text:
Request booking
Fully air conditioned, superbly furnished luxury apartment,with private entrance. Sleeps 4 with 2 twin bedrooms. American style well equiped kitchenette. En suite master bedroom with patio doors to small "Romeo & Juliette" style balcony. There is also a further shower and toilet for guests. TV and DVD player, no UK TV service.
Outside space
There is a spacious private terrace ideal for breakfast . Probably the best feature of this
apartment is the very spacious rooftop solarium with built in barbecue and lovely sea views.
The Complex and Area
Situated in a well maintained secure complex, the apartment has private gated parking and two large swimming pools. Miraflores 4 is in the Playa Flamenca area which is 10 mins drive south of
Torrevieja and is within 5 mins drive of a choice of lovely "Blue Flag" beaches.
Torrevieja is one of the fastest expanding towns in the whole of Spain, but Torrevieja has learned a few
lessons from places like Benidorm, because you'll find no high-rise skyscrapers or package holiday hotels
in Torrevieja, Torrevieja is also an ideal place for family holidays. Torrevieja is surrounded by two large and beautiful natural salt water lakes which form the "Salinas de San Miguel".Torrevieja" and are an official Spanish nature reserve. These lakes attract a wide variety of bird life.The entire area around Torrevieja is famous for it's salt production. Huge salt lakes surround parts of the road down from Alicante airport to Torrevieja.
There are 3 golf courses within 20 mins drive. The apartment is adjacent to resautrants and a short walk to the local shopping complex and famous Playa Flamenca Saturday street market.
Superbly furnished luxury air conditioned apartment, sleeps 4. Master bedroom en suite with patio doors to balcony. Large rooftop solarium.
Room details
2 bedrooms, sleeps 4
Bedroom 1: 2 Single beds
Bedroom 2: 2 Single beds
Room for 5 in the living area
Indoor facilities
DVD/Blu-ray player
TV Languages in Local
Central heating
Iron / board
Pots / pans
Towels / linen
Washing machine
Outdoor facilities
Outside lighting
Sea view
Extra information (Fully air conditioned, superbly furnished luxury apartment with private entrance. Sleeps 4 with 2 twin bedrooms. American style kitchen. Master bedroom fully en suite with patio doors to private balcony. In addition to the balcony and the large private terrace, the apartment also has a large rooftop solarium with built in barbecue and sea views. A "travel cot" and "highchair" are available to hire at a cost of 15.00 Euros per week for each. Welcome packs also available.Please ask for details.)
Sports and activities
Sports Center
Water Skiing
Sights and attractions
Prices and availability
Last updated 11.08.2012
Discounts and extras
If more then one discount matches your arrival date, please be aware that only one discount of the highest amount will be applied to your booking.
Early Booking DiscountsArrival date range | Booking made more than x days/weeks/months before arrival | Discount |
1st January to 31st December | 8 Months | 10% |
Arrival date range | Booking made less then x days/weeks/months before arrival | Discount |
1st January to 31st December | 7 Days | 30% |
1st January to 31st December | 14 Days | 10% |
Arrival date range | Booking is equal to or longer than x days/weeks/months | Discount |
1st January to 31st December | 28 Days | 20% |
1st January to 31st December | 21 Days | 15% |
1st January to 31st December | 14 Days | 10% |
Compulsory extrasDescription | Arrival dates | Booking length or occupancy | Price |
Post let cleaning & laundry | All year | N/A |
£36.40 per booking Paid locally |
Description | Arrival dates | Booking length or occupancy | Price |
Cot Hire (cot linen not provided) | All year | N/A |
£10.92 per week Paid locally |
Highchair Hire | All year | N/A |
£10.92 per week Paid locally |
Welcome Pack (basic essential provisions) | All year | N/A |
£16.75 per booking Paid locally |
Alicante airport pickup for up to 4 persons | All year | One way trip |
Paid locally |
Alicante airport pickup for up to 6 persons | All year | One way trip |
Paid locally |
This is exact location
- Nearest beach: 2km
- Nearest supermarket: 500m
- Alicante Airport: 45km
- Murcia San Javier: 20km
Michael from Aberdeen
Artur from Gondomar
paul from lincoln
Mal from Wirral
Sara from Melksham
Christer from Stockholm
Owner reply:
Thank you for taking the time to post a review, as we value all our customers opinions. I am a little puzzled as to why you were critical of our 2 twin bedrooms, especially as this is mentioned in the first line of the property description, and twice more further on. Surley having read the description prior to booking, you must have been expecting 2 twin bedrooms...
Chris and Rachel have owned and managed holiday accommodation for more than 12 years, and pride themselves on providing high quality and comfortable holiday lets at great value rates. Great past reviews and feedback confirm their continued sucess in this goal.
Calendar updated: 2 years ago
Last logged in: 12 hours ago
Joined: April 2003


text:
Summit Hotel Properties Reports Third Quarter 2013 Results
Subsequent to the third quarter's end, the Company closed on two of the four announced acquisitions. On October 1, 2013 and October 8, 2013, the Company closed on the Ventura Hampton Inn & Suites and the San Diego Hampton Inn & Suites, respectively.
The conversion of the 213-guestroom hotel to a Hyatt Place in downtown Minneapolis is nearly complete and expected to close prior to year-end 2013.
Renovation Capital
The Company invested $12.3 million on renovations during the third quarter of 2013 at eleven properties. Projects ranged from lobby and public space improvements to complete guestroom renovations, including furniture, soft goods, and guest bathrooms.
"The capital we have invested in the renovations of our hotels continues to yield exceptional results," Hansen said. "We see ongoing RevPAR growth premiums from these upgraded hotels and will maintain investment in our portfolio where opportunities are presented." Dispositions During the third quarter of 2013, the Company sold three hotels and a parcel of land that it no longer considers strategic for a total sale price of $8.0 million. In addition, the Company reclassified ten non-strategic hotels to held for sale; with plans to divest these hotels in the next several quarters. Balance Sheet- At September 30, 2013, the Company had total outstanding debt of $400.3 million and $45.5 million of cash and cash equivalents. Maximum borrowing capacity was $150.0 million under the senior secured revolving credit facility. The Company had no outstanding borrowings on its senior secured revolving credit facility, $0.7 million in standby letters of credit, and $149.3 million available to borrow. In addition, the Company had 15 unencumbered hotels.
- The Company's weighted average interest rate on its debt outstanding at September 30, 2013 was 5.27 percent.
- At September 30, 2013, the Company's total net debt to trailing twelve month pro forma corporate EBITDA was 3.7x.
- On October 1, 2013, the Company acquired the 115-guestroom Hampton Inn & Suites located in Ventura (Camarillo), Calif., for a purchase price of $15.7 million.
- On October 8, 2013, the Company acquired the 108-guestroom Hampton Inn & Suites located in San Diego (Poway), Calif., for a purchase price of $15.2 million.
- On October 10, 2013, the Company closed on a $300.0 million senior unsecured credit facility. The unsecured credit facility is comprised of a $225.0 million revolving credit facility and a $75.0 million term loan. The credit facility has an accordion feature which will allow the Company to increase the capacity by $100.0 million in either additional revolver capacity or an additional term loan.
- Subsequent to quarter end, the Company sold two hotels and one parcel of land for a total sales price of $8.6 million.
Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Action Alerts PLUS
Portfolio Manager Jim Cramer and Director of Research Jack Mohr reveal their investment tactics while giving advanced notice before every trade.
Product Features:
- $2.5+ million portfolio
- Large-cap and dividend focus
- Intraday trade alerts from Cramer
Quant Ratings
Access the tool that DOMINATES the Russell 2000 and the S&P 500.
Product Features:
- Buy, hold, or sell recommendations for over 4,300 stocks
- Unlimited research reports on your favorite stocks
- A custom stock screener
Stocks Under $10
David Peltier uncovers low dollar stocks with serious upside potential that are flying under Wall Street's radar.
Product Features:
- Model portfolio
- Stocks trading below $10
- Intraday trade alerts
Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Dividend Stock Advisor
David Peltier identifies the best of breed dividend stocks that will pay a reliable AND significant income stream.
Product Features:
- Diversified model portfolio of dividend stocks
- Updates with exact steps to take - BUY, HOLD, SELL
Trifecta Stocks
Every recommendation goes through 3 layers of intense scrutinyquantitative, fundamental and technical analysisto maximize profit potential and minimize risk.
Product Features:
- Model Portfolio
- Intra Day Trade alerts
- Access to Quant Ratings
Options Profits
Our options trading pros provide over 100 monthly option trading ideas and strategies to help you become a well-seasoned trader.
