8 Dec
2006
8 Dec
'06
11:35 a.m.
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?) - who contacted me regarding
his displeasure with my mention of the Apple-1 on the Apple-II page of
my site - here is what I have posted as part of my introdiuction to the
Apple-II:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the Apple Computer Company,
and built a home computer they called the "Apple 1" in their garage. Although
it
required the users to provide their own cabinet, power supply, keyboard and
video monitor, it didn't require a separate terminal, and a simple BASIC interpreter
could be loaded with an optional cassette interface. Although it required a fairly
technical user to complete the system and make it usable, about 200 Apple 1s
were sold in the first year.
The following year (1977), Apple refined the design, providing a keyboard and
power supply and packaging the machine in a attractive low-profile plastic cabinet
with simple connections for the video monitor and tape storage. Now - anyone
who could plug two connectors together could use this computer. The result, called
"Apple 2" was one of the most successful early personal computers, and sold
many thousands of units.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Mr. Balascaks first correspondance, he stated that the KIM-1 was a far
better machine than the Apple-1, asked if I had succumbed to "the relentless
revisionism of the brand zealots?", and demanded that I "correct the above
reference to show the machine's irrelevance".
In his second correspondance, he stated that I am spreading "Apple
propaganda", again stated that the KIM-1 was better, sold in higher
quantities and cheaper (I still do not know what the KIM-1 has to do
with an Apple-II page).
In his third correspondance he acqused me of "posting lies and being
worse than useless by corrupting history into fiction". Again, he stated
that the KIM-1 was a far better machine and much cheaper.
In his last email, he indicated that he believes I am responsable for the
degradation of the internet and the reason that it cannot be trusted as
a source of information.
I don't know where this is coming from - I believe my reference to the
Apple-1 is accurate considering it's brevity - Apple was formed in 1976
and operated out of Jobs basement. The Apple-1 was sold through the
homebrew computer club as well as a few of stores, and although I do
not have confirmed numbers of sales, I believe it was around 200
units.
It was never my intention to make a page about the Apple-1 (I don't have
one, and I only feature systems on my site which are in my collection)...
I believe at some point someone asked why I didn't mention the Apple-1
so I added this one paragraph as part of the Apple-II history. I have no
other references to the Apple-1 (at least that I can recall) on my site.
In all of my responses to him, I indicated that I am unwilling to change
the site based on the hearsay of one individual, especially when that
person has an apparent (in my opinion based on correspondance
received) bias for or against the material being questioned, however I
would be happy to revise the site in response to any documented
facts/evidence he can provide that the material I have is incorrect.
All I have received in return is statements about how much better the
KIM-1 was (I make no such comparisons on my site), how expensive
the Apple-1 and Apple-II were (I post no such prices on my site), and
rants about a website that apparently lists Woz as the "inventor of
the single-board computer" (I make no such claim on my site).
I should probably just ignore it - but the fact that I have been accused
of lying and deliberatly posting misinformation is disturbing to me ...
So - I throw it to the list - As a background statement showing that
Apple existed and sold a predecessor in small volumes for a time
before the Apple-II ... Is my posting above non-factual? If so, in
what way, and can you provide supporting documentation?
Please keep in mind that I do not wish to post a page about the Apple-1,
only a single paragraph as a way of introducing the guys who built
the Apple-2.
Regards,
Dave
--
dave06a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/index.html
8 Dec
8 Dec
10:57 a.m.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?) - who contacted me regarding
his displeasure with my mention of the Apple-1 on the Apple-II page of
my site - here is what I have posted as part of my introdiuction to the
Apple-II:
Dave:
Your page seems to accurately describe the Apple I, and contains nothing
that is historically inaccurate. The guy's complaints don't seem very
relevant. The KIM-1 is of interest only in the general scheme of
6502-based computers, and perhaps as an interesting historical side-note
in the history of Commodore Business Machines (as they bought MOS
Technologies sometime soon after the KIM-1).
