one "residence" nine months. Then they pick up, lock,
stock, and laptop and move on. Next year they come back for nine more. "Right"? Keith, who made you king of the world? ;-)

"Right" is obviously subjective. Who said you could trump my "right" with
your "is"? ;-)
Seriously, I believe college students are adults and are entirely logical to declare their long-term principal residence as their legal residence.

THe issue is that it is not their residence and there are *no* taxes paid,
in most cases, not even by the landlord. If they were declared to be
residences of kingdom of the one who pays the bills (they are claimed on
their parent's taxes) things balance out. As it is, many communities are
being taxed into oblivion by transients who have nothing at stake.

--
Keith
--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Ouch, do you have to remind me?!!

I guess denial is a useful defense mechanism :)
Nope, it was decided by the SCotUS back when I was in college. You can declare your residency wherever you are, and are not required to declare it where you (or your parents) pay taxes. If you meet the months, you're eligible to be a resident.

So the states just need to make it 12 consecutive months.
You're resident wherever you last lived 12 months in a row.
Some delay is good. It takes a while to settle in and
understand the local issues well enough to vote.
Bill Clinton's polster?

I try to forget.
Was. He's burned many sheets from the Lincoln bedroom.

Both sides?
In some ways he's changed, some not. His insights into Bill and Hill are great though. He's got them pegged (he was their boy).

How could he not? The gauntlet we make candidates run may
not reveal their true selves to the public, but it surely
does to their staffs. He knew too much.

-- Robert

[Robert Redelmeier]

Felger Carbon <fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote: A 4-year residence (for a ~20yrold) is a *temporary*

Not if it's 4 straight years.
residence? Back when I was tracking such stuff, the average California resident moved every 3 years.

Beware averages without considering the distribution.
This average is made of many renters who move every year,
and homeowners who move much less frequently (especially
penalized in California by property tax lock-in).
Seriously, I believe college students are adults

A totally different subject! :)
and are entirely logical to declare their long-term principal residence as their legal residence.

You have a point for students living off-campus. When they
vote property taxes up, their rents will have to go up.
On campus get clouded by state colleges frequently paying no
prop tax.

-- Robert

[keith]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 20:58:09 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Ouch, do you have to remind me?!! I guess denial is a useful defense mechanism :) Nope, it was decided by the SCotUS back when I was in college. You can declare your residency wherever you are, and are not required to declare it where you (or your parents) pay taxes. If you meet the months, you're eligible to be a resident. So the states just need to make it 12 consecutive months.

That disenfranchises any snow-birds.
You're resident wherever you last lived 12 months in a row. Some delay is good. It takes a while to settle in and understand the local issues well enough to vote.

I'm not sure what the answer is here, but a kid in a dorm isn't a
"resident" of the community, AFAIC. There are exceptions to the age of
majority all the time. I was married and living on my own when I was 18,
though couldn't (legally) buy a beer. Even though we were of the age of
majority and filed taxes independantly, I wasn't eligible for any
financial aid, since I was "too young". I could have been drafted
(deferrment and huge number got me through Vietnam), but wasn't really a
major, since I didn't have all the rights of a citizen (some things never
change).
Bill Clinton's polster? I try to forget.

He was good (no, not Clinton!).
Was. He's burned many sheets from the Lincoln bedroom. Both sides?

Not sure, though he admitted to auctioning off a few. It what was done.
In some ways he's changed, some not. His insights into Bill and Hill are great though. He's got them pegged (he was their boy). How could he not? The gauntlet we make candidates run may not reveal their true selves to the public, but it surely does to their staffs. He knew too much.

Too much? For Bill and Hill, perhaps.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: That disenfranchises any snow-birds.

You think they should be enfranchised?
There are exceptions to the age of majority all the time. I was married and living on my own when I was 18, though couldn't (legally) buy a beer. Even though we were of the age of majority and filed taxes independantly, I wasn't eligible for any financial aid, since I was "too young". I could have been drafted (deferrment and huge number got me through Vietnam), but wasn't really a major, since I didn't have all the rights of a citizen (some things never change).

Yes, majority is a problematic issue. An infant cleraly
is incompetant (and incontent). A 30h year old is probably
competent. Where to draw the line?

THe US voting age was lowered to 18 in 1971 under the rallying
cry of "old enough to die [Vietnam draft], old enough to vote".
Oddly, this was not considered for WW2 or Korea. Of course,
it didn't hurt that young people were perceived more likely
to vote Democrat, and most of the state legislatures needed
to ratify were Democrat controlled.

If beer were important, you should've moved north to Canukistan
where the beer is drinkable and legal at 18.
Too much? For Bill and Hill, perhaps.

Who else? They did the firing. Do you have any evidence
that they (or any other pol) consider anything other than
their narrow self-interest in deciding policy? Of course,
they explained and advocated in other terms. But did they
make any clearly contra-interest decisions?

-- Robert

[cquirke (MVP Win9x)]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:08:30 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote:
College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence?
This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is onlytemporary, after all.

Not so, always. I grew up in one city, went to study in another, and
and never moved back. Most study courses are long enough to engender
a vested interest in the locality, even if one eventually moves on.


