help?...

On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 19:14:25 -0600, amdx <amdx@knology.net> wrote:

 Maybe they did a pretty good job of engineering it to not have affect
on those with Chinese Genetics. ;-)

No, they just did a better job of \'engineering\' their death
statistics.
 
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 11:51:17 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 19:14:25 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:

Maybe they did a pretty good job of engineering it to not have affect
on those with Chinese Genetics. ;-)

No, they just did a better job of \'engineering\' their death
statistics.

Not a plausible claim. There were enough western reporters in China to let us see how thoroughly the Chinese locked down when the epidemic was raging in Wuhan, and there are still enough left to let us see that they aren\'t bothering any more. Australia has been through the same kind of period of empty streets, and is evidence of the fact that if you do it right you can stop doing it after a couple of months. Curistor Doom does love his conspiracy theories, and he\'s correspondingly enthusiastic about putting them forward even when they are obvious nonsense.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On 05/12/2020 00:13, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
fredag den 4. december 2020 kl. 10.38.21 UTC+1 skrev David Brown:
On 03/12/2020 21:56, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
torsdag den 3. december 2020 kl. 21.33.16 UTC+1 skrev
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com:
On Thursday, December 3, 2020 at 1:45:58 PM UTC-5, lang...@fonz.dk
wrote:
torsdag den 3. december 2020 kl. 19.14.31 UTC+1 skrev David
Brown:
On 03/12/2020 18:08, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:


OK, Pompeo/Trump 2024. Pompeo would be a good president
with Trump\'s help.

Pence seems to be a very decent guy, but too quiet for the US
voters who like drama.

Pence won\'t even trust himself to have dinner with a woman
without a chaperon, and you think he should be trusted to run a
country?
where did you get the idea that it is himself he doesn\'t trust?
LOL! I needed that. I actually laughed out loud. Yes, Pence is such
an animal that his magnetism would make any woman desire him
uncontrollably. THAT\'S why he IS Presidential material.


you are missing the point, he doesn\'t want to be accused of anything
because these days that is guilty until proven guilty. For a man in
his position I\'d say it is a pretty smart precaution

It is not /remotely/ a smart precaution.

I realise that in the world of American politics, it\'s important not to
give the gutter press or your political enemies any suggestion of
wrong-doing, because a mere accusation can be as bad as a conviction.

He has publicly announced that he won\'t dine alone with a woman (other
than his wife) because it would be inappropriate. This will immediately
give the media the idea that he\'d be likely to act inappropriately with
a woman if he /did/ get them alone - and that any time he does happen to
be alone with a woman, he is fair game for any mud-slinging, rumour
mongering, gossip press, or conspiracy theory around.

And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people in the
same way as men - he can\'t have a professional relationship with them,
or a friendship with them, because he sees them primarily as sex objects
- or as weaker beings that must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like
something out of a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs
that this person has risen to the prominence he has.

so he is either guilty or guilty...

He is guilty of being stupid, spineless, thoughtless, and a poor
candidate for a leading political position. That\'s not crime, of course
- it applies equally to most of us! But it makes him a hopeless choice
for president.
 
On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:


And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people in the
same way as men - he can\'t have a professional relationship with them,
or a friendship with them, because he sees them primarily as sex objects
- or as weaker beings that must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like
something out of a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs
that this person has risen to the prominence he has.



Did he say all that? Got a link?

He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is what
matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume he is
having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if he himself
thinks women are sex objects.

I certainly don\'t view women in the same way as men.

Of course there are differences between men and women. But there are no
differences that are relevant to having a meal together, unless you are
actually out on a date.
 
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 8:55:24 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote:
On Frii,i 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown
davidi...@hesbynett.no> wrote:
ii

And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people in the
same way as men - he can\'t have a professional relationship with them,
or a friendship with them, because he sees them primarily as sex objects
- or ais weaker beings that must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like
something out of a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs
that this person has risen to the prominence he has.

i

Did he say all that? Got a link?
He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is what
matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume he is
having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if he himself
thinks women are sex objects.

I certainly don\'t view women in the same way as men.

Of course there are differences between men and women. But there are no
differences that are relevant to having a meal together, unless you are
actually out on a date.

You see the world as binary. The world is much more complex than that. I usually agree with you, but in this case I do not.

Dan
 
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 14:55:14 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:


And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people in the
same way as men - he can\'t have a professional relationship with them,
or a friendship with them, because he sees them primarily as sex objects
- or as weaker beings that must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like
something out of a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs
that this person has risen to the prominence he has.



Did he say all that? Got a link?

He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is what
matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume he is
having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if he himself
thinks women are sex objects.

OK, he didn\'t say all that. You made most of it up yourself.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The best designs are necessarily accidental.
 
On 05/12/2020 15:51, dcaster@krl.org wrote:
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 8:55:24 AM UTC-5, David Brown
wrote:
On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote:
On Frii,i 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown
davidi...@hesbynett.no> wrote: ii

And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people
in the same way as men - he can\'t have a professional
relationship with them, or a friendship with them, because he
sees them primarily as sex objects - or ais weaker beings that
must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like something out of
a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs that this
person has risen to the prominence he has.

i

Did he say all that? Got a link?
He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is
what matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume
he is having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if
he himself thinks women are sex objects.

I certainly don\'t view women in the same way as men.

Of course there are differences between men and women. But there
are no differences that are relevant to having a meal together,
unless you are actually out on a date.

You see the world as binary. The world is much more complex than
that. I usually agree with you, but in this case I do not.

The world is indeed complex (and the division of people into \"male\" or
\"female\" is an oversimplification in itself). But in this case, I am
clear - if the guy is unable to have a dinner with a woman without being
overwhelmingly concerned with her gender, or even just overwhelmingly
concerned with what other people will think about him having dinner with
a woman, then he is not fit for office.
 