FWIW, I was around in those early days (like a lot around here). My
first exposure to a "personal computer" was through the Explorer post in
Orange County, who had a small collection of Apple I computers in
various configurations. I also saw a lot of Imsai and Altair machines
as well in that age.
I didn't see a KIM-1 until I was in college, and then it was considered
an "artifact."
11:25 a.m.
On 8 Dec 2006 at 11:57, C. Sullivan wrote:
Your page seems to accurately describe the Apple I,
and contains nothing
that is historically inaccurate. The guy's complaints don't seem very
relevant. The KIM-1 is of interest only in the general scheme of
6502-based computers, and perhaps as an interesting historical side-note
in the history of Commodore Business Machines (as they bought MOS
Technologies sometime soon after the KIM-1).
Ditto here--and I remember the Homebrew offer for the Apple that was
pitched--it was some discount off of the $666.66 asking retail price,
but I can't recall the exact number. I passed it up--I already had
my S-100 box, as did quite a few people. A single-board computer
just didn't interest me.
I did have a couple of friends who owned KIM-1 boards, but I think
they soon became frustrated at the lack of expandability (versus an S-
100 box). There were vendors who offered external card cages and even
a floppy controller for KIM-1 expansion, but it was a scattered
effort.
(BTW, I still have a 2708 EPROM burner for a KIM-1 if anyone wants
it.)
I'm trying to remember if it was Solid State Music who offered the S-
100 6502 board. Does anyone recall?
Cheers,
Chuck
11:03 a.m.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?) - who contacted me regarding
his displeasure with my mention of the Apple-1 on the Apple-II page of
my site - here is what I have posted as part of my introdiuction to the
Apple-II:
<big snip>
Are you sure that isn't M. Sokolov under a nym?
Doc
11:08 a.m.
I should probably just ignore it - but the fact that I have been accused
of lying and deliberatly posting misinformation is disturbing to me ...
So - I throw it to the list - As a background statement showing that
Apple existed and sold a predecessor in small volumes for a time
before the Apple-II ... Is my posting above non-factual? If so, in
what way, and can you provide supporting documentation?
Please keep in mind that I do not wish to post a page about the Apple-1,
only a single paragraph as a way of introducing the guys who built
the Apple-2.
Regards,
Dave
Your page looks accurate to me. The Apple 1 was a little expensive
($666.66 in 1976). I have a flyer
advertising the Apple 1 here:
http://www.dvq.com/misc/images/apple.pdf
It shows the date and price.
Bob
11:15 a.m.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
I should probably just ignore it
Yep. If you're not judging the Apple-1 against anything else, then you haven't
done anything wrong. In addition, as far as I'm aware you haven't stated
anything factually incorrect (although I'm from the wrong side of the pond
there, so my knowledge of Apple history's a little basic!)
He obviously thinks you're a talented historian and writer who just hasn't
taken the opportunity to write about his favourite machine. Take it as praise
and move on :-)
cheers
Jules
11:55 a.m.
Hmmm, wasn't last night (or a day before) a full moon? I think that
would explain the, um, interesting exchange. ;-)
From what little I know of the KIM-1, it was a single
board computer
without a case. It did have an LED segment display and a
hexadecimal
keyboard. Nothing to write home about. The Apple ][ (and not to be an
Apple biggot, so I'll mention the PET) were more complete computers.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?) - who contacted me regarding
his displeasure with my mention of the Apple-1 on the Apple-II page of
my site - here is what I have posted as part of my introdiuction to the
Apple-II:
12:04 p.m.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?)
Nope. But if he's from Concordia University, he's not just picking on
you:
http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000069-2.html
(he's mentioend a few times before you get to the bit he wrote).
BTW: Your page doesn't mention how the VAX-11/780 packaging was much
better than the packaging that came with the Apple I. Where do I send
my long, rambling email of complaint? :-)
Antonio
2:23 p.m.
