From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V12 #79 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, February 28 2003 Volume 12 : Number 079 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Blame the ion storms... ["Rex.Broome" ] Re: Blame the ion storms... ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Re: Blame the ion storms... ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Blame the ion storms... ["Jason R. Thornton" ] Down with Scott McCaughey ["Natalie Jane" ] RE: Impending REAP - B*T*VS [Miles Goosens ] Re: Blame the ion storms... ["Stewart C. Russell" ] Re: Down with Scott McCaughey [Miles Goosens ] Re: Down with Scott McCaughey ["Natalie Jane" ] RE: Down with Scott McCaughey ["Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" ] RE: Down with Scott McCaughey ["Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" ] Re: Blame the hat storms... ["Maximilian Lang" ] Re: Down with Scott McCaughey [Eb ] RE: Impending REAP - B*T*VS ["Sumiko Keay" ] RE: Top posting [Tom Clark ] RE: Top posting [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Newz You Can Use ["Mike Wells" ] Re: Sanctions and Inspections [grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:30:26 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: Blame the ion storms... Stewart: >>There was a third, but since it was entitled "So, how about a double-double* >>and a chocolate glazed**, eh?", it was dismissed out of hand. (Regional reference-- duck!) Now I have to got to In 'N' Out for lunch...* __________ Natalie: >>Egads! Have I slipped through a crack in reality? Is this an alternate >>universe list in which I agree with Miles?? Yup. You're on the Mirror Universe Feglist. You can tell because I have a beard on this one. Be very careful or Woj will have to break out the Agonizer. - -Rex * double double = delicious cheeseburger at SoCal fast food joint In 'N' Out Burger... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 10:32:30 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Blame the ion storms... At 10:30 AM 2/28/2003 -0800, Rex.Broome wrote: >double double = delicious cheeseburger at SoCal fast food joint In 'N' Out >Burger... Mmmmmm. They've expanded to Northern CA, Nevada and Arizona, so it's not just a SoCal delicacy any longer. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:48:04 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Blame the ion storms... Jason R. Thornton wrote: > > ... so it's not > just a SoCal delicacy any longer. There's no way it could beat Conway's Red Top in Colorado Springs. Burgers the size of your head: Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:06:20 -0800 From: "Jason R. Thornton" Subject: Re: Blame the ion storms... At 01:48 PM 2/28/2003 -0500, Stewart C. Russell wrote: >There's no way it could beat Conway's Red Top in >Colorado Springs. Burgers the size of your head: > Jesus. Have you seen the size of my head? I did a search for the best burger in America, and found these results from CitySearch: http://best.citysearch.com/cities/2002/7777 Crown Burgers in Salt Lake looks interesting. "A quarter-pound burger piled high with pastrami." Yikes. Sounds almost as tasty as those Tijuana hot dogs I used to get - hot dogs wrapped in bacon. - --Jason "Only the few know the sweetness of the twisted apples." - Sherwood Anderson ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:10:48 -0800 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: Down with Scott McCaughey >This might send Natalie screaming into the night, THEY'RE NOT AN ALT-COUNTRY BAND ANYMORE!! MOMMY!! MOMMYYYY!!! but Robyn's big mate >Scott McCaughey (wouldn't be surprised to see him at QEH on Sun.), has >a >new album out in his Minus 5 guise, and Jeff Tweedy and the boys >guest >effectively. Funny, I just wrote a review of this for another list, moments ago. Here 'tis: I have to start by saying that I wasn't very impressed when I saw the Minus 5 open for GBV last year. But I figured, what the hell, I'll go see them again when they play here on March 8, why not? So to prepare, I got the album, because I hate seeing a band when I don't know any of their songs. I've listened to the album once now. It's got pretty melodies, nice instrumentation, good sarcastic lyrics... and it's totally innocuous. There's nothing about it that perked my interest, made me tap my foot, or got me excited. Scott McCaughey has a light pleasant voice, not unlike that of Robert Schneider from the Apples