Product Features:
- Actionable options commentary and news
- Real-time trading community

subset: commoncrawl


text: 57 Kassahola Status: Off Market MLS#: 527448 Contact Email this listing Share on Pinterest Share on Google+ Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Calculate Mortgage Print Flyer Get Directions Request a Showing Off Market 57 Kassahola, Connestee Falls, NC 28712 is no longer on the market or has been removed from the MLS. Similar to 57 Kassahola: Ask an Agent About 57 Kassahola * Required fields Send Your Question × Monthly Payment Estimator Price: Down Payment: % Loan Amount: Loan Type: 30 Year Fixed 15 Year Fixed 5/1 ARM Interest Rate: % Est. Tax & Insurance: % ($/mo.) × Email a Listing 57 Kassahola, Connestee Falls NC, 28712 From: Name: Email: To: Name: Email: Subject: Message: Take a look at this property I found on ExitAsheville.com: http://www.exitasheville.com/homes/57-Kassahola/Connestee-Falls/NC/28712/26250774/ Send a copy of this message to me Send Email


text: Delete NSFW Twins the Serendipitous Serval Jul 26, 2012 at 12:04AM EDT Oh come on. Ruficollis isn't even a word. If you're trying to parody me, at least do it correctly. Here, I'll even help you out. "Russian the Repentant Reprobate" It has a nice ring to it. 0 Reply


text:
User talk:Schily
- 1 Who do you work for Schily?
- 2 Abuse of editing summaries
- 3 Bourne shell section on criticism
- 4 Proposed deletion of Star (Unix)
- 5 Nomination of Star (Unix) for deletion
- 7 Edit war
- 8 Source Code Control System
- 9 re: You re-introduced a false claim on Cdrkit
- 10 Comparison of revision control software
- 11 March 2012
- 12 Promotional editing
- 13 Redlinks
- 14 I feel the need to write this
- 15 Shebang: «This is about UNIX - not Linux».
- 16 Edits
- 17 Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
- 18 April 2014
- 19 Notice
- 20 Edits to the Cdrtools article
- 21 Talkback
- 22 be carefull with unfriendly editors
- 23 Cdrtools
- 24 Cdrtools
- 25 RCS vs WP:BLP
- 26 List of commercial software with available source code
Who do you work for Schily?[edit]
You appear to be engaged in a one-man war against a range of internet archiving software, and are engaging in large scale deletion and "undo" behaviour without first discussing your intentions.
What's your agenda? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 02:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- You seem to be a one man show that fights for introducing dis-information. Introducing confusing advertizing blocks for zOS does not help. The information you are looking for is already pointed to in the article. I recommend you to read the article first before you try to modify it. --Schily (talk) 09:53, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Abuse of editing summaries[edit]
Please don't abuse the edit summary as you did with this edit. Dishonest descriptions will generally get a change reverted regardless of the quality of the edit. In extreme cases of abuse it will also get the perpetrator blocked from editing. — Saxifrage ✎ 15:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- You're welcome to discuss your desired changes with the community at the talk pages of Cdrtools, Cdrkit, and Jörg Schilling. Trying to force them in by repeated editing, or sneaking them in by using deceptive edit summaries, will fail and earn you a very poor reputation. Please reconsider your tactics. Also, please look up the definition of "defamation" before you overstep the tolerance of this project for legal threats without good reason. — Saxifrage ✎ 01:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
You seem unfamiliar with the way Wikipedia works. (As for myself, I've been here quite a while and have earned a good reputation. Use ad hominem attacks at the risk of your own credibility. I'm also not a cracker: I am a pseudonymous editor. Wikipedia respects privacy and doesn't care about identity, only about established reputation.) The way a conflict gets resolved is you make the change, find out that someone disagrees (usually by their reverting it) and then you discuss it with them. If a mutually-satisfactory conclusion cannot be found, the input of the wider community is solicited. If it cannot be resolved then, the even-wider input is solicited. Nothing is done by fiat unless you are Jimbo or the Arbitration Committee.
As such, your demand that I restore the page before discussing is tantamount to you saying that you are unwilling to talk unless you get your way. You're welcome to try that, but I can assure you that such a social tactic will fail and Wikipedia is well-set-up to foil such tactics.
Finally, you are welcome, as I have said, to discuss your desired changes at the relevant pages. You are also welcome to discuss your problems with the version I changed them back to. In otherwords, you must explain your objections, not simply say that you don't like the changes. For instance, you claim that your changes are neutral and that the version before was offensive. Please give concrete details that can be dissected and evaluated clearly and openly.
Threats, bullying, and name-calling will fail. That's just how Wikipedia works and I've seen enough people try to force their way that I hope for your own sake that you will stop trying to use those tactics. (Besides, they are morally bankrupt tactics.) You will find it much more effective to work with me and other editors you encounter that to try to "defeat" us. — Saxifrage ✎ 21:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- Your edit here asserted that the link was dead; it is a working page. Please use accurate editing summaries TEDickey (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- You entered this dead link two times and spammed the WP article. Please verify your links before you enter them to WP and in case that is is an extemely unreliable source (as with your edit) inform yourself on how to back up to more reliable links (e.g. archive.org). --Schily (talk) 09:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Bourne shell section on criticism[edit]
I can tell you feel very strongly that the Bourne shell is superior to the C shell based on improvements that were added over the years. But the criticism section isn't the place to work that agenda. All a criticism section should do is state the arguments that people have made with some citations and leave it to the reader to decide. It's not a place to insert personal opinion about which arguments were right. In any event, the list of complaints, however or whenever valid or invalid, do help explain why descendants of the Bourne kept the language but added features, mostly copied from the C shell.
The better place for discussion of the improvements would be in the features section. Frankly, I think that whole section, as just a list of bullets does a disservice to the Bourne shell. A better article would present the whole history of how the Bourne shell evolved and added features over time. This is where you could help make the article much better. Msnicki (talk) 17:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Star (Unix)[edit]
The article Star (Unix) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Star (Unix) for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Star (Unix) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star (Unix) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. TEDickey (talk) 09:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Edit war[edit]
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on List of revision control software. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 21:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- I made one revert after a the result of a discussion was that the claim on the article was proven to be wrong. Unfortunately, the person who introduced the wrong claim immediately reinserted the false claim. Even though he was able to confirm the test results that verified that claim he introduced is wrong. I was in hope to be able to have verifyable facts in the article. --Schily (talk) 21:45, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not verify facts. It just lists sources. Own experiments violate WP:NOR. You didn't get that rule right: Tichys paper is not WP:OR because it's not done by a Wikipedia author, it obviously predates WP by a decade or two and was done within the scientific community, which is the appropriate place to do the research. WP just documents. So: Your experiments indicate that we should look for published sources that undermine your theory of SCCS being not slower than RCS. Congratulations. But until then, the only published results we have, even when they do not agree with your own experiments, are that RCS might be faster. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- The more I read such discussions after edit wars, the more I get the impression that some WP authors bend rules in a way to make sure that they are able to publish claims that have been proven to be wrong. Mr. Dickey as the initiator of the current related edit war e.g. ignored the fact that I have given a pointer to research from Larry MacVoy (the author of BitKeeper SCCS) that confirms that RCS is definitely not faster than SCCS (he calls the claim from Tichy the RCS myth) and you also seem to ignore this pointer to this second independent research from Larry McVoy that disproves the claims from Tichy. Is it really WPs intention to provide an infra structure that supports to publish false claims? --Schily (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, Larry MacVoy acknowledges [1] that RCS is optimized for accessing the trunk tip (this is probably the source that you refer to!), and SCCS is only better when you need fast access to arbitrary revisions. He just states that for the use in BitKeeper, SCCS has better performance, due to the need of fast branch access. --220.127.116.11 (talk) 16:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- I could not find any mentioning of the "RCS myth", only "The myth about SCCS getting slower is nonsense". This is substantially different. He essentially just states SCCS is not as bad as it is said to be, somewhat implying that SCCS had a pretty bad reputation at that time. See the other discussion on how your WP:OR benchmark was heavily biased towards SCCS. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 16:04, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- The more I read such discussions after edit wars, the more I get the impression that some WP authors bend rules in a way to make sure that they are able to publish claims that have been proven to be wrong. Mr. Dickey as the initiator of the current related edit war e.g. ignored the fact that I have given a pointer to research from Larry MacVoy (the author of BitKeeper SCCS) that confirms that RCS is definitely not faster than SCCS (he calls the claim from Tichy the RCS myth) and you also seem to ignore this pointer to this second independent research from Larry McVoy that disproves the claims from Tichy. Is it really WPs intention to provide an infra structure that supports to publish false claims? --Schily (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia does not verify facts. It just lists sources. Own experiments violate WP:NOR. You didn't get that rule right: Tichys paper is not WP:OR because it's not done by a Wikipedia author, it obviously predates WP by a decade or two and was done within the scientific community, which is the appropriate place to do the research. WP just documents. So: Your experiments indicate that we should look for published sources that undermine your theory of SCCS being not slower than RCS. Congratulations. But until then, the only published results we have, even when they do not agree with your own experiments, are that RCS might be faster. --18.104.22.168 (talk) 08:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Source Code Control System[edit]
Hello Schily. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Source Code Control System, you may have a conflict of interest, or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 11:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Please refrain from pushing that your version is official. It is not, as long as the major UNIX operating systems ship their own versions, which predate yours. Thank you. --126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
- Please do not claim that I wrote thing I did not write. I did never write that my version is more official than other versions. My version however is as official as other versions and my version is the only version that is under current development.