Dave Dunfield wrote:
I should probably just ignore it - but the fact that I
have been accused
of lying and deliberatly posting misinformation is disturbing to me ...
So - I throw it to the list - As a background statement showing that
Apple existed and sold a predecessor in small volumes for a time
before the Apple-II ... Is my posting above non-factual? If so, in
what way, and can you provide supporting documentation?
No, as far as I can see, what you said on your site is perfectly accurate.
You're not comparing the Apple I to the II, so why he's bitching (and it
really seems to just be bitching) about the KIM-1 being 'better', I have no
idea. I'd just put it down to him being a rambling fool.
I've had *much* worse... Most memorable was someone who wanted me to design
him a load of what I'd describe as 'borderline illegal electronic devices'
(GPS jammers, airband transceivers, crap like that). I politely declined, then
got a wonderful email back to the effect of 'I pay my internet subscription,
I'm ENTITLED to this'. Yeah right, pull the other one jackass.
Then I got a guy who took a look at my battery-tab welder and demanded that I
"upload a better f*cking schematic"...
I'm beginning to wonder if there's something in the water or food supply
that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of the population of
the planet. Or maybe it's global warming - that seems to be the in-vogue
'problem' at the moment.
--
Phil. | (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny
classiccmp at philpem.me.uk | (='.'=) into your signature to help him gain
http://www.philpem.me.uk/ | (")_(") world domination.
2:39 p.m.
In article <4579E5E0.8010508 at philpem.me.uk>,
Philip Pemberton <classiccmp at philpem.me.uk> writes:
[...] Or maybe it's global warming - that seems to
be the in-vogue
'problem' at the moment.
Global warming causes bit rot.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>
3:22 p.m.
Philip Pemberton wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder if there's something in the water or food
supply that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of the
population of the planet. Or maybe it's global warming - that seems to
be the in-vogue 'problem' at the moment.
Nah, chalk it up to evolution.
Some mutations are useful and provide great advantages to those
individuals who have them. Others, such as those exhibited by the
individuals described in this thread, will likely result in Darwin
Awards in the long run.
It's true that environment may have had a hand in some of these, for
instance, perhaps some of the individuals may have been dropped on their
heads, disabled the door switch on a microwave oven and stuck their head
inside while it was turned on, or had leaded paint chips fall into their
morning cereal, or perhaps have bit into old style thermometers (the
kind that used to have mercury in them) and sucked hard, but the end
result is pretty much the same.
Instead of worrying about debating their points just congratulate them
that they were able to somehow manage to get online and figure out how
to use email. Perhaps, they may have even be able to tie their own
shoelaces today, or spell their own names. That's really a great
achievement considering their situation, so email them back
congratulating them, if you're so inclined.
As long as you don't give them your home phone number, all will be just
peachy. :-)
5:29 p.m.
Philip Pemberton wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder if there's something
in the water or food supply
that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of the
population of the planet. Or maybe it's global warming - that seems to
be the in-vogue 'problem' at the moment.
Google "aspartame Donald Rumsfeld". Be sure your tinfoil hat is
properly tuned before reading.
Seriously, though, the stuff is amazingly toxic, and proven psychoactive.
Doc
9 Dec
9 Dec
8:22 a.m.
Doc Shipley wrote:
Philip Pemberton wrote:
I usually have a seriously bad reaction to it. I have to be really careful.
Peace... Sridhar
I'm beginning to wonder if there's
something in the water or food
supply that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of the
population of the planet. Or maybe it's global warming - that seems to
be the in-vogue 'problem' at the moment.
Google "aspartame Donald Rumsfeld". Be sure your tinfoil hat is
properly tuned before reading.
Seriously, though, the stuff is amazingly toxic, and proven psychoactive. 
10:29 a.m.
Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
I guess I better stick to organic paper hats then!
Google
"aspartame Donald Rumsfeld". Be sure your tinfoil hat is
properly tuned before reading.
Seriously, though, the stuff is amazingly toxic, and proven
psychoactive.
I usually have a seriously bad reaction to it. I have to be really
careful. Peace... Sridhar
.
8:55 a.m.
On Dec 8, 2006, at 5:23 PM, Philip Pemberton wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder if there's something
in the water or food
supply that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of
the population of the planet.
I've wondered about that myself quite a bit in the past year or
three.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Cape Coral, FL
10:50 a.m.
On Sat, 2006-12-09 at 11:55 -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
On Dec 8, 2006, at 5:23 PM, Philip Pemberton wrote:
Likewise. In all seriousness, I think it has to do with continual
exposure to flagrantly biased information. It's as if we have built in
BS (bollocks for you Brits) filters, and after a while they get clogged
with all the near-information they have to strain out. Dunno... The
effect is certainly a "My side is always right and your side is always
wrong" type of false dichotomy. It drives me batty to deal with this as
often as I do. I recall that most people were reasonable twenty years
ago, if not well-informed and brilliant. A point could be made to them,
and acknowledged, and they entertained the idea that their side, while
right for the most part, had occasional "bad" spots... but, not any
more. Now, all you kids get off my lawn! <laughing>
You know, to drag this a little bit on-topic, this does NOT bode
well for anything like new software development, or interest in older
equipment and software. Simpler software to assist in decisions
examines the simplest of facts, and reports on them. It would take
modern capacities and speeds to massage the data so that it always comes
to the pre-ordained conclusion, or to lose the data if it doesn't match
"how things are" according to the user. Of course, DIS (Deliberately
Ignorant Software) could well be the next "killer ap" that will take
over the world.
Peace,
Warren E. Wolfe
wizard at voyager.net
I'm beginning to wonder if there's
something in the water or food
supply that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of
the population of the planet.
I've wondered about that myself quite a bit in the past year or
three.
5:44 p.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Dec 8, 2006, at 5:23 PM, Philip Pemberton wrote:
I don't think it's that simple. I think there's a genetic disorder
going around called "congenital idiocy". There should be a foundation
funding research for a cure.
Peace... Sridhar
I'm beginning to wonder if there's
something in the water or food
supply that's impairing the mental functioning of a good chunk of the
population of the planet.
I've wondered about that myself quite a bit in the past year or three. 
8 Dec
8 Dec
8:38 p.m.
Other have noted good information, so I won't rehash.
However, if you feel you must respond, feel free to give my name and
email, and he can Google for me, for I am a CBM zealot.
In light of my qualifications as a CBM fanboi, I will note that KIM-1
was impressive in its price only, little else.
The Apple I did not require a Terminal, the KIM-1 did
Apple I had 4kB RAM std, KIM-1 had 1kB + 64 bytes.
As well, I think the expansion options on the Apple I were more extensive.
There are others, of course, but to be fair, it's an apples to oranges
comparison. Woz built the Apple-I as a machine, Peddle made the KIM-1
to show off MOS' new CPU.
Jim
9 Dec
9 Dec
10:12 a.m.
I should probably just ignore it - but the fact that I
have been accused
of lying and deliberatly posting misinformation is disturbing to me ...
So - I throw it to the list - As a background statement showing that
Apple existed and sold a predecessor in small volumes for a time
before the Apple-II ... Is my posting above non-factual? If so, in
what way, and can you provide supporting documentation?
Hi Dave, there's no reason for this guy to be flying off like he is.
Nothing out of line in your entry, and he's probably just a bit eccentric.
The only thing I could see factualy (nitpick) wise is (and it has nothing
to do with his gripe however):
In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the Apple
Computer Company,
and built a home computer they called the "Apple 1" in their garage.
I would reword it a bit, as it makes it sound like Jobs had a hand in
designing the Apple 1, which he did not. Likewise, when they decided to
sell it they assembled it in Jobs's parents garage and not "their" garage.