in Stereo, which never varies in tone or conveys any strong emotion. Even Jeff Tweedy sounds inert. The album is like vanilla ice cream, sweet and bland. I was hoping Wilco would provide some chocolate sauce for the ice cream (so to speak), but... apparently not. Mind you, this is only a first impression. I might give it a few more spins to see if I can get anything more out of it. Maybe I'll change my mind. It's been known to happen. *shrug* (I always hedge my bets!) n. (are you still glad I'm back?) _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:22:48 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: RE: Impending REAP - B*T*VS At 06:37 PM 2/27/2003 -0500, Christopher Gross wrote: >If I was to rate the seven >seasons of Buffy according to the letter system used in most US schools, >it would look something like this: > >season 1: A- >season 2: A+ >season 3: A+ >season 4: A- >season 5: A >season 6: B+ >season 7: A- (so far) > >Of course, this is me, and I seem to be Joss Whedon's perfect target >audience. Everything he does just resonates with me. I love Buffy, love >Angel, loved Firefly. He could probably film his laundry list and I'd >watch it. I am Joss's bitch. Flip the grades between Seasons 4 and 5 and I could have written this post. Now that FIREFLY's gone, shouldn't K Directorate's An(n?)a, Sydney's Season One nemesis, make a sexy, high-kicking reappearance on ALIAS? I sure think so. Then next, I'd make sure that the other three females from FIREFLY resurfaced on ANGEL or the probable Faith spinoff. I'm not sure my heart could take an ANGEL ep that featured Charisma Carpenter, Morena Baccarin, and a crossed-over Eliza Dushku, but what a way to finally blow up the ol' ticker real good. Summer Glau / Winter Babe, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 14:23:08 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: Re: Blame the ion storms... Jason R. Thornton wrote: > > Have you seen the size of my head? hey, you are talking to someone no slouch in the noggin department. Most hats don't fit, and I even have to check that that toques won't cause constriction. Stewart "Toque Hair City" Russell ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:32:20 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: Down with Scott McCaughey At 11:10 AM 2/28/2003 -0800, Natalie Jane wrote: >got me excited. Scott McCaughey has a light pleasant voice, not unlike that >of Robert Schneider from the Apples in Stereo, which never varies in tone or >conveys any strong emotion. The one time I saw Scott McCaughey as a lead singer live (I was about to use an unqualified "live," but then I remembered that I have seen him at least three times as a touring member of R.E.M.) was on 1997's "Magnificent Seven" tour, and when he took the mic, I suddenly thought I must have been high when I listened to and was unimpressed by all those Young Fresh Fellows album -- he sang with passion and sported a cooler, deeper voice. Looked like the Second Coming of Ian Hunter, and when he took a turn at the pianner, he played like it too. Enjoyed the show immensely, *especially* the Minus 5 and Eitzel portions, and this show (the tour-ender in Atlanta) featured Stipe and Mills joining the Mag7 for an unforgettable R.E.M. encore. (Said encore being an OK "New Test Leper" with just Buck/Mills/Stipe, then a spectacular all-covers blowout of "The Passenger," "Wicked Game," and... and... well, I can't recall, but it was another super, well-chosen cover.) Went back to the albums. Wouldn't know it was the same guy. Was still indifferent to it. Will buy DOWN WITH WILCO for the titular involvement of Tweedy et al (to echo Nat and borrow Chris' phrase, I guess I'm Jeff Tweedy's bitch), but don't have high hopes. >n. (are you still glad I'm back?) Oh, pshaw. It'll be at least two more days before the new wears off! ;-) later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:30:18 -0600 From: "Mike Wells" Subject: Fw: The following takes place between 1992 and the present Rex, responding to Miles: > but I stand behind "Moss Elixir" as truly excellent, particularly > in the writing department, and "Nextdoorland" puts a lot of things right for > me. I will also nod to "Elixer," it's still probably my all-around favorite release of his...IMO it hangs together stylistically better than anything he had done since "Trains." I find the newer Robyn's songwriting skills so much more polished and complete..."JfS" for me is tremendously thoughtful