---------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Cats have 9 lives, which makes them
ideal for experimentation!---------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

[Tony Hill]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:08:30 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote: "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz... Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as assinine as that is. College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence?This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is onlytemporary, after all.

All residences are temporary, it's just a question of how long that
temporary residence lasts. I know that there are some dorm rooms that
I lived in for longer than some apartments.
*Should* a transient population dictate programs(and thus the taxes to support them) they have no reasonable expectationof paying a dime for?

Uhh.. have you seen the cost of renting a dorm room? There is
definitely a portion of that cost that is getting funneled back
through the university and paid as property taxes (assuming no special
tax-free deals for the University of course).

It may not be direct payment like home owners, but students living in
dorms are most certainly paying property taxes. It's really not all
that unlike people living in apartments... Or are they not supposed to
be allowed to vote either?!

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[Tony Hill]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:18:00 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
If beer were important, you should've moved north to Canukistanwhere the beer is drinkable and legal at 18.

Or 19, depending on just which part of Canada you live in, this is one
of the laws that are controlled by the provinces here, and in 7 of the
10 provinces and all 3 of the territories, the legal drinking age is
19. Only Alberta, Manitoba and of course Quebec have a drinking age
of 18.

Fortunately I grew up on one of the provincial border towns, in
Ontario but a short ride from Quebec, and like all 18 year olds here I
used to just head across the bridge to get my beer back in the day...
Err, actually we used to go across the bridge to buy beer when we were
14 or 15, because in Quebec beer was sold in corner stores, typically
by people who didn't give a rats all about the drinking age :>

The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has always
confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems a
bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works well
enough for basically all the rest of the world.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[keith]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:18:00 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: That disenfranchises any snow-birds. You think they should be enfranchised?

Sure, if they're paying taxes in the state(s) they live in. Many
snowbirds live in FL for nine months and then go north. They pay taxes in
both places (I'm not suggesting they vote twice).
There are exceptions to the age of majority all the time. I was married and living on my own when I was 18, though couldn't (legally) buy a beer. Even though we were of the age of majority and filed taxes independantly, I wasn't eligible for any financial aid, since I was "too young". I could have been drafted (deferrment and huge number got me through Vietnam), but wasn't really a major, since I didn't have all the rights of a citizen (some things never change). Yes, majority is a problematic issue. An infant cleraly is incompetant (and incontent).

Incontinent too. ;-)
A 30h year old is probably competent. Where to draw the line?

30 hour? How is a 30hour old competent? Are you suggesting that they
have the tools (and responsibilities) to manage their live, and others?
You lost me here!

Age ov majority is an issue, however one who of age of majority,
married, paying taxes, able to be drafted... Should be treated as a full
citizen with all rights, since the responsibilitis have been assumed. I'm
not in favor of the 21yo drinking laws forced on the states by the feds
either. If 20 year-olds cannot be trusted to drink, how the hell can they
be trusted to vote?

BTW, I rather liked the 19yo laws in IL, (enacted after I was 21, BTW(.
Few 19's are in high shcool, but many 18's are. There is a difference.
THe US voting age was lowered to 18 in 1971 under the rallying cry of "old enough to die [Vietnam draft], old enough to vote". Oddly, this was not considered for WW2 or Korea. Of course, it didn't hurt that young people were perceived more likely to vote Democrat, and most of the state legislatures needed to ratify were Democrat controlled.

Sure, and I was one of those. I was in the first group of 18YO's to vote.
I was married and living on our own before that. Yes, I think I *should*
have had a franchise, but I aslo think I should have been able to buy a
beer (legally).
If beer were important, you should've moved north to Canukistan where the beer is drinkable and legal at 18.

It was legal south of the BorDER, until the MADD-moms got ahold of a few
congress-critters. The same tactic has worked well for tobacco, next
McDonalds...
Too much? For Bill and Hill, perhaps. Who else? They did the firing. Do you have any evidence that they (or any other pol) consider anything other than their narrow self-interest in deciding policy? Of course, they explained and advocated in other terms. But did they make any clearly contra-interest decisions?

Some have concern for the process. B&H found that they could get away
with murder. That doesn't make things better. Watch her over the next
couplea of years. She will once again define "dishonesty", while blaming
others.

--
Keith

[keith]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:36:06 -0500, Tony Hill wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:08:30 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:40:57 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote: "keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:pan.2005.01.15.03.44.12.655590@att.bizzzz...>> Nope, not fraud. Wrong, but not fraud. They're registered voters. The> courts have decided that they can declare residency in their dorms. ...as> assinine as that is. College students are commonly 18 yrs old (or more) and hence are legally adults. They typically spend 9 months a year in their dorms (more if enrolled in summer programs). Keith, why is it assinine for them to declare residency in what is obviously their principle residence?This is precisely the debate. What is a "legal residence"? It is onlytemporary, after all. All residences are temporary, it's just a question of how long that temporary residence lasts. I know that there are some dorm rooms that I lived in for longer than some apartments.