Probably something like:
"In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the Apple Computer Company
to sell Wozniak's computer, which they named the "Apple 1". Although it
required the users to provide their own cabinet, power supply, keyboard
and video monitor, it didn't require a seperate terminal as other
computers of the time did. A simple BASIC interpreter could also be
loaded with an optional casette interface. Although it required a fairly
technical user to complete the system and make it usable, about 200 Apple
1's were assembled in Jobs' garage and sold in the first year."
Marty
3:41 p.m.
On 9 Dec 2006 at 12:12, Martin Scott Goldberg wrote:
"In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the
Apple Computer Company
to sell Wozniak's computer, which they named the "Apple 1". Although it
required the users to provide their own cabinet, power supply, keyboard
and video monitor, it didn't require a seperate terminal as other
computers of the time did. A simple BASIC interpreter could also be
loaded with an optional casette interface. Although it required a fairly
technical user to complete the system and make it usable, about 200 Apple
1's were assembled in Jobs' garage and sold in the first year."
Someone needs to mention that Jobs and Wozniak also got a very sweet
deal when they needed venture capital. Within a few years, the
picture would change dramatically, with VC's requiring a majority of
seats on the corporate board, large shares of the profit pie and veto
power on any strategic decision--including seeking more venture
capital.
By about 1985, VCs had gotten very greedy and probably were
responsible for the death of several startups. I was hired as a
consultant to VCs for several of them to see what might be salvaged
from a tilt-up filled with office furniture and
incomplete production
inventory. Inevitably it was after the engineering staff had
been
laid off, so record of any potentially valuable intellectual property
ended up in the dumpster. The rest was usually auctioned off.
Woz and Jobs were in the right place at the right time.
Cheers,
Chuck
10 Dec
10 Dec
4:54 a.m.
Hi Dave, there's no reason for this guy to be
flying off like he is.
Nothing out of line in your entry, and he's probably just a bit eccentric.
The only thing I could see factualy (nitpick) wise is (and it has nothing
to do with his gripe however):
... Suggested new wording:
"In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the
Apple Computer Company
to sell Wozniak's computer, which they named the "Apple 1". Although it
required the users to provide their own cabinet, power supply, keyboard
and video monitor, it didn't require a seperate terminal as other
computers of the time did. A simple BASIC interpreter could also be
loaded with an optional casette interface. Although it required a fairly
technical user to complete the system and make it usable, about 200 Apple
1's were assembled in Jobs' garage and sold in the first year."
Marty,
Thanks, and I agree - I have updated the site to reflect these changes.
And to everyone else - thanks for the feedback and encouragement.
To paraphrase Spock "I shall give this individual all the consideration
he is due". (I love quoting fictional people)
Dave
--
dave06a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/index.html
31 Dec
31 Dec
7:06 a.m.
I know this is OLD, but I haven't had a chance to read my cctalk e-mail for a few
weeks...
Murray is an out and out CRANK, and a loser.
Your site makes NO value judgement of the Apple I or even Apple II,
does not compare it to any other machine, nor do you extoll the virtues
of Apple. Neither do you degrade his favored KIM-1.
So, it is wholly impossible that you are being unfair, or spreading "Apple
propaganda". Did this CRACKPOT even tell you what text he would have
preferred?
I applaud you on your desire to be accurate. It is unfortunate that Mr. Balascak
seems to have lost touch with reality. Rather that converse with him,
you might suggest he find a girlfriend/boyfriend/whatever, and stop
harrassing people with his misguided angst. If he thinks it is so important,
he can start his own KIM-1 fansite, where he can extoll the virtues of the KIM-1,
and discuss the global plot by the pro-Apple anti-KIM-1 lesbian nazi eskimo communists
front
to discredit his beloved machine. Also direct him to distributors where
he can buy heavy duty tin foil in bulk, suitable more making those protective
hats for keeping the spy rays out of his brain.