and layered, and ultimately more rewarding on repeat listens than some of the earlier stuff ("QE" being my notable example). Less quirky, yes. But I adore "Guildford," for me the quintessential RH song. > But I think one big reason Robyn still looms so large in my book through > these years is that A) he kept going and stayed "on mission" throughout > those years when his style became (even more) unfashionable, and B) he never > made any of the halfhearted concessions or stylistic shifts that many of his > contemporaries did in order to stay "current" or court radio play in the > '90's... the examples are endless and debatable, but I don't think Robyn can > be accused of this on any level. I recall giving this very reason to Ed when he asked why there where people who liked both Rush and Robyn (seemingly disparate tastes). Michael ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:38:54 -0600 From: "Mike Wells" Subject: Blame the hat storms... Stewart: > hey, you are talking to someone no slouch in the noggin department. Most hats don't fit, and I even have to check that that toques won't cause constriction. After outgrowing 8 1/8 fitted caps I gave up trying for awhile. One solution is to hit a 'Farm & Fleet' or similar hunting store before the season starts. Skip past the XXL section to 'the missing link and up' rack. There's usually a couple freakishly large knit jobs that will just be large enough, if you don't mind flourescent orange. > Stewart "Toque Hair City" Russell Wasn't that a hit for The Bay City Rollers? Michael "orange on a stick" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:41:56 -0800 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: Re: Down with Scott McCaughey >I suddenly thought I must have been high when I listened to and was >unimpressed by all those Young Fresh Fellows album -- he sang with passion >and sported a cooler, deeper voice. I thought he was great with YFF. Maybe he saves all his energy for them. (Speaking of which, I heard the Fastbacks broke up! Say it ain't so!!) >Will buy DOWN WITH WILCO for the titular involvement of Tweedy et al (to >echo Nat and borrow Chris' phrase, I guess I'm Jeff Tweedy's bitch), but >don't have high hopes. Except for a couple of Tweedy lead vocals, you would never guess Wilco were involved. I suspected it would be like that when I bought the CD, having read reviews to that effect, but hope springs eternal. > >n. (are you still glad I'm back?) > >Oh, pshaw. It'll be at least two more days before the new wears off! ;-) I give it a day and a half... :P n. _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 11:46:03 -0800 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Down with Scott McCaughey Miles Wrote: > The one time I saw Scott McCaughey as a lead singer live (I was about to > use an unqualified "live," but then I remembered that I have seen him at > least three times as a touring member of R.E.M.) was on 1997's > "Magnificent Seven" tour, and when he took the mic, I suddenly thought I > must have been high when I listened to and was unimpressed by all those > Young Fresh Fellows album -- he sang with passion and sported a cooler, > deeper voice. Looked like the Second Coming of Ian Hunter, and when he > took a turn at the pianner, he played like it too. As probably the biggest Scott McCaughey fan on this list, I agree that Scott, regardless of the band, is much much better live than on record especially up until recently. I think the last 4 YFF/-5 records (Let the War against Music Begin, Because we Hate You, In Rock, and Down With Wilco) are easily the best work he was done. Sadly the album that best captures the live energy is In Rock which is only available at shows. > Went back to the albums. Wouldn't know it was the same guy. Was still > indifferent to it. Will buy DOWN WITH WILCO for the titular involvement > of Tweedy et al (to echo Nat and borrow Chris' phrase, I guess I'm Jeff > Tweedy's bitch), but don't have high hopes. As some one that was not a big fan of YHF, It definitely harkens back too more of a Summerteeth vibe. It's a great album that really seems to be trying to be the sequel to the Beach Boys album Love You. They even covered the Night Was So Young when I saw last saw them live and I about crapped my pants. Scott MCCaughey on record is not a always a sure fire winner but he always is live. It life affirmingly good shit. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 12:04:32 -0800 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Down with Scott McCaughey > I thought he was great with YFF. Maybe he saves all his energy for them. If anything he seems to be mostly focused on the Minus 5 lately. Live the Minus 5 can be just as energetic if not more especially if they play as traditionalo four piece comboa and keep Ken stringfellows' keyboards off the stage. > (Speaking of which, I heard the Fastbacks broke up! Say it ain't so!!) They sadly have departed after all these years. But Kim Warnick's new band Visqueen is most excellent and their first album came out last week. And Kurt Bloch as cropped up in two new bands Once For Kicks and Sgt. Major. > >Will buy DOWN WITH WILCO for the titular involvement of Tweedy et al (to > >echo Nat and borrow Chris' phrase, I guess I'm Jeff Tweedy's bitch), but > >don't have high hopes. > > Except for a couple of Tweedy lead vocals, you would never guess Wilco > were involved. I suspected it would be like that when I bought the CD, > having read reviews to that effect, but hope springs eternal. Really? I can hear Wilco all over album especially in the rhythm section and production touches. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 14:58:15 -0600 From: Miles Goosens Subject: RE: Down with Scott McCaughey At 11:46 AM 2/28/2003 -0800, Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\) wrote: >As probably the biggest Scott McCaughey fan on this list, I agree that >Scott, regardless of the band, is much much better live than on record >especially up until recently. I think the last 4 YFF/-5 records (Let >the War against Music Begin, Because we Hate You, In Rock, and Down With >Wilco) are easily the best work he was done. Sadly the album that best >captures the live energy is In Rock which is only available at shows. That would explain why I haven't noticed, because I don't think I've bought anything McCaughey since THE LONESOME DEATH OF BUCK McCOY -- which I liked better than almost any previous McCaughey record. >> Went back to the albums. Wouldn't know it was the same guy. Was >still >> indifferent to it. Will buy DOWN WITH WILCO for the titular >involvement >> of Tweedy et al (to echo Nat and borrow Chris' phrase, I guess I'm >Jeff >> Tweedy's bitch), but don't have high hopes. > >As some one that was not a big fan of YHF, It definitely harkens back >too more of a Summerteeth vibe. It's a great album that really seems to >be trying to be the sequel to the Beach Boys album Love You. They even >covered the Night Was So Young when I saw last saw them live and I about >crapped my pants. Well, I loved both SUMMERTEETH and YHF, the former a little more but only because it became one of those special albums that was perfectly attuned with my life and emotions when it came out, to the point where it stopped being an album and became more like a way of life. But this description of DOWN WITH WILCO, which I've seen echoed elsewhere, worries me. I like PET SOUNDS fine, but it's the only Beach Boys product that doesn't make me want to strangle them before they emit one more trademark harmony, and I'm completely sick of the toporiffic effect that this album has exerted over pop music during the last decade -- it's like every other record in the genres I formally liked (usually The Genre Formerly Known As Alternative Formerly Known As Modern Rock Formerly Known As Indie Formerly Known As Underground) is stuck in flypaper on a Sunday morning, and isn't too concerned about it, 'cos it's too busy doing a midtempo wallow in that lovingly overorchestrated stickiness. So to me, LOVE YOU is a red light rather than a recommendation. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:54:25 -0500 From: "Stewart C. Russell" Subject: very odd music (100% daxophone content) odd: see also: much German oddness with musical bits of wood. Oh, and dancing meerkats wearing fedoras. Stewart ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:21:24 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: Down with Scott McCaughey on 2/28/03 12:58 PM, Miles Goosens at outdoorminer@mindspring.com wrote: > I like PET SOUNDS fine, but it's the only Beach Boys product that doesn't make > me want to strangle them before they emit one more trademark harmony, and I'm > completely sick of the toporiffic effect that this album has exerted over pop > music during the last decade -- it's like every other record in the genres I > formally liked (usually The Genre Formerly Known As Alternative Formerly Known > As Modern Rock Formerly Known As Indie Formerly Known As Underground) is stuck > in flypaper on a Sunday morning, and isn't too concerned about it, 'cos it's > too busy doing a midtempo wallow in that lovingly overorchestrated stickiness. > So to me, LOVE YOU is a red light rather than a recommendation. Yes, yes, and yes. For years I've felt like there was something wrong with me for not realizing the sheer genius that is Pet Sounds. Yeah, the back story makes a good VH-1 special, but geez it's hard for me to keep from puking whenever "Wouldn't It Be Nice" comes on the radio. Flame away, - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:24:31 -0800 From: "Jason Brown \(Echo Services Inc\)" Subject: RE: Down with Scott McCaughey >> It's a great album that really seems to be trying to be the sequel to the >> each Boys album Love You. > > But this description of DOWN WITH WILCO, which I've seen echoed elsewhere, > worries me. I like PET SOUNDS fine, but it's the only Beach Boys product > that doesn't make me want to strangle them before they emit one more > trademark harmony, and I'm completely sick of the toporiffic effect that > this album has exerted over pop music during the last decade -- it's like > every other record in the genres I formally liked (usually The Genre > Formerly Known As Alternative Formerly Known As Modern Rock Formerly Known > As Indie Formerly Known As Underground) is stuck in flypaper on a Sunday > morning, and isn't too concerned about it, 'cos it's too busy doing a > midtempo wallow in that lovingly overorchestrated stickiness. So to me, > LOVE YOU is a red light rather than a recommendation. Miles, just curious have you ever hear LOVE YOU? Because it is really not like PET SOUNDS at all. No wall of sound antics or sleighbells to be found. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:31:33 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: I am a character in a PK Dick novel on 2/28/03 8:23 AM, Natalie Jane at emma_blowgun@hotmail.com wrote: > Egads! Have I slipped through a crack in reality? Is this an alternate > universe list in which I agree with Miles?? What's next - Tom liking > Neutral Milk Hotel??? :) Boy, you HAVE been away for a while. NMH is now my fave band ever! I can't get enough of that whiny Jeff Mangum, his Aeroplane Over The Sea album is right up there with Pet Sounds on my list of desert island discs!!! Banjos! - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:43:33 -0500 From: "Maximilian Lang" Subject: Re: Blame the hat storms... Mr Mike of the large noggin: >After outgrowing 8 1/8 fitted caps I gave up trying for awhile. Wow, I thought I had problems with 7 3/4"! Max _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:44:41 -0800 From: Eb Subject: Re: Down with Scott McCaughey >Prodigal Gnat: >Scott McCaughey has a light pleasant voice, not unlike that of >Robert Schneider from the Apples in Stereo, which never varies in >tone or conveys any strong emotion. I would say McCaughey's voice has *considerably* more character than Schneider's. >Tom: >For years I've felt like there was something wrong with me for not realizing the sheer genius that is Pet Sounds. Don't expect me to assuage your fears. ;) I always say that Brian Wilson songs can't be fully appreciated without working through his chords on your own polyphonic instrument of choice. Only *listening* doesn't cut it. He's practically unique among pop-rock artists, in this regard. (Sometimes I feel this way about Squeeze, but not nearly as intensely.) I'd just like to add one point, regarding Natalie's exasperation with other lists. I've been sampling some other lists in recent months, due to this list's steadily decreasing musical content, and you know what makes this list much better than most other lists? The almost complete absence of non-editing top-posters! This is amazingly rare. I am so sick of downloading 10-12K posts from other lists which are just one or two sentences followed by a long post quoted in its entirety, including mailing-list footers. And then another top-poster replies to *that* post, so then you get top-posting, two levels deep.... BLAH! I haven't heard the new Minus 5 album yet, but I sure wanna get a copy. Eb np: some dull alt-metal band called Memento who ain't nearly as good as the movie ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:01:01 -0600 From: "Sumiko Keay" Subject: RE: Impending REAP - B*T*VS The Cheeseman from "Restless" - episode 22, season 4. (And you're right I meant to post to the list.) Sumi >>> Eb 02/28/03 03:13PM >>> >I was just thinking that given the most recent episode perhaps I should >have abbreviated it as BSotV. > >I just re-watched this morning to catch the cheeseman - - kudos to >people who caught the glimpse of him during the regular show! Who is "the cheeseman"? PS You sent me this as email...I think you meant to post it to the public list. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 14:15:41 -0800 From: Tom Clark Subject: RE: Top posting Eb; > I'd just like to add one point, regarding Natalie's exasperation with > other lists. I've been sampling some other lists in recent months, > due to this list's steadily decreasing musical content, and you know > what makes this list much better than most other lists? The almost > complete absence of non-editing top-posters! How's this for top posting? Processes: 59 total, 2 running, 57 sleeping... 157 threads 14:07:32 Load Avg: 0.62, 0.32, 0.16 CPU usage: 2.8% user, 8.3% sys, 88.9% idle SharedLibs: num = 7, resident = 1.93M code, 184K data, 548K LinkEdit MemRegions: num = 4485, resident = 91.0M + 8.99M private, 114M shared PhysMem: 50.6M wired, 212M active, 218M inactive, 480M used, 32.1M free VM: 2.06G + 3.62M 17644(0) pageins, 4948(0) pageouts PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE 2853 top 7.4% 0:01.15 1 14 18 312K 364K 608K 13.6M 2852 tcsh 0.0% 0:00.02 1 10 15 340K 628K 784K 5.73M 2851 login 0.0% 0:00.37 1 12 33 248K 416K 576K 13.7M 2850 Terminal 0.9% 0:04.03 3 58 113 2.93M 7.45M 7.53M 72.0M 2804 iTunes 0.0% 0:31.26 7 144 237 7.52M 12.8M 14.8M 89.9M Sorry, - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 23:25:17 +0100 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: RE: Top posting - --On Freitag, 28. Februar 2003 14:15 Uhr -0800 Tom Clark wrote: > How's this for top posting? > > Processes: 59 total, 2 running, 57 sleeping... 157 threads > 14:07:32 > > Load Avg: 0.62, 0.32, 0.16 CPU usage: 2.8% user, 8.3% sys, 88.9% > idle SharedLibs: num = 7, resident = 1.93M code, 184K data, 548K > LinkEdit MemRegions: num = 4485, resident = 91.0M + 8.99M private, 114M > shared PhysMem: 50.6M wired, 212M active, 218M inactive, 480M used, > 32.1M free VM: 2.06G + 3.62M 17644(0) pageins, 4948(0) pageouts > > PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE > VSIZE 2853 top 7.4% 0:01.15 1 14 18 312K 364K > 608K 13.6M 2852 tcsh 0.0% 0:00.02 1 10 15 340K > 628K 784K 5.73M 2851 login 0.0% 0:00.37 1 12 33 > 248K 416K 576K 13.7M 2850 Terminal 0.9% 0:04.03 3 58 > 113 2.93M 7.45M 7.53M 72.0M 2804 iTunes 0.0% 0:31.26 7 > 144 237 7.52M 12.8M 14.8M 89.9M I can top that! ;-) You know, it bugs me that OS X's top doesn't show you the processors separately. Under Linux I get this: 11:23pm up 13:41, 2 users, load average: 0,84, 0,90, 0,86 126 processes: 125 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped CPU0 states: 0,0% user, 1,0% system, 0,0% nice, 98,0% idle CPU1 states: 0,0% user, 0,1% system, 0,0% nice, 99,0% idle CPU2 states: 0,0% user, 0,1% system, 0,0% nice, 99,0% idle CPU3 states: 0,0% user, 0,1% system, 0,0% nice, 99,0% idle Mem: 7721160K av, 435120K used, 7286040K free, 0K shrd, 123940K buff Swap: 4192752K av, 0K used, 4192752K free 157816K cached PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND 32060 root 14 -2 1000 996 836 S < 1,9 0,0 0:00 service 32058 root 15 0 1164 1160 900 R 0,9 0,0 0:00 top 1 root 15 0 508 508 440 S 0,0 0,0 0:50 init However, on my brand-new 1,25 Dual G4 I only see: Processes: 79 total, 3 running, 8 stuck, 68 sleeping... 259 threads 23:24:40 Load Avg: 0.47, 0.22, 0.04 CPU usage: 24.7% user, 9.6% sys, 65.7% idle SharedLibs: num = 125, resident = 26.5M code, 2.14M data, 8.79M LinkEdit MemRegions: num = 7976, resident = 151M + 16.1M private, 183M shared PhysMem: 83.3M wired, 201M active, 395M inactive, 679M used, 89.0M free VM: 4.99G + 70.5M 79761(0) pageins, 237901(0) pageouts PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE 24306 top 6.6% 0:00.35 1 14 18 340K 332K 636K 13.6M 24304 BBEdit 6.5 0.0% 0:02.32 7 140 219 5.08M 19.0M 28.2M 130M - -- Sebastian Hagedorn PGP key ID: 0x4D105B45 Ehrenfeldg|rtel 156 50823 Kvln http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/~hgd/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 16:37:33 -0600 From: "Mike Wells" Subject: Newz You Can Use "Augusta National Gets KKK's Support (AP) -The leader of a Ku Klux Klan splinter group said Friday he will demonstrate in support of Augusta National Golf Club's all-male membership during the Masters, whether the club likes it or not. "This equal rights stuff has gotten out of hand," said Joseph J. Harper of Cordele, imperial wizard of the American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan." This gives me one of those searing little pains right behind the eyeball, know what I mean? Sheesh. If you think about though, it's a crafty two-for-one for the 'ol triple K...what with Tiger Woods poised to stomp the mostly white competition like narcs at a biker rally.* Michael "*Dennis Miller threadmerge" Wells ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2003 11:46:23 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com (James Dignan) Subject: Re: Sanctions and Inspections Oh man... I didn't want to get involved in all this... From the Quail >James writes, > >> There ain't no such thing as >> an unbiased news source at the moment (ever?), especially not with the >> mainstream US media > >*Especially* not with the mainstream US media? I take exception to this >singling out in the context of the Middle East.[...] okay, allow me to rephrase that and step back one. "especially not with the mainstream US televised and radio news media (in comparison to other televised and radio news media that I and other fegs are likely to be able to regularly see or hear)." My comparison is simply with other news services that I have been able to watch covering the situation - notably BBC and other British media, Auastralian media, and NZ media. In comparison with these three others, the US news media has been frothing at the mouth. >> Hardly an unbiased opinion of Iraqis in general, though, is it? I suspect >> that defectors and exiles from any country would have bad things to say >> about the government in charge of it and want it overthrown. Otherwise they >> wouldn't have defected or been exiled. > >Yeah, especially when they come from a Stalinist police state that routinely >executes anyone who protests the regime's decisions. I think that defectors >from such states have a different slant on things than, say, Canadian >expats. > >Additionally, the fact is, it is very hard to get the real word of the >"average" Iraqi. Not only does this vary wildly depending on location, >tribe, religion, and ethnicity, but Saddam tightly controls all media, and >it is a well known fact that most Iraqis are terrified of informers. I'm not saying it would be easy, or even possible, to get a view from Iraqis in Iraq, or that there is such a thing as an "average Iraqi". All I'm saying is that you can't judge the way a whole country feels from such a biased sample. I could just as well point out that the New Zealand Iraqi community led their own anti-war protests here, even presenting a petition to parliament containing the names of over 75% of New Zealand's Iraqi community. It is also intriguing that there are reports from the Kurds in the north of Iraq that they are very much against an invasion of Iraq. Admittedly, there are probably any number of reasons for this (they're not exactly overjoyed with the idea of Turkey coming in, to start with). But you would expect that they in particular would be strongly in favour of the overthrow of Saddam. >Sanctions and inspections are different, but related, things. Sanctions are >*not* working, which is one of the reasons that most non-military sanctions >have been lifted recently. yet you suggest that sanctions and inspections together are. In which case, why go to war? >The fact is, Russia, China and France have been >grossly compromised by Iraqi oil contracts, whereas countries like Turkey, >Syria, Jordan, Iran, and the lower Gulf States are widely engaged in >smuggling -- oil goes out, money and materials go in. I don't think there's anyone who's likely to argue this. But the whole was situation is about oil. Trying to dress it up as "we're going to help those poor Iraqis get rid of this despotic regime" is just a hypocritical smokescreen. >Inspections, which have been tied to sanctions, have proven somewhat more >effective, although the link between the two has grown tenuous. Recall, the >inspectors were tossed out in 1998, and high-level Iraqi defectors claim >that Saddam has mobilized his BW, CW, and nuclear programs, making them >almost impossible to find. Even current inspectors, back in the country for >only a little while, agree that Iraq is not cooperating fully. (Which is not >to say they welcome a war.) and they