Wrong Way:New Definiton REQUIRED

From: Bill Richman <bill_r_at_inetnebr.com>
Date: Wed Nov 19 00:21:50 1997

It was a _suggestion_. That's why I said "something to the effect of"
and " _x_ (2?) years". I never implied the definition was perfect as
it stood. Besides, I said "OR which were actively produced for less
than (2) years", not "AND". So if the LINC is over 20 years old, it's
in, regardless of how long it was produced. Were the others you
mentioned all produced for more than 2 years running? Sometimes I
"Really" think that the only place you'd find more attitude than in
this group would be in a flock of "Valley Girls".

On Tue, 18 Nov 1997 23:14:37 -0500, you wrote:

>From: bill_r_at_inetnebr.com (Bill Richman)
><How about making the rule something to the effect of "Systems older
><than 20 years, or which were actively produced for less than _x_ (2?)
><years running" ? Too complicated? At least it would cover almost all
><of the "unique" machines. If they were made for more than 2 years,
>Really. Lets see the LINC was over twenty years ago and made for more
>than two years. There are very few of them. Back then (64-66ish) a
>couple dozen were a lot of any machine! It would also eliminate the
>Altair, Imsai, KIM-1, PDP-8 and a few others.
>It doesn't work.

                            -Bill Richman
"When they took the fourth amendment, I was quiet because I didn't deal drugs.
 When they took the sixth amendment, I was quiet because I was innocent.
 When they took the second amendment, I was quiet because I didn't own a gun.
 Now they've taken the first amendment, and I can say nothing about it."
Received on Wed Nov 19 1997 - 00:21:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:30:35 BST