- The way Mr. Dickey (and since last night you) act however is definitely not aligned with WP rules. If you introduce claims, you of course need to confirm them. Last night, you removed confirmed statemenets that have been introduced by other users (informing about the fact that I am the current maintainer) and you introduced a false claim about licensing. SCCS is definitely not available under various lisenses but either CDDL ot Closed source. I am sorry to see that you seem to be interested in starting an edit war. --Schily (talk) 08:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
re: You re-introduced a false claim on Cdrkit[edit]
I merely reverted an egregiously problematic edit. I suggest you get a reliable source to publish your interpretation and reference that, solving all of our problems. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Comparison of revision control software[edit]
Your recent editing history at Comparison of revision control software shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block. If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly.
Please be more constructive. The reasoning that the table is overly complex is reasonable, and the proposed simplification is good. Don't just revert, try to improve things (and understand that most people don't care much about POSIX for revision control systems anymore, since there is a single one in this table that supports it anyway!) --Chire (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- Do you really believe I am your edit slave? If you like to modify an article, do it by your own but follow the rules and do not remove information. Your edits need to be reverted as long as you do no more than removing information. --Schily (talk) 15:37, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a sink of information. It is well acceptable to remove (or here: merge) information if this increases readability of the article. The difference between non-POSIX and POSIX keyword expansion is probably not encyclopedically relevant, and can well be merged into a single column of that complex, overly large table. Unfortunately, you again have a WP:Conflict of interest, and want to promote SCCS via POSIX keywords (that nobody else seems to care about, since only BitKeeper seems to support them). What good is a column when there is a single "yes" in it? This doesn't make sense for the table, but should be listed as a comment (or merged with another column - e.g. into "keyword expansion"). --Chire (talk) 15:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
March 2012[edit]
Your recent editing history at Year 2038 problem shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
- I am sorry to see that you do not follow WP rules, so you (Guy Macon) may be blocked because of the repeated vandalim you introduced. Please do not revert things you do obviously not understand. Note that you have been given information that would allow you to understand the background in case you like to inform yourself. --Schily (talk) 13:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Promotional editing[edit]
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. TEDickey (talk) 10:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
- You seem to be completely insane - sorry. I added an OSS hint that has been removed by an unfriendly person before. --Schily (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Bourne shell. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you.
Your remarks, " Any person with some minimal basic knowlege in UNIX history or with minimal programmings skills will be able to understand that in contrary to you" and "you are missing the needed skills to be able to discuss a topic but still act as if you were the only person on the planet that knows things right" are unhelpful. Even if you disagree, others are still entitled to their opinions and to be treated respectfully. Msnicki (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
In this edit your edit summary was "write the article first" implying that a redlink should not have been placed in the article. If that was the only problem then a more appropriate action would have been to remove the linking, not delete the contribution altogether. In any case WP:REDLINK supports the addition of redlinks to subjects which could or should have articles in the future.
If your problem was that it was uncited then you should have said so in the edit summary, and a more appropriate action would have been a {{cn}} template. I am an experienced electrical engineer with nearly half a century of experience, I have been on Wikipedia for five years with well over 30,000 edits, and have contributed several Featured Articles. I don't write rubbish here. Please show a little more good faith. I will find a source for this and re-add it. I trust you will not delete it again. SpinningSpark 12:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- If you did mention a well known variant, I could concur. You did however write about a "multi basis transistor" that does not really exist. BTW: reverting things back without first having a related discussion is seen as unfriendly act. --Schily (talk) 14:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- Read the contribution again, it is not "multi basis", but "multiple-base" transistor, comparable with multiple-emitter and multiple-collector. They not only exist, but numerous books describe them and scholarly papers report research on them. I have used them in designs myself. I do not see how I am being unfriendly, you have challenged a contribution, and I have provided a reference, as described in WP:V. On the other hand, you utterly failed "to try to find and cite supporting sources yourself" also as recommended in WP:V. Your edit summary failed to give a removal reason so it is only possible to address it by guessing. The redlink question, which is all you mentioned in your edit summary, is a red herring unrelated to whether the material should exist or not. The criteria for inclusion are verifiability, relevance, and due weight. No formatting issue is ever reason for deletion, but rather,should be fixed. SpinningSpark 15:40, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- I was in hope that you understand, while writing a related article, that the transistor you are talking about cannot really exist. There is no problem to build a transistor with more than Emitter or with more than one Collector and in fact these transistor variants really exist. A multi-basis transistor would be a transistor with one Emitter, one Collector and more than one Basis. I cannot imagine how this should be made. It is thus more likely that people use e.g. two transistors in a specific way that would allow to compensate the noise. This is how the basic idea for the bipolar transistor has been discovered by Herbert Mataré in 1942 while he was working on a Duodiode that should allow to compensate the noise in a mixer for a 3 GHz Radar receiver. And BTW: talking about rules in general: such a discussion belongs to the talk page of the transistor article. --Schily (talk) 16:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I feel the need to write this[edit]
Schily, as I'm an ordinary guy who does not have much to do with FOSS development, but more FOSS user and supporter, I would like to say sorry for what Debian did to your project and ask to forgive them please. I use Linux most of the time and it is very bad that users have to use lower quality software, created only BY cloning(forking) and FOR the sake of opposing something. I think such cloning should be illegal. I have read a lot about your conflict and I agree with you on your denial of broken patch completely. However, I don't think going CDDL was good idea - this is only my opinion. CDDL was created to destroy FLOSS, by Sun, and it is not a secret - and this is why when you switched licenses a lot of people revolted. That was reflex-like reaction, probably due to the past similar case of OSS vs ALSA. You are original developer and you are not required to accept any, especially broken, patches, you have my highest respect. You are also correct it is illegal to remove your copyright notes and it is simply unethical. Those are things I, GPL lover, understood simply reading your notes on the website. These were sufficient to understand those guys were are scam and that you had no intention to stop support or deny advancements, as well as you demand respect for your work because you love it. But Debian is not made of those guys, and CDDL is really not good. It simply hurts FLOSS. Please, can you consider dual-licensing you work under both CDDL and GPL? This would allow Debian to include your project once again. It would also be cool if you'd document and keep this issue for historical meaning. I think Mark Shuttleworth was only worried because people have problems with optical media AND he would really like to use original software of yours, but CDDL made him problems (just as it was designed to). That said, I thank you for you hard commitment over these years and for not abandoning Linux (to hell with CDDL vs GPL). It would be cool if you review your position regarding to that, but its just my dream :(. I wish you very best, people like you mean a lot for us,non-ms users. Thank you! 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:57, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Your claims about the CDDL are of course nonsense. Just because some people spread FUD against the CDDL does not make the CDDL a bad license. In contrary, the CDDL was designed for best interoperability with other licenses. Also note that the GPL was used to attack the cdrtools project and that the FSF did not help against the attacks from Debian. This is why the cdrtools project switched away from the GPL. The current licensing has been confirmed to be without problems by various lawyers, so why should I go back to a license that was used to attack an OSS project? --Schily (talk) 12:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Shebang: «This is about UNIX - not Linux».[edit]
In the shebang page, you modified text with comment: «This is about UNIX - not Linux».
I understand that Linux is a subset of Unix. And both are/intend to be POSIX compliant. But the page was related to shebang and so I do not understand your removal! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:19, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- #! is not part of POSIX, so it is a local UNIX enhancement. Your addition was about a patch request for Linux which is definitely not UNIX related - this patch will not apply to UNIX sources. --Schily (talk) 14:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. TEDickey (talk) 10:52, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Please try to be constructive and understand that an ecyclopedia should not contain unsourced claims, such as the previous claim that tried to convince people that there is a legal problem. It seems that you are not constructive as you support people who try to add unsourced claims. I removed a maintenance tag that is nonsense as it cannot be resolved the way the initiator likes to. I could however agree, that we keep the maintenance tag for a while to give people the chance to give a verification for their related claim not to be alleged. If nobody is able to prove that there is a legal problem (which is what I expect as nobody could prove that claim during the past 7 years), we of course need to keep "alleged". --Schily (talk) 10:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.