Most colleges the room is a transient domocile. You must move
out between semesters and you're re-assigned rooms each year.
*Should* a transient population dictate programs(and thus the taxes to support them) they have no reasonable expectationof paying a dime for? Uhh.. have you seen the cost of renting a dorm room? There is definitely a portion of that cost that is getting funneled back through the university and paid as property taxes (assuming no special tax-free deals for the University of course).

Nope. At least here in the US almost all colleges are "not-for-profit
educational institutions" and as such are tax exempt. They don't pay
income nor property taxes. *NONE* ...not even the dorms.
It may not be direct payment like home owners, but students living in dorms are most certainly paying property taxes.

Nope! See above.
It's really not all that unlike people living in apartments... Or are they not supposed to be allowed to vote either?!

It is *quite* different. I don't have a problem with their voting, just
not in the college town, when ma&pa are paying the bills and nothing is
being returned to the town.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Sure, if they're paying taxes in the state(s) they live in.

A good point. But not everthing is taxation.
Incontinent too. ;-)

That's what I meant. Typo.
A 30h year old is probably competent. Where to draw the line?
You lost me here!

You prefer the formatting 0x30? Or does 050 sound better?
Age ov majority is an issue, however one who of age of majority, married, paying taxes, able to be drafted... Should be treated as a full citizen with all rights, since the responsibilitis have been assumed. I'm not in

A good point. Responsibility without rights is akin
to taxation without representation.
favor of the 21yo drinking laws forced on the states by the feds either. If 20 year-olds cannot be trusted to drink, how the hell can they be trusted to vote?

Was it the Feds who foisted? Why? Which Dept?
I guess Tranny with Highway money by the MADD moms?
Some have concern for the process. B&H found that they could get away with murder. That doesn't make things better. Watch her over the next couplea of years. She will once again define "dishonesty", while blaming others.

Only to be expected. Thieves have the best locks.

-- Robert

[Robert Redelmeier]

Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote: The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has always confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems a bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works well enough for basically all the rest of the world.

http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/LegalDrinkingAge.html

most of Europe is 16, but can't drive 'til 18.

-- Robert

[The little lost angel]

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:36:06 -0500, Tony Hill
<hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has alwaysconfused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems abit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works wellenough for basically all the rest of the world.

The guys here can be conscripted into the army and learn to kill
people at 17. But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government
to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal
thank you) :ppPPp

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[Robert Redelmeier]

The little lost angel <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote: The guys here can be conscripted into the army and learn to kill people at 17. But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal thank you) :ppPPp

Population control? Do you think the guy are mature
enough to handle it the other 'way around? :)

More seriously, the prudery is probably a concession
by the SG govt towards the Muslim minority/neighbors.

-- Robert

[George Macdonald]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:12:46 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote: The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has always confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems a bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works well enough for basically all the rest of the world.http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/LegalDrinkingAge.htmlmost of Europe is 16, but can't drive 'til 18.

I think the 16 is for restaurant consumption - IOW parent, who makes
purchase, allowed to offer wine to child with meal... must be seated etc...
all very civilized. In the home, it's often completely at the discretion
of the parent for any age, as opposed to here in NJ, where the cops have
the right to enter your home unannounced & without warrant if they
"suspect" under age drinking. I believe that in most Euro-countries, to
make a purchase at a bar the general age is 18; of course in Netherlands
you can also ask the barman for his selection of other substances, which
are illegal in the U.S.:-)

In Belgium, it used to also be -- a long time since I've been there, so
dunno if it's been changed -- that you could not buy spirits in a bar -
beer/wine only and you could only buy spirits in a club where you are a
member.

Also remember that the European Commision can decide to make a mission out
of banning and raising ages at the drop of a hat... and has already done so
with other things. Since it's run by pompous, self-regarding zealots I
expect something along those lines soon... especially given their close
relationship with the WHO and recent "findings" by WHO's cancer research
arm (www-cie.iarc.fr) that alcohol is a carcinogen.

In the U.S., the situation in Louisiana seems to be difficult to sort out:
apparently the 21 law has been in place since 1993(?) but nobody pays much
attention to it, especially in New Orleans. Personally I believe, where a
law is widely flouted, as is the 21, it's a sure sign that it is unjust and
should be removed... and in reality it is often applied arbitrarily and
with prejudice.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[Kai Harrekilde-Petersen]

George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:12:46 GMT, Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote: The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has always confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems a bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works well enough for basically all the rest of the world.http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/LegalDrinkingAge.htmlmost of Europe is 16, but can't drive 'til 18. I think the 16 is for restaurant consumption - IOW parent, who makes purchase, allowed to offer wine to child with meal... must be seated etc... all very civilized. In the home, it's often completely at the discretion of the parent for any age, as opposed to here in NJ, where the cops have the right to enter your home unannounced & without warrant if they "suspect" under age drinking. I believe that in most Euro-countries, to make a purchase at a bar the general age is 18;

In Denmark, the legal age for drinking in a bar is 18, regardless of
alcohol content >0%. When buying in a store, you only have to be 15.

WRT to getting a drivers license, you have to be 18. But you can get a
license for driving a tractor when you are 15 (but you can't drive it
on public roads).

It's not much of a problem, because we don't have to huge distances to
cover here in Denmark.
of course in Netherlands you can also ask the barman for his selection of other substances, which are illegal in the U.S.:-)

And they are illegal in all other EU countries, I believe.
Also remember that the European Commision can decide to make a mission out of banning and raising ages at the drop of a hat... and has already done so with other things. Since it's run by pompous, self-regarding zealots I expect something along those lines soon... especially given their close relationship with the WHO and recent "findings" by WHO's cancer research arm (www-cie.iarc.fr) that alcohol is a carcinogen.

Europe is actually quite a bit more relaxed wrt drinking than the US.
You can get fined by just having an open bottle/can in your car in the
US, and public drinking is quite unusual, IIRC. In the EU, having an
open bottle is not a problem - it's only a problem if the alcohol
content is above a certain country-determined limit.


Kai
--
Kai Harrekilde-Petersen <khp(at)harrekilde(dot)dk>

[keith]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:44:24 +0000, The little lost angel wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:36:06 -0500, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has alwaysconfused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems abit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works wellenough for basically all the rest of the world. The guys here can be conscripted into the army and learn to kill people at 17.

Conscription? How quaint. ;-)
But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal thank you) :ppPPp

Gee L', you sound like you're dissapointed. ;-)

--
Keith

[keith]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 05:41:12 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Sure, if they're paying taxes in the state(s) they live in. A good point. But not everthing is taxation.

No, but paying one's way has a tendancy to teach the value of a dollar.Contrary to every 10YO's dreams, the Magic-Money-Machine does have to be
recharged at times.
Incontinent too. ;-) That's what I meant. Typo.

Sure. ..but it earned the: ;-)
A 30h year old is probably competent. Where to draw the line? You lost me here! You prefer the formatting 0x30? Or does 050 sound better?

Oh, I got lost in the "incontinent". ;-)

No, I expect that people who are providing for themselves and perhaps a
family are better judges of such things than those who pay nothing for
anything.
Age ov majority is an issue, however one who of age of majority, married, paying taxes, able to be drafted... Should be treated as a full citizen with all rights, since the responsibilitis have been assumed. I'm not in A good point. Responsibility without rights is akin to taxation without representation.

Rights without responsibility are equally dangerous.
favor of the 21yo drinking laws forced on the states by the feds either. If 20 year-olds cannot be trusted to drink, how the hell can they be trusted to vote? Was it the Feds who foisted? Why? Which Dept? I guess Tranny with Highway money by the MADD moms?

Sure. Senate/House (and yes via MADD). Done through the highay trust
fund. Same with 55PMH limit, brain-buckets, and seatbelts.
Some have concern for the process. B&H found that they could get away with murder. That doesn't make things better. Watch her over the next couplea of years. She will once again define "dishonesty", while blaming others. Only to be expected. Thieves have the best locks.

....and lawyers.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Same with 55PMH limit, brain-buckets, and seatbelts.

But the double-nickel is history (VT is histerical) and so are
donorcycle lids in most states. Seatbelts stay because they
help the inse cos. So why does the 21 stick? Too many MADD moms
who cannot control their kids? "Lord of the Flies" writ large?

-- Robert

[The little lost angel]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:10:52 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
The little lost angel <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote: The guys here can be conscripted into the army and learn to kill people at 17. But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal thank you) :ppPPpPopulation control? Do you think the guy are matureenough to handle it the other 'way around? :)

I don't think it has anything to do with population control... rather
the government has been trying to incite population explosion. We get
tax relief/rebates for having kids here.

I forgot to mention the other great irony. We can get married 3 years
before it's legal to watch a semblance of the stuff married folks do
in bed :ppPpP

Hmm, now that I look at it this way. Maybe the "prudishness" is just a
sinister plot to push guys into getting married before they are ready
in order to sate animal desires and hence produce the children much
desired by our government :ppPpPp
More seriously, the prudery is probably a concessionby the SG govt towards the Muslim minority/neighbors.

Somemore I doubt that? It's probably just another manifestation of Big
Brother's desire to control every aspect of our lives heedless of the
realities/sensibility of things.

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[Tony Hill]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:12:46 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote: The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has always confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems a bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works well enough for basically all the rest of the world.http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/LegalDrinkingAge.htmlmost of Europe is 16, but can't drive 'til 18.

There are a variety of rules and exceptions, but more often than not
you have to be 18 to purchase alcohol in much of Europe.

As for driving, well it's a HELL of a lot more dangerous to drive in
Europe than to drink there, so it doesn't surprise me that the driving
age is 18! :>

Besides, cars and gas are so expensive in Europe and public
transportation generally fairly good, so most of the young people I
knew from there didn't worry too much about the driving age. But if
the drinking age were 21... well, there would be outrage! :>

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[Tony Hill]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:44:24 GMT,
a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little lost angel) wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 20:36:06 -0500, Tony Hill<hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has alwaysconfused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive! Even 19 seems abit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate legal age. It works wellenough for basically all the rest of the world.The guys here can be conscripted into the army and learn to killpeople at 17. But they aren't deemed matured enough by our governmentto watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontalthank you) :ppPPp

