Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: On the poll results for ufodiscussion

Expand Messages
  • Keith McLean
    Sorry about the typos in that email, Regan. Some a s should have been I s, meat should have been meant , etc. Thanks, Keith ... directly. ... on my ... of
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 3, 2004
      Sorry about the typos in that email, Regan.

      Some "a"s should have been "I"s, "meat" should have been "meant", etc.


      Thanks,

      Keith


      --- In ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Keith McLean" <kmskywatch@y...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Regan,
      >
      >
      > Thanks for your comments and good wishes. :) :)
      >
      > Yes, despite having studied IT subjects academically I can't
      > understand either why computers at times do not function properly.
      >
      > Computing and the internet are increasingly a commercial venture it
      > would seem, with increasing competition between stakeholders.
      > Typically, the efficency aspect and the desire to avoid legal
      > confrontations via copyright law are both factors which would concern
      > internet companies, I would think. Artistic and social freedoms are
      > reduced to fit this codified landscape, in favour of a product
      > orientated or "branding" strategy and ethic. So it would seem these
      > reductions in features and technical foulups that you refer to are a
      > product of this activity.
      >
      > Do you know what I discovered today? My computer informed that a had a
      > number of unread emails, refering to the contents of my Outlook
      > Express program. Now, while I receive email correspondence from my ISP
      > in Outlook, I don't use it activity for email. Surprisingly, not opnly
      > had a few messages from my ISP, but I had actually received email meat
      > for SOMEONE ELSE! The person who was the intended recipient was also a
      > "Keith McLean", but naturally his email address was not mine, but
      > shared the same ISP email service system. So, somehow my ISP had
      > fouled up somewhere.
      >
      > Anyway, I hope you can remedy the computer problems, Regan. I have
      > found having a friend involved in IT is a great person to get
      > technical advice from - someone who deals with technical issues
      directly.
      >
      >
      > Thanks,
      >
      > Keith
      >
      >
      > --- In ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Regan Power"
      > <soulsearcher_22@b...> wrote:
      > > Keith,
      > >
      > > I would just like to say that I do think you are doing just
      > fine as
      > > Moderator/Owner and I am glad to hear that you feel happy about
      > remaining in
      > > that capacity for the time being.
      > >
      > > Also, I am sorry not to have been able to participate in the
      > recent
      > > poll, but I have been suffering a plethora of technical "glitches"
      on my
      > > computer lately that have made using the net a real ordeal for me.
      > It all
      > > seemed to start when I downloaded Windows Security Pack 2 and found
      > that it
      > > immediately blocked my access to basic system-information! It told
      > me that
      > > I could get more information from my system administrator. That's me!
      > >
      > > A series of problems arose thereafter, involving all three
      of my
      > > ISPs and various bits of security software that are running on my
      p.c.,
      > > although these were probably unconnected with Windows Security Pack
      > 2, it's
      > > fair to say. However, the concatenation of the whole lot has left me
      > > breathless and feeling that the term "internet surfing" has become a
      > sick
      > > joke these days. Surfing implies effortless motion that is under
      > one's own
      > > control. But today, my computer is not under my own control and the
      > > once-simple and easy act of visiting and navigating a web-site has
      > become an
      > > arduous, time-consuming labour, in which I can realistically
      expect new,
      > > unexpected and unnecessary problems to assail me on every occasion.
      > As I
      > > write, an icon is flashing on my task bar which bears the dispiriting
      > > legend, "Updates are ready for your computer. Click here to
      > download these
      > > updates." Who knows what can of worms I shall open now if I do
      > "Click here"
      > > as prompted? And who knows what spam, spyware or virus
      > susceptibilities my
      > > p.c. may be open to if I don't?
      > >
      > > Happy, the "primitive" tribesman who does not have to suffer
      > such
      > > afflictions of a hi-tech, commercially aggressive, uncivilized
      > civilization.
      > > His time is his own and his life is under his own control. No so
      > for those
      > > of us who want/need to use the Internet, however. I think this
      > forum itself
      > > demonstrates how poorly we are being served by a
      > communication-system that
      > > has been vaunted as the culture-icon of the modern age. When it
      > started,
      > > less than half a year ago, we were able to correspond in Rich Text
      > format,
      > > which meant we could use italics, bold-type, underlines, different
      > fonts and
      > > even different colours. We could include pictures in the text-body
      > and the
      > > text would go wherever we put it. This facility enabled us to produce
      > > emails that were not only clear to read, but also a pleasure. (Not
      > that we
      > > always did that, of course, but my point is that the facility to do
      > it was
      > > there.) But steadily and progressively, restrictions have come in
      > and now
      > > we are reduced to just being able to correspond in Plain Text - the
      > minimal
      > > facility and functionality. And accordingly, communication is harder.
      > >
      > > Is this situation not ironic? We have at our fingertips a
      > > communication facility that is widely thought to be the most
      > sophisticated
      > > product of any human civilization that ever was, but we cannot use
      > it beyond
      > > the most crude and primitive level. How much of our disk-space is
      > taken up
      > > by "facilities" like Rich Text that we cannot use? If this trend
      > goes on, I
      > > can foresee us going back to corresponding by snail-mail
      > round-robins before
      > > very long. Hmmn, now that idea might be worth some
      consideration.......
      > >
      > > Regards,
      > > Regan
      > > _____
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Keith McLean
      > > To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:03 AM
      > > Subject: [ufodiscussion] On the poll results for ufodiscussion
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi everyone,
      > >
      > >
      > > Thanks for voting in the recent polls on the moderation questions.
      > >
      > > I think the results indicate that everyone is generally happy with how
      > > things are going with regard to ufodiscussion. I'll remain as
      > > moderator/owner for the foreseeable future, and feel happy enough with
      > > things. Thanks to everyone for contributing articles, opinions and
      > > points of view to the list and keep it going. :)
      > >
      > > Thanks also to Regan and Janet for your interest and support.
      > >
      > > Anyway, have a good day.
      > >
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > >
      > > Keith McLean (owner/moderator)
    • Regan Power
      Keith, Ah, the tribulations of composing and posting readable emails, eh? I know how you must feel! But your sentence construction was so good that I could
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 4, 2004
        Keith,

