Personally, I _enjoy_ hearing a little bit about the lives of people who share some of my interests. The world (including the government, your employer, your friends, etc.) tends to pigeon-hole us enough without our voluntarily doing it to ourselves. Yes, I'm on this list because I enjoy classic computers, but I also enjoy the _people_ who are into them, and what they do when they're not "hiding in the basement". Granted, I jumped into a discussion when I first joined this list a few months ago and made some comments in ignorance that probably got me on a few "dumbass" lists, but I hope I've redeemed myself in some small way since then. I'm sorry if this terribly "off-topic" post annoys anyone, but since we're all "just folks" here, I hope it will be forgiven. I'm tired of compartmentalizing myself to meet other people's expectations. -Bill Richman bill_r(a)inetnebr.com http://incolor.inetnebr.com/bill_r (Home of the COSMAC Elf Simulator!)

On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Sam Ismail wrote: Call me a geek, but I get to gether with people to socialize (as this listserv does) as WELL as talk about common interests. However, at every party, there is always a few anti-socials in front of the TV. sq (does anyone else here remember the old computer club meetings, back in those days of the S-100 bus computers, where we'd all pack our cars with all our homebrew computer hardware, take it to the meeting site, and for the first couple of hours, brag about our stuff, show it off to everyone else, then for the rest of the night, we'd all stand in groups and talk?) -- -<squest(a)cris.com>---------\ ( ( | ) ) Amendment1 Congress shall make ============================> /_\ no law abridging the freedom MicroPower FM Broadcasting-/ /\_/\ of speech, or of the press.

Jim: Isn't this a better thing....? We cna all get together any time we want and not get into trouble. We can have all the computes set up and work as long as we like. No worry about fumes. We can even have a few beers. Now about my drinking problem.... -Mike Allison James Willing wrote:

Sam, some people have expressed an interest in this general discussion... so far, you are the only one who has opposed it. I don't think it's really that hard to hit the delete button (but now I sound like a spammer). So... I would like to propose the following: I have set up a listserv for computer collectors. Before you get uptight, I don't want this new mailing list to compete with the classiccmp. In fact, my rules will be this: 1. Members should have an interest in collecting computers. 2. Members should have some semblance of a life outside of computers. 3. Discussion shall include, but not be limited to Linux, premarital sex, drug/alcohol use, The Simpsons(tm), religion, business, pleasure, and whatever your heart desires EXCEPT NO DISCUSSION OF COMPUTERS >10 YEARS OLD. (That's what classiccmp is for.) to subscribe send a message 'subscribe' to collector-request(a)slg.ml.org There, if you want to discuss life outside of computers, there's a place for you (me). And Sam can be happy knowing that classiccmp can stay on topic. ttyl srw p.s. This will (hopefully) be my last ever off-topic post on classiccmp. On Sun, 25 Jan 1998, Sam Ismail wrote:

Sam, My mail server must have been down the day you were put in charge. I, for one, would like to hear Mr Whitson's comments on this matter. Clearly there is a question of interpretation here and, seeing as how I've received no warnings or chastisements directly from Bill or from anyone else for that matter, I'll assume that your opinion is either that of the minority or differs from his to such a degree that it isn't worth the bits wasted in its transmission. I suspect that you would do well to discard your copy of _Roberts Rules of Order_ and procure a copy of _When Anger Hurts_. A (wo)man's maturity is defined not so much by his principles and unwavering rigidity in the face of that which offends him as it is by the depth of his patience and his tolerance for others in spite of his dissatisfaction with their behavior. As I've said, I am not only confident but resolute that the aforementioned discussion WAS, indeed, within the parameters set forth for the group...IE the discussion of computer collecting, which is driven by various motivations which are worthy of discussion in and of themselves inasmuch as they reveal why one may wish to collect one sort of computer over another or collect computers at all and recognizing that we all need some reassurance, from time to time, that computer collecting is not merely a deviance or eccentricity. You reveal yourself in your words and the manner in which you convey them. Should chastisement rain down upon me by the TRUE powers that be, then I will accept such knowing that I did so as a mature adult and not as a sniveling whiner. I will know that however just or unjust such judgement may be, many will recognize my sincerity and respect me for my forthright and honest nature and my respect for others. But I will NOT accept condescension or judgement from YOU so descend from your horse and stand amongst men (and women) as an equal rather than a self-appointed proclaimer of what is worthy and what is unworthy of discussion. As for your threat of spamming, it carries little weight here as it will result in the implementation of various hacks which function to deny incoming mail from specific mail servers or from specific addresses. Anthony Clifton - Wirehead

Offtopic observation, last you'll hear from me about it: It seems that there was at least ten times more mail complaining about the "offtopic" thread than the number of messages that made up that thread. Now if it were up to me, I'd rather see a few "offtopic" posts than see all the cat fighting going on because a few people want to complain publicly about a thread, one in particular doing most of the complaining. Different people can interpret a FAQ different ways, no two ways are exactly right. Wouldn't it be best to use that little ole delete key instead of generating even more "offtopic" messages to the list? Maybe I'm alone in my thinking, I can't assume that what I think is precisely what other people think, and I should therefore be the self-appointed leader of said people. This is just my opinion, and I guess it's worth almost as much as the electrons it is printed on. And on that note: I am not writing this message for public reply. If you feel you do have to reply publicly, fine, I can't stop you. If you'd like to tell me where to stick my opinion, I can be flamed at: higginbo(a)netpath.net (if you do flame, please, at least make it interesting reading, because I have seen just about everything where flames are concerned.) <END Off-Topic TRANSMISSION> - John Higginbotham - limbo.netpath.net

On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Daniel A. Seagraves wrote: No, actually, just DON'T POST THE MESSAGE. Re-direct it to the proper Usenet newsgroup and the continue the discussion there if you're so inclined. Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass Coming Soon...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0 See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!

At 07:42 PM 1/24/98 GMT, Bill Richman wrote: I think the thing I find most interesting about the lives of people on the list is the relatively large number of "young" list members. I'd really thought that it'd only be the older group with a nostalgic feeling for old iron that would be interested in collecting old iron. To add some "on-topic" content to this e-mail: One of the seminal articles I remember reading in Byte (in the good old days :-) was one by Carl Helmers talking about setting up an Apple II to run UCSD Pascal. I'm slowly assembling all the necessary bits but I seem to remember that to run UCSD Pascal you needed the "Euro+" Apple II. Can anyone confirm this? Preferably someone running UCSD Pascal on an Apple II... Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies(a)latrobe.edu.au Information Technology Services | Phone: +61 3 9479 1550 Fax: +61 3 9479 1999 La Trobe University | "My Alfas keep me poor in a monetary Melbourne Australia 3083 | sense, but rich in so many other ways"

Any idea what UCSD uses in Applesoft that it would require the roms? I know it doesn't require the "autostart" monitor rom which came with the II+ because I replaced mine with the older II rom and UCSD still ran fine. Of course I still had the Applesoft BASIC code roms in the machine, but that was just the language interpreter. I'd be curious to know for what or why UCSD would make use of the BASIC roms. On 28 Jan 98 at 11:35, Sam Ismail wrote: ----- David Williams - Computer Packrat dlw(a)neosoft.com http://www.neosoft.com/~dlw

On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Wirehead Prime wrote: No you're not. For the past 5 postings you've been talking about yourself, your wife, your job, and your attitudes on drugs and pre-marital sex. Now what the hell does that have to do with how you got into collecting computers? Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass Coming Soon...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0 See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!