Geez! You're government is even more messed up than I thought! :>

Around here nudity (and I'm talking nudity here, not hard-core porn or
anything like that) usually just gets PG (basically anyone can watch
it, but it's not recommended for young children) or AA (14 years or
older to watch). Unless of course it's a Quebecois movie, in which
case pretty much anything goes :>

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

[George Macdonald]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:11:54 +0100, Kai Harrekilde-Petersen
<khp@harrekilde.dk> wrote:
George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes: On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:12:46 GMT, Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:> The whole "must be 21 to drink" thing in the States has> always confused me. Honestly that seems REALLY excessive!> Even 19 seems a bit old to me, 18 is a much more appropriate> legal age. It works well enough for basically all the rest> of the world.http://www2.potsdam.edu/alcohol-info/LegalDrinkingAge.htmlmost of Europe is 16, but can't drive 'til 18. I think the 16 is for restaurant consumption - IOW parent, who makes purchase, allowed to offer wine to child with meal... must be seated etc... all very civilized. In the home, it's often completely at the discretion of the parent for any age, as opposed to here in NJ, where the cops have the right to enter your home unannounced & without warrant if they "suspect" under age drinking. I believe that in most Euro-countries, to make a purchase at a bar the general age is 18;In Denmark, the legal age for drinking in a bar is 18, regardless ofalcohol content >0%. When buying in a store, you only have to be 15.WRT to getting a drivers license, you have to be 18. But you can get alicense for driving a tractor when you are 15 (but you can't drive iton public roads).It's not much of a problem, because we don't have to huge distances tocover here in Denmark.

That's probably the big difference - the U.S. suburban infrastructure is
built around the automobile; without a car, a young person would have no
social life. That and the driving test has traditionally been a joke in
most U.S. states -- drive around some bollards in a parking lot with an
automatic transmission car -- though that is in the process of being
tightened up in many states.
of course in Netherlands you can also ask the barman for his selection of other substances, which are illegal in the U.S.:-)And they are illegal in all other EU countries, I believe.

I believe in England cannabis/marijuana has been decriminalized - some
towns have taken things a bit further and turn a blind eye to "users".
Also remember that the European Commision can decide to make a mission out of banning and raising ages at the drop of a hat... and has already done so with other things. Since it's run by pompous, self-regarding zealots I expect something along those lines soon... especially given their close relationship with the WHO and recent "findings" by WHO's cancer research arm (www-cie.iarc.fr) that alcohol is a carcinogen.Europe is actually quite a bit more relaxed wrt drinking than the US.You can get fined by just having an open bottle/can in your car in theUS, and public drinking is quite unusual, IIRC. In the EU, having anopen bottle is not a problem - it's only a problem if the alcoholcontent is above a certain country-determined limit.

OTOH I see lots of reports of politicians, in some Euro-countries, vowing
to take action on "youth binge drinking" - seems like they are determined
to get less "relaxed" about drinking in general... the hand-wringing has
already started. Watch out for that sanctimonious Irish prick, Byrne -
he'll be the instigator, with a EC "directive".

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[keith]

In article <uk6qbd7th.fsf@harrekilde.dk>, khp@harrekilde.dk says... George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> writes:
WRT to getting a drivers license, you have to be 18. But you can get a license for driving a tractor when you are 15 (but you can't drive it on public roads).

In the US, one need only be licensed at all if driving on public roads.
No age limits on private property. In fact in many(most/all?) states
it's legal to drive farm machinery on public roads without a license.

It's also legal to drive mail trucks without a license, but that's a
different issue. ;-)

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

The little lost angel <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote: Somemore I doubt that? It's probably just another manifestation of Big Brother's desire to control every aspect of our lives heedless of the realities/sensibility of things.

Being a resident, you would know best. But somehow I doubt
Mr Lee does anything without some reason. I doubt he can
control VCDs or now DVDs, but these probably cause less offense.

-- Robert

[The little lost angel]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:31:56 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal thank you) :ppPPpGee L', you sound like you're dissapointed. ;-)

Why should I be??? Most of which get censored out, which most guys are
so eager to see are things I've seen for a large part of my life after
all! Admittedly the perspective may be considered as rather different
:pPpPP

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[The little lost angel]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 01:15:11 -0500, Tony Hill
<hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:
Geez! You're government is even more messed up than I thought! :>

The government don't trust the people, that's why :(
Around here nudity (and I'm talking nudity here, not hard-core porn oranything like that) usually just gets PG (basically anyone can watchit, but it's not recommended for young children) or AA (14 years orolder to watch). Unless of course it's a Quebecois movie, in whichcase pretty much anything goes :>

We do get some nudity for a NC16 rating I think. PG here is definitely
no no to nudity. They have been adding in various degrees of ratings
in the past couple of years but I haven't bothered to look at them. At
least not since I ignored the R-21 rule at the age of 11 (Keith time)
;)


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[keith]

In article <41ed5790.91428265@news.singnet.com.sg>, a?n?g?e?
l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com says... On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 01:15:11 -0500, Tony Hill <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote:Geez! You're government is even more messed up than I thought! :> The government don't trust the people, that's why :(Around here nudity (and I'm talking nudity here, not hard-core porn oranything like that) usually just gets PG (basically anyone can watchit, but it's not recommended for young children) or AA (14 years orolder to watch). Unless of course it's a Quebecois movie, in whichcase pretty much anything goes :> We do get some nudity for a NC16 rating I think. PG here is definitely no no to nudity. They have been adding in various degrees of ratings in the past couple of years but I haven't bothered to look at them. At least not since I ignored the R-21 rule at the age of 11 (Keith time) ;)

Hmm, that would be the equivalent of an NC11 rating here. ;-)

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

The little lost angel <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote: On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:31:56 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no full frontal thank you) :ppPPp
Gee L', you sound like you're dissapointed. ;-) Why should I be???