        Ah, the tribulations of composing and posting readable emails, eh?
        I know how you must feel! But your sentence construction was so good that I
        could correct your typos in my mind with little effort and get the sense of
        what you were saying anyway. I would that could be so with all the emails I
        send and receive!

        In saying that you have studied IT academically and even you can't
        understand why our computers act up sometimes, you have helped answer a
        question that has been in my mind for a few years now. I have been
        wondering who really owns my computer. Do I, or does Bill Gates? Now I
        know. Bill Gates does.

        Regards,
        Regan
        _____


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Keith McLean
        To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 2:02 PM
        Subject: [ufodiscussion] Re: On the poll results for ufodiscussion



        Sorry about the typos in that email, Regan.

        Some "a"s should have been "I"s, "meat" should have been "meant", etc.


        Thanks,

        Keith


        --- In ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Keith McLean" <kmskywatch@y...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Regan,
        >
        >
        > Thanks for your comments and good wishes. :) :)
        >
        > Yes, despite having studied IT subjects academically I can't
        > understand either why computers at times do not function properly.
        >
        > Computing and the internet are increasingly a commercial venture it
        > would seem, with increasing competition between stakeholders.
        > Typically, the efficency aspect and the desire to avoid legal
        > confrontations via copyright law are both factors which would concern
        > internet companies, I would think. Artistic and social freedoms are
        > reduced to fit this codified landscape, in favour of a product
        > orientated or "branding" strategy and ethic. So it would seem these
        > reductions in features and technical foulups that you refer to are a
        > product of this activity.
        >
        > Do you know what I discovered today? My computer informed that a had a
        > number of unread emails, refering to the contents of my Outlook
        > Express program. Now, while I receive email correspondence from my ISP
        > in Outlook, I don't use it activity for email. Surprisingly, not opnly
        > had a few messages from my ISP, but I had actually received email meat
        > for SOMEONE ELSE! The person who was the intended recipient was also a
        > "Keith McLean", but naturally his email address was not mine, but
        > shared the same ISP email service system. So, somehow my ISP had
        > fouled up somewhere.
        >
        > Anyway, I hope you can remedy the computer problems, Regan. I have
        > found having a friend involved in IT is a great person to get
        > technical advice from - someone who deals with technical issues
        directly.
        >
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        > Keith
        >
        >
        > --- In ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com, "Regan Power"
        > <soulsearcher_22@b...> wrote:
        > > Keith,
        > >
        > > I would just like to say that I do think you are doing just
        > fine as
        > > Moderator/Owner and I am glad to hear that you feel happy about
        > remaining in
        > > that capacity for the time being.
        > >
        > > Also, I am sorry not to have been able to participate in the
        > recent
        > > poll, but I have been suffering a plethora of technical "glitches"
        on my
        > > computer lately that have made using the net a real ordeal for me.
        > It all
        > > seemed to start when I downloaded Windows Security Pack 2 and found
        > that it
        > > immediately blocked my access to basic system-information! It told
        > me that
        > > I could get more information from my system administrator. That's me!
        > >
        > > A series of problems arose thereafter, involving all three
        of my
        > > ISPs and various bits of security software that are running on my
        p.c.,
        > > although these were probably unconnected with Windows Security Pack