are cooperating, even if slowly. Yet every time they do, the US and British governments make some new claim that their cooperation is not cooperation. The latest I have heard is that by agreeing to destroy the missiles that contravene UN rules, they are not helping voluntarily. >It is also worthy to note that there are differences between UNSCOM and >UNMOVIC, and it is largely believed (by the US and Britain) that the latter >inspectors are weaker, less professional, certainly more compromised by >concessions made to Iraq, and motivated more by UN politics than any real >desire to see Iraq disarm completely. Does any other government believe this, or is it only the US and Britain? Oh, the Australian government probably thinks so too, come to think of it. >Recall that once military sanctions >are lifted on Iraq, China, Russia and France are free to sell arms to >Saddam. Then don't lift the military sanctions. >Hell, Iraq was responsible for 40% of French arms exports, and even >*during* sanctions, China was busted for selling them sophisticated, >military-grade communication networks! And Russia, during sanctions, was >caught smuggling them components meant for ballistic missiles. Ballistic >fucking missiles! Well, we know Iraq has ballistic missiles. What it doesn't have is guided ones. A ballistic missile is simply one that is guided up and then falls at random. Which is exactly what the ones that are about to be destroyed do. Now if, say, Russia had been caught smuggling in components for guided missiles, or long-range missiles, then there might be cause for concern. But the only missiles that have been found in Iraq that contravene UN rules could go nearly 180 miles rather than the limit of 150 miles, and could not be guided. And those are about to be destroyed. >(And, yes, I know we also helped Saddam out against Iran, >I am not saying the US is an angel, and again, I feel the US wrongly aids >dictators and sells out human rights. and will no doubt do so again. Say Saddam is removed. Who's going to be put in his place, and how is the US going to ensure that he stays there? What sort of help with the US give to rebuild Iraq? Even when people who seem genuinely good are put in place of evil regimes, far too little help is given to them. Recall that at the moment Karzai is pleading the US for help in Afghanistan, but the Bush administration is ignoring him. >Also, recall that in the early 90s, Iraq had everything they needed to make >a nuke *but* the fissile materials. How long do you think it will take >Saddam to get some? Especially if North Korea is allowed to crank out >warheads in the near future? hell, if he was going to get them, he'd have had them long ago. How much material went missing in the southern part of the old USSR - places like Chechnya? And, as I pointed out before, all of the claims you make (apart, obviously, from the oil), are more applicable to North Korea than to Iraq, yet the US government is happy enough to continue with dialogue and sanctions there. No talk of invasion and removing the president in the case of North Korea. >Again, this doesn't mean you need to support an invasion. Two >other options include renewed sanctions and inspections (very, very >unlikely), or a shift to deterrence rather than containment (reasonable but >risky). Reasonable byt risky indeed, but far less risky than starting a war which will likely escalate to include most of the middle east, and will almost certainly end up with the majority of the Moslem world hostile towards the US. Several moslem nations are not that politically stable, and it wouldn't take much anti-western feeling to topple the likes of Pakistan's government. If that happens, it'll no longer be a case of "if a hostile power gets the bomb". >HOLLYWOOD (Variety) - The prospect of a war in Iraq has prompted 20th >Century Fox to postpone the production start of "Mad Max: Fury Road," the >fourth installment of Mel Gibson's action adventure series. never let it be said that nothing good has come out of all this. James James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand. =-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= .-=-.-=-.-=-.- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-. -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= You talk to me as if from a distance =-.-=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time -=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V12 #79 *******************************