Maybe the movies would whet the guys' appetites for The
Real Thing? Or maybe serve as [much needed?] training films?

I'm quite confident Keith was not inferring you are one of the
~2% of females whose preferences are contrary to the other 98%.

-- Robert

[keith]

In article <RPcHd.20032$iC4.14357@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>,
redelm@ev1.net.invalid says... The little lost angel <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote: On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:31:56 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:> But they aren't deemed matured enough by our government> to watch any form of nudity in movies until 21 (and no> full frontal thank you) :ppPPpGee L', you sound like you're dissapointed. ;-) Why should I be??? Maybe the movies would whet the guys' appetites for The Real Thing? Or maybe serve as [much needed?] training films? I'm quite confident Keith was not inferring you are one of the ~2% of females whose preferences are contrary to the other 98%.

Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'.

--
Keith

[Robert Redelmeier]

Keith R. Williams <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'.

Much as I thought. Visual sitimulus can indeed go both ways,
but my understanding is the majority of women are more
responsive verbally. Hence the popularity of chick p0rn
(Harlequin Romances) that are seldom censored.

-- Robert

[George Macdonald]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:36:30 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
Keith R. Williams <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'.Much as I thought. Visual sitimulus can indeed go both ways,but my understanding is the majority of women are moreresponsive verbally. Hence the popularity of chick p0rn(Harlequin Romances) that are seldom censored.

Apparently women also enjoy writing it as well - a large portion of the
slash fanfic is written by (hetero-)women... and really raunchy too...
though I've never actually read any of it.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[Felger Carbon]

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in
message news:vhvqu0hs2moacdfjgrk9rn070rjci85plj@4ax.com... and really raunchy too... though I've never actually read any of it.

Right. And the skin magazines have a lot of really raunchy photos...
not, mind you, that I've ever looked at them. ;-)

[The little lost angel]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:29:18 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:
really raunchy too...though I've never actually read any of it.

*cough* *cough* really? :ppPpPp

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[The little lost angel]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:20:40 -0500, Keith R. Williams <krw@att.bizzzz>
wrote:
In article <RPcHd.20032$iC4.14357@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>,redelm@ev1.net.invalid says... Maybe the movies would whet the guys' appetites for The Real Thing? Or maybe serve as [much needed?] training films?

Eh, afaik, most of my guy friends have admitted that they attended
much needing educational courses as much as a good 5~8 years before
being allowed to legally enrolled in these courses. Probably has to do
with the fact it becomes legal to practise The Real Thing with a girl
once she's 16. Yup so another one here, we can do it about 5 years
before we will ever get to watch a semblance of it :PpPpP

(Please don't mind me replying to Robert here, sucky nntp server so I
don't get to see the original *frown*)
I'm quite confident Keith was not inferring you are one of the ~2% of females whose preferences are contrary to the other 98%.Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'.

Just for the record, I'm strictly a north/south pole kind of person!
:ppPpP

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[keith]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:29:18 -0500, George Macdonald wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:36:30 GMT, Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:Keith R. Williams <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'.Much as I thought. Visual sitimulus can indeed go both ways,but my understanding is the majority of women are moreresponsive verbally. Hence the popularity of chick p0rn(Harlequin Romances) that are seldom censored. Apparently women also enjoy writing it as well - a large portion of the slash fanfic is written by (hetero-)women... and really raunchy too... though I've never actually read any of it.

I wuz going to answer this from work, but I'm hesitant going too far off
the reservation where people care what I say.

That said, my dear wife had me read one of her "romance" books written by
one of her fav authors (Ann Rice) a few years back. IIRC it was one of
the "Sleeping Beauty" series. Yikes! Even the few Hustlers I've "read"
weren't that raunchy! I asked her if she was going to send the series on
to my mom (the answer wasn't verbal).

--
Keith

[keith]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:01:45 +0000, Felger Carbon wrote:
"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message news:vhvqu0hs2moacdfjgrk9rn070rjci85plj@4ax.com... and really raunchy too... though I've never actually read any of it. Right. And the skin magazines have a lot of really raunchy photos... not, mind you, that I've ever looked at them. ;-)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you read the fine prose.