        > 2, it's
        > > fair to say. However, the concatenation of the whole lot has left me
        > > breathless and feeling that the term "internet surfing" has become a
        > sick
        > > joke these days. Surfing implies effortless motion that is under
        > one's own
        > > control. But today, my computer is not under my own control and the
        > > once-simple and easy act of visiting and navigating a web-site has
        > become an
        > > arduous, time-consuming labour, in which I can realistically
        expect new,
        > > unexpected and unnecessary problems to assail me on every occasion.
        > As I
        > > write, an icon is flashing on my task bar which bears the dispiriting
        > > legend, "Updates are ready for your computer. Click here to
        > download these
        > > updates." Who knows what can of worms I shall open now if I do
        > "Click here"
        > > as prompted? And who knows what spam, spyware or virus
        > susceptibilities my
        > > p.c. may be open to if I don't?
        > >
        > > Happy, the "primitive" tribesman who does not have to suffer
        > such
        > > afflictions of a hi-tech, commercially aggressive, uncivilized
        > civilization.
        > > His time is his own and his life is under his own control. No so
        > for those
        > > of us who want/need to use the Internet, however. I think this
        > forum itself
        > > demonstrates how poorly we are being served by a
        > communication-system that
        > > has been vaunted as the culture-icon of the modern age. When it
        > started,
        > > less than half a year ago, we were able to correspond in Rich Text
        > format,
        > > which meant we could use italics, bold-type, underlines, different
        > fonts and
        > > even different colours. We could include pictures in the text-body
        > and the
        > > text would go wherever we put it. This facility enabled us to produce
        > > emails that were not only clear to read, but also a pleasure. (Not
        > that we
        > > always did that, of course, but my point is that the facility to do
        > it was
        > > there.) But steadily and progressively, restrictions have come in
        > and now
        > > we are reduced to just being able to correspond in Plain Text - the
        > minimal
        > > facility and functionality. And accordingly, communication is harder.
        > >
        > > Is this situation not ironic? We have at our fingertips a
        > > communication facility that is widely thought to be the most
        > sophisticated
        > > product of any human civilization that ever was, but we cannot use
        > it beyond
        > > the most crude and primitive level. How much of our disk-space is
        > taken up
        > > by "facilities" like Rich Text that we cannot use? If this trend
        > goes on, I
        > > can foresee us going back to corresponding by snail-mail
        > round-robins before
        > > very long. Hmmn, now that idea might be worth some
        consideration.......
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > > Regan
        > > _____
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: Keith McLean
        > > To: ufodiscussion@yahoogroups.com
        > > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:03 AM
        > > Subject: [ufodiscussion] On the poll results for ufodiscussion
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Hi everyone,
        > >
        > >
        > > Thanks for voting in the recent polls on the moderation questions.
        > >
        > > I think the results indicate that everyone is generally happy with how
        > > things are going with regard to ufodiscussion. I'll remain as
        > > moderator/owner for the foreseeable future, and feel happy enough with
        > > things. Thanks to everyone for contributing articles, opinions and
        > > points of view to the list and keep it going. :)
        > >
        > > Thanks also to Regan and Janet for your interest and support.
        > >
        > > Anyway, have a good day.
        > >
        > >
        > > Thanks,
        > >
        > > Keith McLean (owner/moderator)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.