April 2014[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 00:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Notice[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Schily.27s_personal_attacks_and_biased_editing_on_Cdrtools_and_other_UNIX_topics. Thank you. LFaraone 16:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Edits to the Cdrtools article[edit]
When you notice some corrections that should be made to Cdrtools like this one, please propose them at the talk page (you can use the {{edit request}} template), and someone will make the change for you if we can verify it. You should not be changing the article's text, not even for small and trivial fixes. Diego (talk) 16:57, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- I only made balanced changed. You on the other side recently made unbalanced changes to the cdrtools article like this one where you removed attempts to correct unbalanced claims that should not stay uncorrected. So you should first ask on the talk page before you make edits. Please revert your unbalanced changes. Schily (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- You think you made balanced changes, but you have a conflict of interest that makes you misunderstand what Wikipedia editors consider balanced. Our policy forbids you to make any edit that others consider controversial, that's why you were recently blocked.
- I have explained what you need to do to make the article more balanced: give us links to web pages that explain why the content is unbalanced, and we will assess whether each claim needs to be corrected. Diego (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- If you believe that people with a conflict of interest should not edit a page, please make sure that no person with a COI is editing the page. Let me repeat: At least during the last 4 weeks, I did not add any own claim to the cdrtools page, I just corrected false or unbalanced claims that have been introduced by people with a COI. Schily (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Message added 12:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Diego (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
be carefull with unfriendly editors[edit]
Hello Schily, Some people are waiting for you to fall in a trap. So I think you should avoid edits of cdrtools that get reverted. Because someone will sooner or later report you and try to have your account blocked... Ekkt0r (talk) 14:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
I do understand that you have objection to the closure of the RfC in cdrtools but instead of referring to legitimate avenues of appeal, you are engaged in bludgeoning the process and subverting community consensus in Cdrtools article. Given your connection to the topic, I warn you that another attempt in disruptive actions will result in you being reported to WP:ANI.
If you need help find the correct venue of appeal for closure, I will help you find one.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- It seems that you don't even see the that fact that you claimed to see a consensus where no consensus is and that you reported a fictive ratio that does not match the reality is the reason for my amazement. In addition, this "Rfc" is not the most important problem in the article. The most important issue is the fact that the article is full of personal attacks and pointers to external personal attacks, which is against WP rules, see my unanswered question related to personal attacks. Note that a personal attack is a claim made against a person when this claim is not verified - in our case the claim that there is a license problem. I encourage you to be collaborative and to only act in cases where you read the whole conversation, which is needed to understand the problems behind. If you are willing to help in the case, you are of course welcome! Schily (talk) 09:14, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Like I said, if you do not like what I see, there are legitimate courses of actions to take. (If you don't know them, please ask; I am not seeing you asking yet.)
- My concern so far is the outcome of RFC alone; nothing else. Even if my concern was other things, I'd have never justified one disruptive action with another disruptive action. No one answered your question posted in WT:NPA because it was inadvertently or deliberately an instance of trolling; hence WP:DFTT.
- Best regards,
- Codename Lisa (talk) 10:31, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- P.S. You might want to elucidate a little about this "personal attack" issue with a diff and quote. You've been vague about it. If your concern is valid, I can notify ANI and take action against it quickly. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Calling my question trolling is completely misunderstanding the problem. I was describing the activities of a person that is very active with harming cdrtools. This is no fun but a very problematic person is supported by the WP rules with his attacks and I am looking for a solution. The persom I am talking about writes text with his WP account and text with IP numbers and the cases where he uses IP numbers look very intentional. I created a log of 47 such IP based edits between December 2010 and now that verifies this behavior. The person also attacks cdrtools on his personal website and he tries (via anonymizing remailers) to blackmail Linux distributors that asked their lawyers and thus distribute the original cdrtools instead of the buggy and unmaintained fork from Debian.
- Regarding the licensing section: In May 2004, a social attack against cdrtools was started by some people from Debian. These people later came up with the false claim that there was a legal problem in cdrtools in order to distract from their social attacks. They did never send any legally valid verification for their claims and many lawyers confirmed that there is no legal problem. The cdrtools article however quotes the claims from laymen with the intend to create the impression that there is a modicum of truth in these claims. This cannot be seen as a neutral report on this Debian initiated incidence but rather as an attempt to harm cdrtools.
- Another problem in the licensing section is the fact that it attacks cdrtools by describing activitied in an intentionally reversed timeline in order to confuse cause and reaction. It would be easy to verify the real timeline as this is something that cannot be faked in the internet.
- Any attempt to make the cdrtools article neutral failed so far. I understand an encyclopedia in a way that it may have to report about attacks but without becoming parts of the attackers. In our case, this would require to clearly mention that there is no verification for a legal problem. Schily (talk) 12:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- Please give me your list of 47 IPs, the suspected associated WP account, the link to his personal website, link to the social attack and the diffs. I will send them to an admin to block the user and strike out the diffs.
- Best regards,
- Codename Lisa (talk) 14:20, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- How should I do this? I would usually do this by mail. Schily (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- You can post them here. Or if they are very long, create a subpage in you user page, (e.g. User:Schily/Details) and insert the details there. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- How should I do this? I would usually do this by mail. Schily (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Codename Lisa: Given the length of the list, I believe it is better to have it separated. Are you OK with the sole list of now 51 IP edits in time order? Do you like it to be sorted with respect to the level of unbalanced text? BTW: You might have noticed that the user in question recently identified himself, so the relation between the WP IP edits and the WP Username was already uncovered by him. In order to better understand his global stratey, it would help to know about his activities on his personal web pages with real name and his other anonymous activities against the cdrtools project on other places (e.g. the bugtracking systems of Linux distributors). Schily (talk) 15:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- As you might have seen already, I created that page and filled it with a bunch of diffs related to these edits. I hope this helps to understand what's going on. Schily (talk) 15:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi again. Thanks for the list. Since I am already involved in the RFC case of Cdrtools, I will have to send the list to a non-involved admin, crat or checkuser clerk for analysis. (I cannot personally process it.) However, given the high number incidents, your best approach would be what we call it a "celebrity defense". This is a method used by celebrities because they receive too much paparazzi coverage. Here is how it works: Your best defense is neutrality. For example, if someone wrote "He chastised this approach", you change it into "he disagree this approach because ...", provide a reason and add a source. This will disarm the attacker and is in accordance to WP:NPOV. The only avenue of attack left for him or her would be edit warring, which will cause other Wikipedians to rise in your defense.
- I will send you the name of the admin who would accept this case.
- Best regards,
- Codename Lisa (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- "Calling my question trolling is completely misunderstanding the problem."
- That's probably true, but the burden of asking it in right place, right time and right manner is on you. If you are not a troll, please don't behave like one. Make no mistake, it is very difficult not to behave like a troll. But you will learn once you set about it. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
- I discovered that your cases have already been taken by WP:ANI, WP:COIN an WP:ANEW. You should have told me. My analysis of the diffs did not reveal a significant change in the situation since those cases. As such, you must follow up the issue with the admins that participated in those topics. But as I advised earlier, you should take up neutrality of point of view as your defense.
- Best regards,
- Codename Lisa (talk) 12:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- I do not understand. What I like to treat is the problem that results from the fact that a user did not only act with an easy to understand conflict of interest that can be checked by looking at a single action each time. The problem we have results from the fact that this user runs coordinated attacks against the project simultaneously on different media. Each incident taken alone may look tolerable, but if you look at all activities, you understand that someone is trying to run a phalanx of coordinated attacks that in total is non-tolerable. This unfortunately can only be understood if the real identity and other pseudonyms of the same person are known, but this requires to disclose his real identity which is not allowed by WP. You may now understand why I said that the WP rules support people that abuse WP just as one of many media to attack a person or a project. Given the problems with the WP rules, this is why I made the proposal to send all available information in a private mail. Only if you have all this information, you will be able to understand what's going on. Schily (talk) 14:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- BTW: his recent personal attacks (using his WP login) seem to verify that his motivation may be jealousy on the fact that I am working on UNIX since 35 years and while doing this created a lot of OpenSource software and developed concepts that are now in use on most systems. Schily (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
The article was a mess. I had to shorten it substantially.
I hope the following sentence summarizes your position with respect to the license (it's mostly left as it was before, I only added the collective, not derivative part IIRC):
- Jörg Schilling denies a license problem in cdrtools. In his interpretation, it consists of independent works and thus do not mix incompatible licenses (i.e. it is a collective work, not a derivative work). According to his interpretation, binary versions may be distributed.[12] He continues to develop his version of cdrtools under the CDDL and GPL (mkisofs) licenses, whereas the cdrkit fork has received next to no updates since.
I also added a website, cdrtools.org, which may violate your trademark (?) and appears to be by some Debian developer or user; but I believe it is useful.
Please, let's keep the article short and to the point. Cdrecord is about writing CDs, not about licensing and fighting - the article thus should focus on CD writing, too. I'm considering to move the first paragraph of the licensing section up, and make it more about SCSI and ATA support. Users of your software do need to know why the devices are addressed. In fact I might do this change next... There has been much too much fighting, and that doesn't do any good, or help you in any way. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
RCS vs WP:BLP[edit]
As noted on the talk page, your edit makes an insinuation about the rcs developers, which is against WP:BLP. You should be familiar with this guideline TEDickey (talk) 00:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- As you should know, I did of course not make any insinuation, I did just write provable facts. For this reason, your message can be seen as a personal attack. You may like to check your attitude of having discussions with other people. If you believe you found a problem, write a polite question that includes sufficient information and verify your claims for correctness first. Schily (talk) 14:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Your comment as written cannot be misinterpreted. Perhaps you meant something different. I did some further investigation, and expanded the discussion here, although I am not satisfied with the presentation (having more information to add), and probably will split-out a new page for the topic. However, the point is documented there. TEDickey (talk) 09:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- So what is correct? You misinterpreted my comment and now claim that it cannot be misinterpreted?
- BTW: I cannot see how your private web page is related to RCS in with regard to licensing. All I see is an unverified claim from, where you try to tell us that Tichy assigned the Copyright to the FSF. This is obviously wrong as a German cannot assign Copyright - this is forbidden by law. Schily (talk) 11:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- My web page comments on facts which I have observed, which you are demonstrably ignorant of. Rather than make excuses about my wording "assigned", you might take the time to verify (as suggested) the quote from the copyright.list file by communicating with the FSF records on the linked page. TEDickey (talk) 01:07, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed (though I considered that in my response last night, and concluded from Schily's comments in other cases that it would be contentious). The quote does not rely on that. By the way, "private webpage" denotes something with access controls, e.g, ".htaccess", whereas Schily uses the term here in a misleading sense, to attack the messenger. Of course, almost all of Schily's edits rely on what he would call his "private webpages", so the point of doing this is lost TEDickey (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- You seem to have strange ideas on what a private web page is. A private webpage is a synonym for a personal web page and the quoted web page is apparently a personal web page. But anyway, this page does not contain a verification that the author Tichy did give the permission to put the code under GPL and you again try to attack the messenger for information that do not like. Schily (talk) 11:13, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed (though I considered that in my response last night, and concluded from Schily's comments in other cases that it would be contentious). The quote does not rely on that. By the way, "private webpage" denotes something with access controls, e.g, ".htaccess", whereas Schily uses the term here in a misleading sense, to attack the messenger. Of course, almost all of Schily's edits rely on what he would call his "private webpages", so the point of doing this is lost TEDickey (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'll repeat myself, since you seem to have trouble following the discussion: on my cm-tools page, I commented on a part of what I investigated:
Given that, I agreed that we could use RCS, but that I would provide wrappers to implement the timestamp improvement. Modifying the RCS programs themselves was out of the question (we kept in mind the company lawyers who would steer clear of anything related to licensing). Revisiting this page in November 2014, I see that the pertinent version could have been RCS 4, released as part of 4.3BSD Tahoe or even RCS 3 in 4.3BSD. In either case, at that point in time Tichy (the original author of RCS) had left Purdue to return to Germany (August 1987). Most of the development after the end of 1983 had been done by others. Oddly enough (though included in 4.3BSD), the actual source license was noncommercial. For commercial use (as done by MKS), registration was required. That changed a year later. This is what it says in the Free Software Foundation's .copyright.list (see this page):
RCS Walter Tichy 1989-03-20
Licenses use of RCS with our choice of terms.
- The link in "see this page" points to http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Papers.html, which says in part:
To check whether papers have been received, look in /gd/gnuorg/copyright.list. If you can't look there directly, firstname.lastname@example.com can check for you. Our clerk can also check for papers that are waiting to be entered and inform you when expected papers arrive.
- So in other words, you again confirm that the website you refer to does not contain information related to RCS licensing but just general information. Regarding RCS relicensing, in our time is is usual to provide certain information electronically as part of the sources - in special if it is known that a piece of software was offered under a different license before.
- So you say. Pretending that I said or agreed to something after I pointed out that I had not is one of the things that the guideline on civility points out as a defect. By the way, you have digressed from this thread, and have neither responded to directions for how to verify the given quotation, nor offered any constructive comments toward supporting your statements. TEDickey (talk) 01:46, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- I am sorry to see that you do not seem to understand that it would be your task to present a verification of your claim iff/when there was a permission from Mr. Tichy to put RCS under GPL. It you did not digress from that topic, we could have a constructive discussion. Schily (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- So you say. Pretending that I said or agreed to something after I pointed out that I had not is one of the things that the guideline on civility points out as a defect. By the way, you have digressed from this thread, and have neither responded to directions for how to verify the given quotation, nor offered any constructive comments toward supporting your statements. TEDickey (talk) 01:46, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- So... when are you intending to start addressing the problems with your edits? None of your comments so far have been constructive, several are misconstructive TEDickey (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- I always made constructive comments, but you have not been willing to be constructive but rather tried to diverge with any of your messages. So once you make comments that are on topic, you are of course welcome! 14:18, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- So... when are you intending to start addressing the problems with your edits? None of your comments so far have been constructive, several are misconstructive TEDickey (talk) 01:04, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
- Diverging comment removed. Many of the discussions you have with others are driven by your problematic relation to reliable sources. There are two basic problems that can be seen repetitive:
- You make own edits that miss a reliable source
- You claim that reliable sources given by others are not reliable.
- This results is an imbalance between your expectations and your own contributions.
- You should avoid this imbalance if you like to be taken for serious.
- Diverging comment removed. Many of the discussions you have with others are driven by your problematic relation to reliable sources. There are two basic problems that can be seen repetitive:
- In our specific case, we have a situation where comparable license changes in other projects usually are documented by a file that is included in the source tree. Such a document is missing in the RCS source tree and such a document is not even available in the network. This is why I like to see a reliable source for the permission to change the license of RCS towards the GPL. Schily (talk) 11:46, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- You keep to refuse to answer my questions: The RCS license was obviously changed by the GNU project. It is the task of the people who changed the license to verify that this change has been done according to the will of the code owner. I am still missing this verification. Can you prove that the license change has been done in compliance to the will of the code owner - in other words can you present us a letter from Mr. Tichy that he is willing to change the license towards the GPL? There is not even the minimum documentation that we can expect from the new maintainers: Something like "The license was changed to GPL on dd.mm.yyyy with permission from Mr. Tichy". I do not want to get obscure hints on that I can ask obscure people, I like to see what seems to be usual practice on the OSS community. Schily (talk) 11:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- By the way, your assertion about comparable license changes bears comment: whether or not it is common practice is arguable (and we don't do unsupported argument here). In particular, this was not done by Sun for their release of sccs sources. It gives less information than, for example, the source which I have provided. To aid the reader, here is the relevant license information, which lacks discussion of the changes from the original AT&T, through at least one intermediate step to its final form:
# # CDDL HEADER START # # The contents of this file are subject to the terms of the # Common Development and Distribution License (the "License"). # You may not use this file except in compliance with the License. # # You can obtain a copy of the license at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE # or http://www.opensolaris.org/os/licensing. # See the License for the specific language governing permissions # and limitations under the License. # # When distributing Covered Code, include this CDDL HEADER in each # file and include the License file at usr/src/OPENSOLARIS.LICENSE. # If applicable, add the following below this CDDL HEADER, with the # fields enclosed by brackets "[]" replaced with your own identifying # information: Portions Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] # # CDDL HEADER END # # Copyright 2006 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved. # Use is subject to license terms. # # @(#)README.usr 1.9 06/12/18 # Enclosed in this directory tree is the source code for "SCCS".
- The reader may notice that AT&T is not mentioned, for instance, nor is there any mention of the previous licenses under which the source was available. Before asserting that something is common practice, you should have several examples in mind, in particular those with which you have some established association. TEDickey (talk) 09:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for verifying that you are not interested in a serious discussion!
- You are quoting the license header from a file that was written by Sun Microsystems to document how to compile the Solaris specific variant of the SCCS code. As this text was written by Sun, nobody would expect an AT&T Copyright notice in this file. BTW: As the file is specific to the compile environment from Sun for Solaris, this file is part of the archive devpro-sccs-src-20061219.tar.bz2 but has been removed from newer versions of the SCCS source because SCCS now uses a portable buildsystem and thus no longer needs the Sun specific notes. Other files in the SCCS source of course contain AT&T Copyright notices, see below.
- Let me add a note to people who don't know that SVr4 is a collaborative work fom AT&T and Sun Microsystems: Since the mid-1990s, Sun owns a full equal Copyright on the UNIX sourcecode. All code that includes a AT&T Copyright notice, a Sun Copyright notice or both (but does not mention additional owners) can be sub-licensed or opensourced by Sun because of this ownership.
- The current SCCS source code contains 112 source files (*.h and *.c)
- 88 of them contain a Copyright AT&T (and others)
- 1 of them contains Copyright AT&T but no Copyright Sun Microsystems
- 87 of them contain Copyright AT&T and Copyright Sun Microsystems
- 3 of them contain Copyright Sun Microsystems but no Copyright AT&T
- 111 of them contain Copyright Jörg Schilling (90 of them in addition contain other Copyright notices)
- 21 of them contain only Copyright Jörg Schilling
- The current SCCS source code contains 112 source files (*.h and *.c)
You see, SCCS sources are in safe state. I wished, RCS was in a similar state. Schily (talk) 11:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
- You are evading the point as usual. The two examples are comparable. To put it in your terms, since you refuse to show me the lawyers' correspondence concerning the SCCS code, you are obviously concealing something. That may or may not be absurd (depending on your personal involvement), but it's the same. TEDickey (talk) 01:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
- You again write non-helpful claims.... SCCS has been relicensed by one of the Copyright holders (Sun Microsystems) - the fact that Sun has become Copyright holder with equal rights to AT&T has been discussed in the public in the 1990s already, RCS has been relicensed by unknown people and the act of relicensing is not even documented in the project files. But as usual, you again diverge from the original topic, so it seems there is no hope to continue an on-topic discussion with you. Schily (talk) 10:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
- Relicensing the code would require some agreement with AT&T, which has not been documented to the extent which you are demanding of RCS. For both, there is available only summary information which tells what the outcome of discussions/negotiations were: there are no private details disclosed in either case. (If you happen to know of some verifiable reliable source for SCCS, it might be interesting to discuss, but so far you have not responded any of my suggestions for those). As I pointed out, the people involved are easily identifiable, and it is simple to find past comments by you regarding some of them which can only be construed as personal attacks. here for instance is a comment about Tichy (using Bing):
Such ignorance seems not uncommon in the university environment to be and unscientific assertions have sometimes devastating. ... lack of scientific rigor in publications
- Your English postings have been in the same tone (so I see no reason to doubt Bing), apparently having a long-term grudge against one or more of the developers. Filling in a perceived void with insinuations and attacks on the various developers violates WP:BLP. TEDickey (talk) 01:14, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- You again verify that you are not interested in a fact based discussion and you repeatedly start personal attacks by missinterpreting fact based statements from me. It is even worse: you did not read my previous text.
- I already mentioned the fact that Sun aquired the needed rights in the 1990s and that this has been widely discussed in the usenet at that time. If you have not been reading the usenet in the 1990s, I recommend you to do it now - before sending any further inapropriate reply. Schily (talk) 10:41, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- If you have a reliable source, that would be something to discuss. Apparently you have none (otherwise, you would provide one, just to make a point). TEDickey (talk) 00:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
- Keep in mind, that most of usenet is hearsay, and not suitable for the type of discussion we are having (referring to your demands to see a letter from Tichy, etc.). You might find it in a press release from Sun, but those generally are vague on this sort of thing - and Oracle has done a thorough job of removing that type of information from its websites TEDickey (talk) 01:24, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
List of commercial software with available source code[edit]
Hello, Schily. I'm trying to understand the purpose of List of commercial software with available source code. I tried asking the article's creator at Talk:List of commercial software with available source code#False dichotomy but after his explanations I am only more confused. As far as I can tell, you are the only other editor to have commented on the purpose of this article (in this edit). Could I persuade you to have a look at the article and its talk page and let me know what you understand the scope of the list to be? —Psychonaut (talk) 21:18, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. TEDickey (talk) 13:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)


text:
Cable broadband is carried via optic fibres, which also provide digital TV and telephone services.
In each case, the data is carried along lines or cables that have more capacity than conventional ones.
Access speed is measured in bits per second: 512 kilobits (512k) is 10 times the speed of dial-up; 1 megabit (1mb) is 20 times faster.


text:
Now Playing
WFP Logistics
Delivering food by land, sea and air, WFP Logistics is the essential link in feeding 90 million people worldwide every year. Our corporate video shows WFP Logistics in action.
Date | 20 March 2011 |
Topics | Hunger TV |
Countries | Chad, Afghanistan, Haiti, Philippines, Somalia |
Latest Videos/Galleries
16 November 2013
Philippines Typhoon: WFP High Energy Biscuits Keep Survivors Going
15 November 2013
WFP Relief To Typhoon Haiyan Survivors (For The Media)
15 November 2013
Typhoon Haiyan Appeal


text:
US 6035436 A Abstract A method for handling different of types of data bit errors in a computer system. In one embodiment, the method comprises the step of storing a data line in a first storage location. The method also includes the step of retrieving the data line from the first storage location. Data bit errors in the data line are detected and the data line is marked as containing a data bit error and stored in a storage location if the data line is not to be used immediately by a requesting process; otherwise error handling is performed by halting the requesting process.
Claims(12) 1. A method of operation for a computer system that includes a memory subsystem and a system bus coupled to a plurality of bus agents, which includes at least one processor having an internal cache, the method comprising:
evicting a dirty line from the internal cache; using an ECC word associated with the dirty line to detect a data error; determining whether the data error is a correctable type of error or an uncorrectable type of error, if the data error is a correctable type of error: correcting the data error to produce a corrected line; and writing the corrected line to the memory subsystem; otherwise determining whether the dirty line was evicted due to a process request by a receiving bus agent; if so, handling the data error by the receiving bus agent; else, marking the dirty line to produce a marked cache line; and writing the marked cache line to the memory subsystem. 2. The method according to claim 1 wherein the marking step comprises storing a marker bit in a buffer circuit.
3. The method according to claim 1 wherein the step of writing the marked cache line to the memory subsystem further includes transmitting the marker bit to the memory subsystem.
4. The method according to claim 1 further comprising encoding a source of the data error when the data error is the uncorrectable type of error.
5. The method according to claim 4 wherein the marking step comprises storing a marker bit in a buffer circuit.
6. The method according to claim 1 further comprising collecting statistics regarding sources of uncorrectable types of errors over time.
7. The method according to claim 1 wherein the uncorrectable type of error comprises a double bit error.
8. A computer system comprising:
a system bus; a plurality of bus agents each having interface logic to communicate on the system bus according to a protocol, the plurality of bus agents including: a processor having an associated cache; a memory subsystem; wherein a bus agent marks an ECC bit associated with a data line having an uncorrectable error when a memory-to-memory transaction of the data line is performed, the uncorrectable error being handled only if and when the data line is requested by a process associated with a requesting bus agent. 9. The computer system of claim 8 wherein the interface logic comprises a buffer to store the ECC bit.
10. The computer system of claim 8 wherein the memory-to-memory transaction comprises a write-back transaction.
11. The computer system of claim 8 wherein only the process is halted during handling of the uncorrectable error.
12. The computer system of claim 8 wherein the uncorrectable error comprises a double bit error.
Description The present invention is in the field of data error handling in computer systems. Data stored in transistor integrated circuit devices is subject to spontaneous errors resulting from physical changes in the integrated circuit. These errors can be permanent errors or non-permanent errors. In the case of permanent errors, integrated circuit transistors storing individual data bits have permanently failed. Temporary errors, on the other hand, are often a result of radiation, such as cosmic radiation or radiation from decay of radioactive material. These temporary, or soft errors occur at random locations and times. Soft errors occur with greater frequency in systems that have larger and denser memory arrangements. Because it is the industry trend to include more memory capability in a smaller area, soft errors become an increasingly significant problem. One method for detecting and correcting soft errors in stored data involves storing along with the data one or more error correction code (ECC) bits. An algorithm is used to generate an ECC word associated with a predetermined number of data bits to be stored. When the stored data bits are retrieved from a memory device, along with their associated ECC word, the ECC word is "decoded", or checked, allowing the detection of single or multiple bit errors. Errors detected this way are sometimes correctable. For example, an error involving a single bit is usually correctable, but errors involving more than one bit usually are not. In conventional computer systems including a processor and a memory subsystem, the processor checks data requested from a memory subsystem when it is received. Errors may best be detected at this stage. Conventional computer systems also perform ECC checking at the memory subsystem side when data is written to a memory subsystem from, for example, a cache associated with a processor. This latter type of error detection often occurs asynchronously with respect to the processor instruction execution stream. In other words, in the latter type of error detection, an error is detected in data as a result of a system "housekeeping" process rather than as a result of the data being requested by a particular process. Because it is usually not possible to identify a process that requested the data in which an error has been detected in this type of error detection, handling of the error requires halting of all processes active on the system, including sometimes the processor kernel. This is equivalent to a system reset. The system reset or a halt of all active processes potentially makes the system and stored data unavailable to users for the period required to handle the error. This is especially significant in a server environment where system downtime must be minimized. For these reasons, handling errors caused by housekeeping processes such as, for example, a write-back to main memory in which the data is not actually required for use by any process, becomes extremely inefficient and wasteful. A method for handling different types of data bit errors in a computer system is described. In one embodiment, the method comprises the step of storing a data line in a first storage location. The method also includes the step of retrieving the data line from the first storage location. Data bit errors in the data line are detected and the data line is marked as containing a data bit error and stored in a storage location if the data line is not to be used immediately by a requesting process; otherwise error handling is performed by halting the requesting process. FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a portion of a computer system according to the present invention. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a memory subsystem according to one embodiment. FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a bus agent according to one embodiment. FIG. 4 is a flow chart of a cache line eviction according to one embodiment. A method and apparatus for economically and efficiently handling data bit errors in a computer system is described. According to one embodiment, data errors are handled when a data element is actually requested by a process; otherwise, the data is marked as having an error and stored. FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a portion of computer system 100. Computer system 100 includes processors 102 and 106. Each of processors 102 and 106 include internal caches. Processor 102 includes internal cache 104 and processor 106 includes internal cache 108. Internal caches 104 and 108 share an integrated circuit die with their respective processors. Processors 102 and 106 are connected to system bus 112. Memory subsystem 110 is also coupled to system bus 112. Computer system 100 also includes input/output (I/O) devices 114. I/O devices 114 can include such devices as a keyboard, a cursor control device, and a modem. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of memory subsystem 110 according to one embodiment of the invention. Memory subsystem 110 comprises memory devices external to processors 102 and 106. Memory subsystem 110 includes external cache 202 and main memory 204, which is comprised of random access memory (RAM). Memory system 110 also includes read only memory (ROM) 206 and mass storage device 208. According to the present invention, data is stored in units called data lines in caches 104 or 108 or in memory subsystem 110. In one embodiment, a line comprises 64 bits of data. In one embodiment, system bus 112 uses an ECC code that can correct single bit errors, detect double bit errors, and mark a line of data as containing an error (being "poisoned"). According to known algorithms, an 8 -bit ECC word is generated from 64 data bits in a line in this embodiment. An ECC word of 8 bits is generated for a 64 bit line of data before it is stored in caches 104, 108 or in memory subsystem 110. When a data line is read from a storage location, the line may be checked by using the 64 data bits and 8 ECC bits to compute 8 syndrome bits. A value transmitted with ECC bits is correct if all the computed syndrome bits are 0. If any syndrome bit is 1, then an ECC error has occurred. Any single bit error in data or check bits can be corrected using a syndrome bit. According to one embodiment, the ECC code can detect any double bit error, poisoned data (i.e., a data line containing an error), any error up to 4 bits, and a single nibble error if all other nibbles are correct. Data may be transferred between storage devices in computer system 100 for various purposes. On some occasions, data is transferred from one memory device to another because the data has been requested for immediate use by a process. On other occasions, data may be transferred from one storage device to another, but is not required for use by any process. An example of this is a write-back transaction. In a write-back transaction, data which has been previously modified and stored in a cache (as "dirty" data) is evicted from the cache and written into the memory subsystem, usually to update the main memory which holds an older version of the same data line. In the write-back transaction, the process that modifies the data is probably no longer active and thus, the data line is not currently required. According to the present invention, a distinction is made between the errors detected in data lines requested by processes, and errors detected in data lines not requested by processes. In computer system 100, a transaction such as a write-back transaction involving data which is not immediately required by a process is not handled, but rather written to the memory subsystem after ECC checking occurs at the memory subsystem. According to the present invention, if a single bit correctable error is discovered at this time, it is corrected. If a double bit (uncorrectable) error is detected it is marked (the data is poisoned) using an ECC bit and the data is stored without handling the error at this time. The error is handled when and if the marked line of data is requested for latter use by a process. At that time, the mark will be detected by the requesting process and the error will be handled. At the time that the error is handled, however, the process that requested the data will be known. Therefore, only that process is required to be halted, or killed. Thus, according to the present invention, asynchronous data errors are made synchronous with respect to the instruction execution stream, and system availability is increased. Processors 102 and 106, memory subsystem 110, and I/O devices 114 may all take control of system bus 112 at various times. At these times the devices become bus agents. FIG. 3 is a block diagram of generic bus agent 300 according to an embodiment of the present invention. Bus agent 300 includes interface logic 302, buffer circuitry 304, and storage circuitry 306. Bus agent 300 communicates with system bus 112 and with other bus agents in system bus 112 through interface logic 302. In order for bus agent 300 to conduct transactions over system bus 112 it must gain control of system bus 112 by communicating according to the protocol recognized by system bus 112. When bus agent 300 receives data from other agents or transmits data to other agents, it may temporarily store lines of data in buffer circuitry 304 in order to facilitate transfer. Lines of data are stored in storage circuitry 306 until they are requested by another bus agent. Buffer circuitry 304 is used to store a bit used in one embodiment to mark an associated data line as containing an uncorrectable error. When another bus agent requests the line of data from bus agent 300, interface logic 302 transmits the marker and the data line to the requester. When bus agent 300 receives a line of data, interface logic 302 processes the accompanying ECC bits, and if it is determined that the associated data line contains an uncorrectable error, a marking bit will be stored in buffer circuitry 304 to so indicate. If the ECC bits indicate that a correctable error exists, the error will be corrected using the ECC bits. FIG. 4 shows flow chart 400 which illustrates events occurring upon eviction of a dirty cache line. At block 402 a dirty cache line is evicted, or transmitted from a storage location. As is known in the art, a dirty cache line is one which has been modified by a process but not yet copied in its modified form to a memory subsystem. At block 404 the receiving bus agent uses the ECC word associated with the cache line to detect any error. Three cases are possible, namely, no error, a correctable error, or an uncorrectable error. In the case of a correctable error, as shown in block 406, the error is immediately corrected at block 408 and the evicted line is written to the memory subsystem. At block 410 an uncorrectable error is detected. In this case a determination is made whether the cache line eviction is from an agent that is to receive the data for use in an active process or due to a memory-to-memory transaction such as a write-back operation. If the cache line is evicted due to a request by the receiving agent the uncorrectable error is handled by the receiving agent at block 418. Because the process associated with the request is active at this time, it is possible to handle the error by halting only the requesting process. Thus, by handling errors only when they can be associated with a particular process, less disruptive error handling and increased system availability is achieved. If the cache line eviction is not due to a process request by a receiving agent, then an uncorrectable error is not handled at this time, but is marked at block 416. The marked data line is then written to the memory subsystem at block 420. Finally, if no error is detected by the receiving bus agent at block 412, the data line with its ECC code is written into the memory subsystem at block 420. In one embodiment, the ECC word is also used to encode a source of any uncorrectable errors detected. Specifically, if an error is detected in the cache line after storage in a processor cache, such as cache 104 or cache 108, the ECC word would receive one encoding. If an uncorrectable error is detected after the cache line was stored in the memory subsystem, the ECC word would receive another encoding. When these cache lines are eventually used, i.e., when the associated ECC word is decoded, information is collected regarding whether the source of the error was a processor or a memory subsystem. In this way it is possible to collect statistics over time regarding the robustness of processor memory and of the memory subsystem. This allows a system designer to isolate sources of uncorrectable errors and design future systems accordingly. Although the present invention has been described in terms of specific embodiments, it will be appreciated that various modifications and alterations might be made by one ordinarily skilled in the art without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the following claims. Patent Citations
Referenced by
Legal Events
Rotate |


text:
Student radio hosts at Roger Williams suspended from station for using line that took down Don Imus.
University investigates two cases in which people claimed to be part of the institution but were not.
The class of 2011 is arriving at campuses all over -- and inspiring plenty of professors to wonder why the new students seem younger every year. For a decade, Beloit College has been helping out with its annual Mindset List of gentle reminders of what new students grew up with and what they never experienced.
Students, increasingly the target of retail marketing, are bringing more to their dorms.
For the first time, incoming students at San Francisco State U. can select who they want to live with by searching online profiles.
Pitzer College class is both dedicated to and cataloged on the video-sharing Web site.