--
Keith

[keith]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:51:09 +0000, The little lost angel wrote:
(Please don't mind me replying to Robert here, sucky nntp server so I don't get to see the original *frown*)

Different topic... <blush>... Have you tried individual.net? It's the
best free Usenet service I've seen. ...better than most for hire, though
be warned; no binaries, no porn. ;-)
I'm quite confident Keith was not inferring you are one of the ~2% of females whose preferences are contrary to the other 98%.Oh, no! I was suggesting that FFN went both ways, not L'. Just for the record, I'm strictly a north/south pole kind of person! :ppPpP

Ok, perhaps you want to clarify that. ;-) I'm sure you mean your yin
attracts the opposite, sorta the normal animal magnetism. ;-) OTOH, "no
ask" - "no tell" is a good policy. ;-)

--
Keith

[keith]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 04:03:16 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: Same with 55PMH limit, brain-buckets, and seatbelts. But the double-nickel is history (VT is histerical) and so are donorcycle lids in most states.

VT histerical? Sure, but I don't see the example here. NH is the one
that doesn't require brain-buckets. Here they'd require training wheels
if the nannys could get away with it.

The double-nickel is still here, they just notched it up ten. The federal
highway funds are still tied to the speed-limit and all else the feds want
to tack on.
Seatbelts stay because they help the inse cos.

....help them increase rates? So do speed limits. Remember, Geico gave
*thousands* of radar units to the cops, supported laws banning detectors,
then raised rates or cancelled anyone speeding or caught with a detector.
Nice plan, and I still won't buy insurance from the two-faced bastards.
So why does the 21 stick? Too many MADD moms who cannot control their kids? "Lord of the Flies" writ large?

Sure. The same reason it's illegal for me to serve my future
daugher-in-law a glass of wine, in my own home. Others really do want to
run your life, and they're not the ones people normally complain about.

--

Keith

[Felger Carbon]

"The little lost angel" <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote
in message news:41edc9d9.120685296@news.singnet.com.sg... Eh, afaik, most of my guy friends have admitted that they attended much needing educational courses as much as a good 5~8 years before being allowed to legally enrolled in these courses. Probably has to
do with the fact it becomes legal to practise The Real Thing with a
girl once she's 16. Yup so another one here, we can do it about 5 years before we will ever get to watch a semblance of it :PpPpP

Here in the states, the "Real Thing" age is highly variable. In
Georgia and New Mexico, I think it's about the second trimester. In
California, it's ~37 years, but you have to have a note from the
girl's parents. ;-)

[Robert Redelmeier]

keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote: The double-nickel is still here, they just notched it up ten. The federal highway funds are still tied to the speed-limit and all else the feds want to tack on.

Well, most of TX is at 70 (including many country roads),
and I-10 from San Antonio to El Paso is 75mph.
Seatbelts stay because they help the inse cos. ...help them increase rates?

No silly, make them more PROFIT !
So do speed limits.

Yep, that too!
Remember, Geico gave *thousands* of radar units to the cops, supported laws banning detectors, then raised rates or cancelled anyone speeding or caught with a detector. Nice plan, and I still won't buy insurance from the two-faced bastards.

I didn't hear of this. Thanks.
Sure. The same reason it's illegal for me to serve my future daugher-in-law a glass of wine, in my own home.

I can serve my kids in a restaurant in TX.
Others really do want to run your life, and they're not the ones people normally complain about.

Reminds mre of my morning `fortune`:

A total abstainer is one who abstains from everything but
abstention, and especially from inactivity in the affairs
of others. [Ambrose Bierce]

-- Robert

[The little lost angel]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:35 GMT, "Felger Carbon" <fmsfnf@jfoops.net>
wrote:
Here in the states, the "Real Thing" age is highly variable. InGeorgia and New Mexico, I think it's about the second trimester. InCalifornia, it's ~37 years, but you have to have a note from thegirl's parents. ;-)

Ok, I'm lost with the California reference :(


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[Felger Carbon]

"The little lost angel" <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote
in message news:41eea4b6.176714015@news.singnet.com.sg... On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:19:35 GMT, "Felger Carbon"
<fmsfnf@jfoops.net> wrote:Here in the states, the "Real Thing" age is highly variable. InGeorgia and New Mexico, I think it's about the second trimester.
InCalifornia, it's ~37 years, but you have to have a note from thegirl's parents. ;-) Ok, I'm lost with the California reference :(

Actually, it's 18 in CA and no note required (and _slightly_ more than
the second trimester in GA and NM :). That's why all CA teenagers of
both sexes are virgins until their 18th birthday - wouldn't wanta be
lawbreakers!

[George Macdonald]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:45:18 GMT, a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com
(The little lost angel) wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:29:18 -0500, George Macdonald<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote: really raunchy too...though I've never actually read any of it.*cough* *cough* really? :ppPpPp

Well I stumbled on this particular sub-culture quite recently and had to
know what the "slash" meant... after I'd found out what "fanfic" meant.
Apparently it's a throwback to the early days of the genre which involved
stories to do with erotic (homo-)adventures between Captain Kirk and Spock
- thus the Kirk/Spock is where the "slash" came from. No I didn't bother
to read any further though I gather that the style has been extended to
include other forms of erotic encounters between characters in well-known
TV series and even film, though it seems that male homosexual is the
preferred form of many of the authors. I dunno - there might be something
to interest me somewhere, if females are involved, but I'm not been
motivated to search further.;-)

