|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 335 responses total. |
oval
|
|
response 179 of 335:
| 
Aug 14 14:22 UTC 2003 |
ya i've been looking for a way to find out where it can be viewed at what
times and suchlike.
|
scott
|
|
response 180 of 335:
|
Aug 14 16:20 UTC 2003 |
Was very clear last night.
|
jep
|
|
response 181 of 335:
|
Aug 14 19:56 UTC 2003 |
Sterling Commerce is a reasonably large company, with about 2000
employees. It's no surprise that there's someone else named Perry; Jim
Perry, who works at an office in Dublin, Ohio, (near Columbus).
It's no surprise that I occasionally get e-mail intended for him. Jim
Perry and John Perry are similar enough that someone who doesn't know
about us both might well address an e-mail incorrectly.
However, yesterday things went farther. Although Jim lives in Ohio, I
received a US postal mail (originating from Sterling Commerce) for
him. I live in Michigan.
It appears his letter stuck to my letter All employees received a
message from the company yesterday. I got his as well as mine.
|
russ
|
|
response 182 of 335:
|
Aug 16 13:48 UTC 2003 |
RISKS digest volume 22 issue 85 is in /a/r/u/russ/risks/risks-22.85
|
russ
|
|
response 183 of 335:
|
Aug 17 15:14 UTC 2003 |
As you might expect, the latest RISKS digest has a bunch of
(very early) commentary on the power outage, but also a lot
on the latest MS worm, confounding factors in medical research
(with lessons for everything else), deceptive URLs used by
scammers, filtered e-mail and more. /a/r/u/russ/risks/risks-22.85
|
lk
|
|
response 184 of 335:
|
Aug 17 18:11 UTC 2003 |
I need a Televideo 990 or 9060 terminal (or two). If you have one sitting
around (or can swap for a Wyse) please let me know. More details in
Classified item 1137. Email LK@stratcom.com .
|
russ
|
|
response 185 of 335:
|
Aug 17 22:17 UTC 2003 |
In the wake of 8/14, the RISKS digests are flying fast. RISKS digest
volume 22 issue 86 is in /a/r/u/russ/risks/risks-22.86.
|
gregb
|
|
response 186 of 335:
|
Aug 18 15:04 UTC 2003 |
Do we have to boil it first? B-)
|
dcat
|
|
response 187 of 335:
|
Aug 18 17:03 UTC 2003 |
Today is my last day in Ann Arbor.
|
gregb
|
|
response 188 of 335:
|
Aug 18 19:26 UTC 2003 |
Where U off to, Dcat?
|
dcat
|
|
response 189 of 335:
|
Aug 19 04:56 UTC 2003 |
U of Pittsburgh, w/ orinoco
|
albaugh
|
|
response 190 of 335:
|
Aug 21 16:56 UTC 2003 |
IWLTA that I saw in Ohio (must have been near Toledo) a billboard saying
"Raise the drinking age to 25." I think it was in reference to drunk driving.
They gave a web address for more info, which I forget. Even if it were to
become law, there are so many practical problems, and who knows if would have
any actual effect on whatever the problem is it's trying to solve.
|
gull
|
|
response 191 of 335:
|
Aug 21 17:22 UTC 2003 |
My experience has been that the 21 drinking age mostly encourages guys
in the 16-20 age group to drive into corn fields and drink out of the
backs of pickup trucks, then try to drive home.
|
gregb
|
|
response 192 of 335:
|
Aug 21 17:24 UTC 2003 |
"Practical problems?" Only for those anxious to suck down some beers
and whatnot.
|
goose
|
|
response 193 of 335:
|
Aug 21 18:30 UTC 2003 |
Lower the drinking age to 16, raise the driving age to 21. I'm actually
serious...I would support that. I also think on your second DUI, DWI, OUIL,
whatever...you should be charged with attempted murder.
|
russ
|
|
response 194 of 335:
|
Aug 22 01:29 UTC 2003 |
RISKS digest volume 22 issue 87 is in /a/r/u/rus/risks/risks-22.87
|
jep
|
|
response 195 of 335:
|
Aug 22 02:25 UTC 2003 |
I think Newsweek reported this week that 3.7% of adults will have been
convicted of felony by 2030 or thereabouts. I've shifted left on
another issue and cannot support the addition of more felonies for
alcohol convictions. Let's not make felonies the norm.
|
jep
|
|
response 196 of 335:
|
Aug 22 02:26 UTC 2003 |
I would support decriminalizing the kicking to pulp of those convicted
of DUI *misdemeanors*, though.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 197 of 335:
|
Aug 22 03:24 UTC 2003 |
Re #192: Wrong. It affects everyone, because it forces younger people who
are going to drink to do it in private homes (which, unlike bars
and restaurants, aren't staffed by people trained to shut drunk
people down and try to take their keys, and don't charge as much
per drink), cars, parks, and other places like that. It also
teaches people early to form binge drinking patterns rather than
healthy social drinking ones. Both of those are problems for
society as a whole, not just for the drinkers.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 198 of 335:
|
Aug 22 05:58 UTC 2003 |
I would ask some questions, perhaps partially rhetorical: how has
society changed over history? And how does it vary over the world?
In colonial America, a 15 year old was expected to drink with the men
and hold his liquor. But in the modern U.S., high school and college
students have binge drinking problems. We have strigent standards on
alcohol content, and yet in countries abroad, the booze is stronger
and the drinking ages are lower. Are foreign cultures more
circumspect about propriety in drinking and perhaps have less
tolerance for public drunkenness?
And what of the fact that in many of these countries, the legal
driving age is 18? Any correlation there?
Something to think on, perhaps discuss. I've heard a few words on it,
but not enough that I think I would fully understand it all.
|
slynne
|
|
response 199 of 335:
|
Aug 22 11:33 UTC 2003 |
The biggest problem is that in this country, we are dependent on our
cars. Raising the driving age would be very unpopular because it is
really hard for folks to get around sometimes without a car. But, 16
year olds are generally not responsible enough to handle both the
responsibilities of driving and drinking. They are likely to drink
alcohol and then get behind the wheel of a car. Personally, I still
think the better solution is to lower the drinking age and to raise the
driving age. People are less likely to hurt others while they learn to
drink responsibly than they are to hurt others whole learning to drive
responsibly.
|
gull
|
|
response 200 of 335:
|
Aug 22 12:59 UTC 2003 |
Re #199: I think a lot of the problem is simply that age and maturity
are only loosely correlated. Unfortunately there's no good,
legally-respected way to measure maturity.
|
jep
|
|
response 201 of 335:
|
Aug 22 13:11 UTC 2003 |
I think 16 year olds need to drive more than they need to drink. Take
away their cars, and in a lot of cases, you take away their jobs.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 202 of 335:
|
Aug 22 13:24 UTC 2003 |
Let's continue the 'drinking and driving' discussion in item 171, set up for
that purpose.
|
jep
|
|
response 203 of 335:
|
Aug 22 13:33 UTC 2003 |
Good idea.
|