From: Brian Lanning; Monday, October 17, 2011 4:27 PM Is this page: http://www.classiccmp.org/cctalk.html not working for you guys? There's a box for that at the bottom of the grey area on the right. Vince

--- On Mon, 10/17/11, Ian King <IanK at vulcan.com> wrote: Thanks. But I would have thought that the bloomin' FAQ file/page would have been updated since 1997!!! I've been on the list for around 6-7 years. I've made a few comments that would be considered off-topic. Others have also. It's to be expected. I haven't been on the internet in a few days, and amazed to find a thread (and not an altogether tiny one) devoted to this very subject. For sometime now my posts have been monitored, and not a few times deleted. Sometimes the reason was if the comment (and having nothing at all to do sex, politics, or religion) were posted, the list would be "cluttered up". HA! I was thinking of leaving, but I'm having 2nd thoughts... Tony posts a lot, but I'll bet his posts are 95% on topic (if not more often), so someone complaining about his posts is just looking for any reason to complain (and complaints somehow will even pertain to someone doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing). He might be a bit long winded at times, but who's perfect, and he's basically a good guy. If it was that he and a bunch of other Brits excluded everyone else from their conversations, talking about their nasty Nimbus 'puters LOL LOL, then I would say there's a reason to be critical. But nothing like that is even remotely true, of course. I do not see the reason to criticize someone for little or no reason. And...who knew???...you're not forced to read anyone's posts. Perhaps that should be entered into the near to be updated FAQ file.

I'd joyfully agree to undertake the task. But I'm not sure I'm the one that should be pressed into duty for this particular occasion... I do apologize for the comment, it does seem rather cold when echoed (but I'm laughing as I type this). Please forgive me for not being as graphically oriented as maybe I should. Who'd a thunk I'd check the FAQ file rather then utilize what was staring at me. But maybe, just maybe, it was meant to be :) --- On Thu, 10/20/11, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:

--- On Tue, 10/18/11, Brian Lanning <brianlanning at gmail.com> wrote: Help who? One might conclude that your behavior is anti-social. Hell I don't know any of the rules. You'd think I had learned some by now. But they never did send me to finishing school :(

From: Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> And I would much rather read emails by you and Tony and Chuck and Dave McGuire. Funny, this list is about classic computing but some people don't appreciate the old timers who are classics. For me having you guys (ok, Dave is a youngin') around is the best part of this list. There is an important period in computing before I got started in the late 1970s that I don't know enough about, and I enjoy hearing comments from the guys who were there.

I am probably close to being one of the oldest on this list at 73 years old, so I can appreciate your comment - mine would be the same. I started using an IBM650 in 1960 when I was 22 years old. The PDP-11 arrived in my career in the mid 1970s and I have been using it on and off (mostly on) ever since, mostly with RT-11. I find it interesting that the youngest group of PDP-11 systems supported 4 MB of memory whereas the STAR100 (early 19702s from CDC) had much less physical memory since core was still so expensive even though the address size was 48 bits as opposed to 16 bits on the PDP-11. Jerome Fine

You must reverse yourself, grasshopper. The "youngest" system would be the most recent, 11/8x or /9x. The oldest is, of course, the 11/20.

I agree, Eric, that my view of youngest was confusing to you. If I had provided an example (such as the PDP-11/93), that would have be easier to understand. I have six grandchildren. The youngest is 4 years old and the oldest is 24 years old. The problem, perhaps, is that the youngest PDP-11/93 is about 20 years old and the oldest PDP-11/20 is about 40 years old. More to the point, I was just noting that the STAR100 back in the 1970s had this 48 bit address for memory when core was so expensive that 4 MB of memory was about the physical limit for that system while at about the same time, a lowly PDP-11/20 often had just 8 KB or even 4 KB of core memory - yet 20 years later the PDP-11/93 came with 4 MB of memory on the CPU card, but still with a 16 bit program address even though the physical Qbus address was 22 bits. Jerome Fine

I'm about the same age (44) and also started computing in the late 1970s, so I'm not realyl an old-timer either. I grew up with the 8-bit home micros, and I knew waht a PDP11 was (and knew I wanted one), but I didn;'t use the machines I am now really interested in -- minicomputers, PERQs, HP desktop calculators when they were current. I got them when they were being thrown out and fell in love. So I can't contribute to the stories of people who were there. I do enjoy reading such stories, so please keep them coming. However, a machine is interesting to me for what it does, not what it looks like, so I try to get them going again. And of course that often means working out repair methods that were not used when they were new, which I am then happy to share. -tony

Yes, but from what you've said about the cluelessness in your workplace, that's not saying much :-) -tony

----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred Cisin" <cisin at xenosoft.com> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:29 AM Subject: Re: help me get off this list Agreed. I always enjoy reading Tony and Chucks replies. Regards, Andrew B aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk