..From the crew of Apollo 8..

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

I highly doubt it's Bob. He may be a lot of things, but I truly don't think
he's

a) stupid enough to sign his own name to an anonymous remailer
b) stupid enough to post the same post multiple times.


Oh, ye of little faith....

Pat

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 04:00:59 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

Greg D. Moore (Utter Idiot) babbled:

I highly doubt it's Bob. He may be a lot of things, but I truly don't think
he's

a) stupid enough to sign his own name to an anonymous remailer
b) stupid enough to post the same post multiple times.


Oh, ye of little faith....

....Faith doesn't enter into it. Greg just proved once and for all that
my claims of his being an idiot are correct. If I can't have the
entire Maxson Family cast into the pits of the Real Hell for
Chrisnukkah, this is a good substitute present in my book!

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 04:00:59 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

Greg D. Moore (Utter Idiot) babbled:

I highly doubt it's Bob. He may be a lot of things, but I truly don't
think
he's

a) stupid enough to sign his own name to an anonymous remailer
b) stupid enough to post the same post multiple times.


Oh, ye of little faith....

...Faith doesn't enter into it. Greg just proved once and for all that
my claims of his being an idiot are correct. If I can't have the
entire Maxson Family cast into the pits of the Real Hell for
Chrisnukkah, this is a good substitute present in my book!


And a Happy Holiday to you to OM.


OM

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

And a Happy Holiday to you to OM.



The real trick would be trying to separate a real Hallerb posting from a
fake one, based on internal content. This would be like trying to tell a
real Jackson Pollock painting from a faked one by looking at it-
Hallerb's posts may contain just about anything, and that content may be
spelled in any one of numerous ways. Similarly, without having some
witness who can remember Pollock doing a particular "painting".... or a
radiological examination of the "art" that indicates that it dates from
after Pollock's death in 1956, it would be hard to tell whether one was
looking at a Pollock painting- or a section of a messy paint shop's floor.
In much the same way, a computer could be programed to generate "Random
Hallerb Postings" (RHPs) with considerable fidelity to the real item.
I suggest Julian Bordas to program the random spelling part of the program.

Pat

On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:42:18 -0600, Pat Flannery wrote:

The real trick would be trying to separate a real Hallerb posting from a
fake one, based on internal content. This would be like trying to tell a
real Jackson Pollock painting from a faked one by looking at it-

No, Pollocks method was not nearly as random as folks think. Hallerb is
far more random, a more appropriate comparison might be to some of John
Cage's stochastic music.

If only Hallerb and some of the others would be inspired by Cage's work
"Silence."