Poster reading "$160,000" (and more) that appeared on several buildings at Brown is one student's commentary on campus life.
University of California at Berkeley expands the public reach of its courses in a new video portal with complete lectures, ready to be streamed.
Vice is alive and well in the dorm. Now a group originating at Harvard Law School seeks to bring it into the teaching realm. Is poker a winning academic bet?
Study finds faculty can do more than teach well (think chocolate) to improve their score on student evaluations.


text:
American Spectrum Realty Announces Results Of Tender Investors Tender Offer
American Spectrum Realty, Inc. ('the Company') (AMEX: AQQ), a real estate investment and management company, headquartered in Houston, Texas, announced today that it received from Tender Investors, LLC, the results of their tender offer, which expired July 27, 2010. Tender Investors announced that a total of 1,624 shares of the Company's stock were tendered as a result of the offer.
American Spectrum Realty, Inc. is a real estate investment company that owns, through an operating partnership, 32 office, industrial, self storage and retail properties aggregating approximately 2.9 million square feet in California, Texas, Arizona and the Midwest, and has been publicly traded since 2001. American Spectrum Management Group, Inc. and American Spectrum Realty Management, LLC are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Company's operating partnership who manage and lease all properties owned by American Spectrum Realty, Inc. as well as third-party clients.
American Spectrum Realty Inc. subsidiaries provide first-class management and leasing services for over 125 properties, which consist of 8,444,838 square feet of office, industrial and retail, 2,934 multi-family units, over 13,000 self storage units consisting of 1,714,461 square feet, 3,206 student housing units consisting of 9,107 beds and nine assisted living facilities consisting of 776 beds. American Spectrum's management portfolio comprises properties located in 22 states.
Certain matters discussed in this release are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected, including the risks and uncertainties of acquiring, owning, operating and disposing of real estate.
Such risks and uncertainties are disclosed in the Company's past and current filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Action Alerts PLUS
Portfolio Manager Jim Cramer and Director of Research Jack Mohr reveal their investment tactics while giving advanced notice before every trade.
Product Features:
- $2.5+ million portfolio
- Large-cap and dividend focus
- Intraday trade alerts from Cramer
Quant Ratings
Access the tool that DOMINATES the Russell 2000 and the S&P 500.
Product Features:
- Buy, hold, or sell recommendations for over 4,300 stocks
- Unlimited research reports on your favorite stocks
- A custom stock screener
Stocks Under $10
David Peltier uncovers low dollar stocks with serious upside potential that are flying under Wall Street's radar.
Product Features:
- Model portfolio
- Stocks trading below $10
- Intraday trade alerts
Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Dividend Stock Advisor
David Peltier identifies the best of breed dividend stocks that will pay a reliable AND significant income stream.
Product Features:
- Diversified model portfolio of dividend stocks
- Updates with exact steps to take - BUY, HOLD, SELL
Trifecta Stocks
Every recommendation goes through 3 layers of intense scrutinyquantitative, fundamental and technical analysisto maximize profit potential and minimize risk.
Product Features:
- Model Portfolio
- Intra Day Trade alerts
- Access to Quant Ratings
Options Profits
Our options trading pros provide over 100 monthly option trading ideas and strategies to help you become a well-seasoned trader.
Product Features:
- Actionable options commentary and news
- Real-time trading community


text:
Location: New York, NY | Tickets: 0 | RSVP Tweet
Sorry, tickets are no longer available for this event.
Michael Schimmel Center For The Arts New York, NY
Webster Hall, New York City John Darwn Kurc
November 11, 2009 |
Mountain Jam, Hunter Mountain, N.Y. Erika Goldring / ErikaGoldring.com
June 6, 2010 |
If we have information that is incorrect on this itinerary, please send us an email
© Copyright 2015 Pollstar. All Rights Reserved.
Use of information on this website is subject to License Agreement. Tickets for dates listed may not yet be on sale. Dates may change without notice.


text:
Find Even More Jobs & Nannies at: | eNannySource.com | and | GoNannies.com |
My name is Nia, And I am an 18 year old college student who is looking for something Productive To do with my Life. I enjoy working with kids because I feel like I connect very well with them, As...
I have worked with two previous families. One for one year with children the ages of 6 and 9, and the other family for two years. When i started that job the children were 18 months and 3 years. When...
I am a mother of three teenagers. I have been an Elementary and Eary Childhood teacher for a total of 10 years. For the past 4 years I have worked for a family who drove their children to school and...
I have raised two responsible sons as a single parent. I have worked as a personal assistant/babysitter for a local resident. I presently work full time and am looking to supplement my income babysitting Friday and Saturday nights.
I have over 10 years experience, starting at the age of 16. I really believe that it is my calling. I have worked with 2 families in my life. 1 for 9 years and another 2 as of recent. It...
I am an energetic, warm, kind, friendly and reliable individual. Children tend to gravitate towards my warm, down-to-earth nature. I have been working with children for the past 5 years and enjoy doing so tremendously....
Nanny | Nanny Services | Babysitting Services | Nanny Jobs | Babysitting Jobs
Kids all love to go to the zoo. If you are a New York nanny, you will have more than one option of where to take them to experience learning about animals and how they live. The Central Park Zoo is a great place to bring the kids. It offers educational programs, touch time, and even overnight parties for kids. The Bronx Zoo is another great option. There are more than 4,000 animals to see and learn about, as well as the Skifari which will glide you over the zoo to see it from up high. There is also the Prospect Park Zoo in Brooklyn. This zoo has its focus on the educational aspect of animal life, and offers a nice little petting zoo area.If you are a New York nanny who wants to give the kids a look at marine life, you may want to check out the New York Aquarium. There is a great show where the star is the mighty sea lion. You and the kids can see many creatures, including jellyfish, coral, and even some whales. You will all be entertained and learn a lot as you make your way through and enjoy the show.
Shopping is something that you will have your fill of if you are a New York nanny. The famous area of New York's downtown is home of many great shops, including Macy's and the famous Lego Store-a great place to bring the kids. You will be able to find whatever you want, and shop until your heart's content. Each area of the city is sure to offer you different shopping experiences. China Town, Broadway, and Madison Avenue all offer excellent shopping, but are not the only areas to have fun with this activity. You are sure to find individual little shops in many unexpected places, and make some great deals along the way.
We have found 2 wonderful nannies on your site. They were such a great addition toour family and our kids loved them. Thanks for making the site so easy to use!
Marilynn J., Houston TX
The background checks were great. We ordered 2 advanced background checks and got results within several hours. Both came back clear. It gave us peace of mind knowing our candidates had a clear background and were trustworthy.
Emma, Los Angeles, CA


text:
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc. |
Thread Tools |
January 12 2013, 06:58 AM | #1 |
Rear Admiral
Location: fresno, ca, us
Just noticed something in "The Great Race"
I had never noticed that. Great movie--basically for Lemmon and Falk. Anybody suddenly notice something in a movie they had seen many times? Last edited by propita; January 12 2013 at 07:35 AM. |
January 12 2013, 07:45 AM | #2 |
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Just noticed something in "The Great Race"
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while... |
January 12 2013, 07:45 PM | #3 | |
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Just noticed something in "The Great Race"
Also for Natalie Wood, Larry Storch, the swordfight between Tony Curtis and Ross Martin ("So, until another day, Mr. Leslie, please excuse me - I have a boat waiting), pie fight, etc., etc. It's one of my favorites.
As for literary criticism in general: I have long felt that any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel or a play or a poem is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae or a banana split. ~ Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. |
Bookmarks |
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Thread Tools | |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.


text:
Rate This
World of Geekcraft: Step-by-Step Instructions for 25 Super-Cool Craft Projects (Paperback)
Shipped to Tattered Cover in 3 to 7 days
Geek meets craft in this fun collection of 25 kooky projects for geeks of any affiliation, from D&D dice earrings, Star Trek pillows, and Super Mario cross-stitch to Star Wars terrariums, a Morse code quilt, and much more! Organized by difficulty from "Not a Jedi Yet" to "Warp Speed," World of Geekcraft covers a range of popular crafting techniques including beading, quilting, appliqué, embroidery, and needle felting. Best of all, it's easy to get started with step-by-step instructions and handy templates included in the back of the book. With lots of photos and plenty of geekery throughout, this one-of-a-kind book shows that geek and craft go together like...pixels and cross-stitch!
About the Author
Susan Beal writes for CRAFT, Stitch, ReadyMade, CraftStylish, Geekcrafts.com, and her own blog, Westcoastcrafty.com. She lives in Portland, Oregon.
Jay B. Sauceda is one of the seven founding partners of the creative collective Public School. He lives in Austin, Texas.