Joe Stevenson
On 12/8/2006 at 2:35 PM Dave Dunfield wrote:
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
Hi guys,
I've been having an esclating correspondance with a chap named
"Murray Balascak" (anyone know him?) - who contacted me regarding
his displeasure with my mention of the Apple-1 on the Apple-II page of
my site - here is what I have posted as part of my introdiuction to the
Apple-II:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1976, Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs formed the Apple Computer Company,
and built a home computer they called the "Apple 1" in their garage.
Although it
required the users to provide their own cabinet, power supply, keyboard and
video monitor, it didn't require a separate terminal, and a simple BASIC
interpreter
could be loaded with an optional cassette interface. Although it required
a fairly
technical user to complete the system and make it usable, about 200 Apple
1s
were sold in the first year.
The following year (1977), Apple refined the design, providing a keyboard
and
power supply and packaging the machine in a attractive low-profile plastic
cabinet
with simple connections for the video monitor and tape storage. Now -
anyone
who could plug two connectors together could use this computer. The
result, called
"Apple 2" was one of the most successful early personal computers, and sold
many thousands of units.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Mr. Balascaks first correspondance, he stated that the KIM-1 was a far
better machine than the Apple-1, asked if I had succumbed to "the
relentless
revisionism of the brand zealots?", and demanded that I "correct the above
reference to show the machine's irrelevance".
In his second correspondance, he stated that I am spreading "Apple
propaganda", again stated that the KIM-1 was better, sold in higher
quantities and cheaper (I still do not know what the KIM-1 has to do
with an Apple-II page).
In his third correspondance he acqused me of "posting lies and being
worse than useless by corrupting history into fiction". Again, he stated
that the KIM-1 was a far better machine and much cheaper.
In his last email, he indicated that he believes I am responsable for the
degradation of the internet and the reason that it cannot be trusted as
a source of information.
I don't know where this is coming from - I believe my reference to the
Apple-1 is accurate considering it's brevity - Apple was formed in 1976
and operated out of Jobs basement. The Apple-1 was sold through the
homebrew computer club as well as a few of stores, and although I do
not have confirmed numbers of sales, I believe it was around 200
units.
It was never my intention to make a page about the Apple-1 (I don't have
one, and I only feature systems on my site which are in my collection)...
I believe at some point someone asked why I didn't mention the Apple-1
so I added this one paragraph as part of the Apple-II history. I have no
other references to the Apple-1 (at least that I can recall) on my site.
In all of my responses to him, I indicated that I am unwilling to change
the site based on the hearsay of one individual, especially when that
person has an apparent (in my opinion based on correspondance
received) bias for or against the material being questioned, however I
would be happy to revise the site in response to any documented
facts/evidence he can provide that the material I have is incorrect.
All I have received in return is statements about how much better the
KIM-1 was (I make no such comparisons on my site), how expensive
the Apple-1 and Apple-II were (I post no such prices on my site), and
rants about a website that apparently lists Woz as the "inventor of
the single-board computer" (I make no such claim on my site).
I should probably just ignore it - but the fact that I have been accused
of lying and deliberatly posting misinformation is disturbing to me ...
So - I throw it to the list - As a background statement showing that
Apple existed and sold a predecessor in small volumes for a time
before the Apple-II ... Is my posting above non-factual? If so, in
what way, and can you provide supporting documentation?
Please keep in mind that I do not wish to post a page about the Apple-1,
only a single paragraph as a way of introducing the guys who built
the Apple-2.
Regards,
Dave
--
dave06a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/index.html
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
6565
days inactive
6588
days old
22 comments
17 participants
participants (17)
-
arcarlini＠iee.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
bobalan＠sbcglobal.net -
brain＠jbrain.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
classiccmp＠philpem.me.uk -
dave06a＠dunfield.com -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
feedle＠feedle.net -
ikvsabre＠comcast.net -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
legalize＠xmission.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
ploopster＠gmail.com -
ray＠arachelian.com -
wgungfu＠csd.uwm.edu -
wizard＠voyager.net