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 11:20:32 AM UTC-5, David Brown wrote:
On 05/12/2020 15:51, dca...@krl.org wrote: anotheranother
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 8:55:24 AM UTC-5, David Brown
wrote:
On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote: another
On Frii,i 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown another
davidi...@hesbynett.no> wrote: ii

And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people another
in the same way as men - he can\'t have a professional another
relationship with them, or a friendship with them, because he another
sees them primarily as sex objects - or ais weaker beings that
must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like something out of
a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs that this
person has risen to the prominence he has. another

i

Did he say all that? Got a link?
He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is
what matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume
he is having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if
he himself thinks women are sex objects.
another
I certainly don\'t view women in the same way as men.

Of course there are differences between men and women. But there
are no differences that are relevant to having a meal together,
unless you are actually out on a date.

You see the world as binary. The world is much more complex than
that. I usually agree with you, but in this case I do not.

The world is indeed complex (and the division of people into \"male\" or
\"female\" is an oversimplification in itself). But in this case, I am
clear - if the guy is unable to have a dinner with a woman without being
overwhelmingly concerned with her gender, or even just overwhelmingly
concerned with what other people will think about him having dinner with
a woman, then he is not fit for officeanother

But why is a guy having dinner with a woman who is not his wife? I can not remember ever having dinner with a woman other than my wife. At least since I have been married.

Can not remember having dinner with just another man either. I certainly would not be overwhelmed in either case.

Dan
 
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 17:20:23 +0100, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 05/12/2020 15:51, dcaster@krl.org wrote:
On Saturday, December 5, 2020 at 8:55:24 AM UTC-5, David Brown
wrote:
On 05/12/2020 00:48, John Larkin wrote:
On Frii,i 4 Dec 2020 10:38:11 +0100, David Brown
davidi...@hesbynett.no> wrote: ii

And he is saying publicly that he doesn\'t view woman as people
in the same way as men - he can\'t have a professional
relationship with them, or a friendship with them, because he
sees them primarily as sex objects - or ais weaker beings that
must be protected by gallant gentlemen, like something out of
a Victorian novel. It is a pathetic state of affairs that this
person has risen to the prominence he has.

i

Did he say all that? Got a link?
He said he won\'t dine alone with a woman other than his wife. He is
happy to dine alone with another man. The difference in gender is
what matters to him - it is misogyny. He thinks people will assume
he is having an affair, and a person will only reason like that if
he himself thinks women are sex objects.

I certainly don\'t view women in the same way as men.

Of course there are differences between men and women. But there
are no differences that are relevant to having a meal together,
unless you are actually out on a date.

You see the world as binary. The world is much more complex than
that. I usually agree with you, but in this case I do not.


The world is indeed complex (and the division of people into \"male\" or
\"female\" is an oversimplification in itself). But in this case, I am
clear - if the guy is unable to have a dinner with a woman without being
overwhelmingly concerned with her gender, or even just overwhelmingly
concerned with what other people will think about him having dinner with
a woman, then he is not fit for office.

OK, if that\'s the way you feel, don\'t vote for him.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The best designs are necessarily accidental.
 
Bert Hickman wrote:
Robert,

Once you get your system running again, you may want to download the
MozBackup (Mozilla Backup) utility. It will save not only your profile
but also other user data (you select which) such as address books,
bookmarks, certificates, cookies, email settings, saved passwords,
emails, and more. MozBackup allows you to easily back up, transfer, or
re-install all the associated scattered user settings and data for
Seamonkey, Firefox, Thunderbird and many other programs in a single
operation. Invaluable for setting up multiple machines to a common
configuration and a lifesaver for recovering a corrupted profile.

Bert

Paul wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
  When i open Win7 SeaMonkey 2.49.5 now, i get nothing useful..no
list of newsgroups, or anything else.

  Content list of top bar: File, Edit, View, Go,Message, Tools,
Window, Help     All greyed out.


  Content list of second bar: GetMsgs, Compose, [greyed out]] Reply,
Reply all, Forward //need i go on rest greyed out.



  Content of last bar: View: (pulldownlist)   Greyed out.

  Since i cannot see any newsgroups, posting a response is not of any
use to me.
  Please use email to robertbaer@localnet.com and give guide how to
restore this blankie.

   Thanks


application data or Appdata
      Mozilla
         seamonkey
            profiles.ini
            Profiles
               abcd5678
               efgh1234  <=== make a new one

You will likely need to edit profiles.ini to get
the new profile added to the list of profiles.
When a new profile hasn\'t been set up, and you
launch from inside Seamonkey (which you can\'t do at the
moment), then the profile would be \"Default User\"
instead of \"default\".

Then, in Command Prompt

cd Program Files
cd Seamonkey
./seamonkey -P \"Default User\"     <=== this is the assumed name of the
new profile

If you want a sexy name for the profile, edit the profiles.ini.
Here, I\'m adding a reference to my new profile. You could even
move the Default=1 down to the second profile here, so that it
starts automatically, without even using Command Prompt.

[General]
StartWithLastProfile=1

[Profile0]
Name=default
IsRelative=1
Path=Profiles/abcd5678.default
Default=1

[Profile1]
Name=TestProfileEFGH1234
IsRelative=1
Path=Profiles/efgh1234

cd /d C:\\Program Files\\Seamonkey
./seamonkey.exe -P \"TestProfileEFGH1234\"     <=== Now am using the new
one by name

The idea is, to create a new profile.

You\'ll need to migrate stuff eventually, like bookmarks.

    Paul
With a suggestion from someone else, found problem was in the layout.
Solved now.
Thanks.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top