That much of this is written by women must have some deep significance...
which escapes me.:-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[keith]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:06:05 -0500, George Macdonald wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:45:18 GMT, a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little lost angel) wrote:On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:29:18 -0500, George Macdonald<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote: really raunchy too...though I've never actually read any of it.*cough* *cough* really? :ppPpPp Well I stumbled on this particular sub-culture quite recently and had to know what the "slash" meant... after I'd found out what "fanfic" meant. Apparently it's a throwback to the early days of the genre which involved stories to do with erotic (homo-)adventures between Captain Kirk and Spock - thus the Kirk/Spock is where the "slash" came from. No I didn't bother to read any further though I gather that the style has been extended to include other forms of erotic encounters between characters in well-known TV series and even film, though it seems that male homosexual is the preferred form of many of the authors. I dunno - there might be something to interest me somewhere, if females are involved, but I'm not been motivated to search further.;-)

Geez Goerge! You taught me a few things tonight. ...things I likely
could have lived without learning, but more knowledge just the same.
That much of this is written by women must have some deep significance... which escapes me.:-)

Come to think of it, the Ann Rice novel (one of her Sleeping Beauty
series) my wife had me read was quite similar in content. <shiver>

--
Keith

[The little lost angel]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:06:05 -0500, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:
Well I stumbled on this particular sub-culture quite recently and had toknow what the "slash" meant... after I'd found out what "fanfic" meant.

You mean slash isn't like violent killing/hacking/slashing action
story???
Apparently it's a throwback to the early days of the genre which involvedstories to do with erotic (homo-)adventures between Captain Kirk and Spock- thus the Kirk/Spock is where the "slash" came from. No I didn't botherto read any further though I gather that the style has been extended toinclude other forms of erotic encounters between characters in well-knownTV series and even film, though it seems that male homosexual is thepreferred form of many of the authors. I dunno - there might be somethingto interest me somewhere, if females are involved, but I'm not beenmotivated to search further.;-)
That much of this is written by women must have some deep significance...which escapes me.:-)

I don't quite get this though. In my universe, fan fiction involves
plenty of fan written fiction involving alternative endings, universes
or self created characters in an existing fiction universe. Most of
which has nothing to do with male homosexuality or killing/slashing.
If sex was involved, most of the time I see heterosexuality or
lesbianism.

Could I suggest that there's some deep significance in why your
research took a particular direction? ;pppPPp

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

[George Macdonald]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:33:32 GMT, a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com
(The little lost angel) wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:06:05 -0500, George Macdonald<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:Well I stumbled on this particular sub-culture quite recently and had toknow what the "slash" meant... after I'd found out what "fanfic" meant.You mean slash isn't like violent killing/hacking/slashing actionstory???

Nope.
Apparently it's a throwback to the early days of the genre which involvedstories to do with erotic (homo-)adventures between Captain Kirk and Spock- thus the Kirk/Spock is where the "slash" came from. No I didn't botherto read any further though I gather that the style has been extended toinclude other forms of erotic encounters between characters in well-knownTV series and even film, though it seems that male homosexual is thepreferred form of many of the authors. I dunno - there might be somethingto interest me somewhere, if females are involved, but I'm not beenmotivated to search further.;-)That much of this is written by women must have some deep significance...which escapes me.:-)I don't quite get this though. In my universe, fan fiction involvesplenty of fan written fiction involving alternative endings, universesor self created characters in an existing fiction universe. Most ofwhich has nothing to do with male homosexuality or killing/slashing.If sex was involved, most of the time I see heterosexuality orlesbianism.

Who said anything about "killing/slashing"? It's not part of my universe
in any way so I admit that my initial assumption was that maybe "slash
fanfic" had to do with cutting, disfigurement and maybe snuff. I was
intrigued enough to find out (could there really be such sickos ?) what it
really meant and as I said the "slash" part comes from the slash in
Kirk/Spock - the origins of the slash subgenre, which apparently delighted
Gene Roddenberry. Apparently Clark Kent/Lex Luther is another favorite
err, pairing.<shrug>

Google "slash fanfic" turns up this:
http://www.mninter.net/~sprounds/fanfic%5B2%5D.html - click on the "entry
for slash" link for the explanation... and you'll know as much as I do
about it. Note there is nothing I see offensive up to that point. Now
obviously the female author claims could be a cover for raving pooves but I
did see one author's bio-notes assuring everyone that she was an "ordinary
suburban housewife" who took to the keyboard after the kiddies had been
packed off to school.:-)
Could I suggest that there's some deep significance in why yourresearch took a particular direction? ;pppPPp

Absolutely not... though I will admit to be being a dedicated homophobe...
bloody cottagers used to really piss me off... that last term being left as
an exercise to the reader.:-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

[Gnu_Raiz]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:35:22 -0500, keith wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:06:05 -0500, George Macdonald wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:45:18 GMT, a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little lost angel) wrote:On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:29:18 -0500, George Macdonald<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:> really raunchy too...>though I've never actually read any of it.*cough* *cough* really? :ppPpPpsnip<<< Geez Goerge! You taught me a few things tonight. ...things I likely could have lived without learning, but more knowledge just the same. That much of this is wri