Gmail Contest:

[{I}{K}{E}]

40

[DanB]

41

[{I}{K}{E}]

42

[DanB]

43

[{I}{K}{E}]

44

[DanB]

45

[Cheese]

I'm not entering 'cos I have a gmail account.

[{I}{K}{E}]

46

[namzuf9]

Why is it anti spam never works when its needed?
47?

[Cheese]

I'm not entering 'cos I have a gmail account.

[DanB]

49

[{I}{K}{E}]

50 :

[{I}{K}{E}]

51

[DanB]

Originally posted by Withcheese@5 July 2004 - 01:08
I'm not entering 'cos I have a gmail account.

so do i

[Cheese]

I'm not entering 'cos I have a gmail account.

[{I}{K}{E}]

53

damn you Withcheese your nr. 53 !!

I can delete your post :evil:

[internet.news]

53rd reply?

[DanB]

There's been 56 replies

[internet.news]

Originally posted by samsamsamsam@5 July 2004 - 00:09
53rd reply?

no

[Cheese]

DanB won it.

[{I}{K}{E}]

[DanB]

Originally posted by Withcheese@5 July 2004 - 01:10
DanB won it.

w00t


who wants it?

[{I}{K}{E}]

Anti Spam Security
Why did I reach this page instead to see my posted message ?

Possible Reasons:

You already posted your message (double post)
You are using a script to post messages
You hit the reload button but your message was already posted
If you think this is an error please contact our administrators and they will look into this problem. Please make sure to check the forum you posted to see if your message is not already there.

The Administration

[{I}{K}{E}]

Originally posted by danb+5 July 2004 - 01:11--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (danb @ 5 July 2004 - 01:11)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Withcheese@5 July 2004 - 01:10
DanB won it.

w00t


who wants it? [/b][/quote]
me

[DanB]

Originally posted by {I}{K}{E}+5 July 2004 - 01:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ({I}{K}{E} @ 5 July 2004 - 01:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by danb@5 July 2004 - 01:11
<!--QuoteBegin-Withcheese

@5 July 2004 - 01:10
DanB won it.

w00t


who wants it?

me [/b][/quote]
bribes by pm please

[namzuf9]

Originally posted by {I}{K}{E}@5 July 2004 - 01:11
Anti Spam Security
Why did I reach this page instead to see my posted message ?

Possible Reasons:

You already posted your message (double post)
You are using a script to post messages
You hit the reload button but your message was already posted
If you think this is an error please contact our administrators and they will look into this problem. Please make sure to check the forum you posted to see if your message is not already there.

The Administration

Hooray&#33; Good ole aunty spam.

[{I}{K}{E}]

Originally posted by namzuf9+5 July 2004 - 01:13--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (namzuf9 @ 5 July 2004 - 01:13)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-{I}{K}{E}@5 July 2004 - 01:11
Anti Spam Security
Why did I reach this page instead to see my posted message ?

Possible Reasons:

You already posted your message (double post)
You are using a script to post messages
You hit the reload button but your message was already posted
If you think this is an error please contact our administrators and they will look into this problem. Please make sure to check the forum you posted to see if your message is not already there.

The Administration

Hooray&#33; Good ole aunty spam. [/b][/quote]

[{I}{K}{E}]

reply 67

we can go for the 106th reply

[{I}{K}{E}]

reply 68

me goes to bed :beerchug:

[J'Pol]

I can&#39;t believe that you chaps are falling for this type of "must have it" shite.

What is it you think you are getting. It&#39;s monitored email for fucks sake. It&#39;s the type of thing this site should be about opposing.

[manker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@5 July 2004 - 00:21
I can&#39;t believe that you chaps are falling for this type of "must have it" shite.

What is it you think you are getting. It&#39;s monitored email for fucks sake. It&#39;s the type of thing this site should be about opposing.

it&#39;s a gig of free webspace with unlimited bandwidth on a superfast reliable server, as long as you&#39;re not hiding anything why wouldn&#39;t people want it?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by manker+5 July 2004 - 01:26--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (manker @ 5 July 2004 - 01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@5 July 2004 - 00:21
I can&#39;t believe that you chaps are falling for this type of "must have it" shite.

What is it you think you are getting. It&#39;s monitored email for fucks sake. It&#39;s the type of thing this site should be about opposing.

it&#39;s a gig of free webspace with unlimited bandwidth on a superfast reliable server, as long as you&#39;re not hiding anything why wouldn&#39;t people want it? [/b][/quote]
It erodes rights to personal privacy. Please see (and read) earlier posts.

However please feel free to take the short term, selfish view. A big fuck-off personal email archive is obviously much more important than civil liberties.

[manker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+5 July 2004 - 00:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 5 July 2004 - 00:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by manker@5 July 2004 - 01:26
<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol

@5 July 2004 - 00:21
I can&#39;t believe that you chaps are falling for this type of "must have it" shite.

What is it you think you are getting. It&#39;s monitored email for fucks sake. It&#39;s the type of thing this site should be about opposing.

it&#39;s a gig of free webspace with unlimited bandwidth on a superfast reliable server, as long as you&#39;re not hiding anything why wouldn&#39;t people want it?

It erodes rights to personal privacy. Please see (and read) earlier posts.

However please feel free to take the short term, selfish view. A big fuck-off personal email archive is obviously much more important than civil liberties. [/b][/quote]
I already know about gmail&#39;s privacy policy. so i won&#39;t be using it for anything I want to keep private. like email.

I will be using my gmail account as storage though. thats why (some) people want them. I don&#39;t think thats infringing on anyone&#39;s civil liberties..

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by manker+5 July 2004 - 01:40--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (manker @ 5 July 2004 - 01:40)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@5 July 2004 - 00:31

Originally posted by manker@5 July 2004 - 01:26
<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol

@5 July 2004 - 00:21
I can&#39;t believe that you chaps are falling for this type of "must have it" shite.

What is it you think you are getting. It&#39;s monitored email for fucks sake. It&#39;s the type of thing this site should be about opposing.

it&#39;s a gig of free webspace with unlimited bandwidth on a superfast reliable server, as long as you&#39;re not hiding anything why wouldn&#39;t people want it?

It erodes rights to personal privacy. Please see (and read) earlier posts.

However please feel free to take the short term, selfish view. A big fuck-off personal email archive is obviously much more important than civil liberties.

I already know about gmail&#39;s privacy policy. so i won&#39;t be using it for anything I want to keep private. like email.

I will be using my gmail account as storage though. thats why (some) people want them. I don&#39;t think thats infringing on anyone&#39;s civil liberties.. [/b][/quote]
Then you haven&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent.

You have taken an "I&#39;m alright Jack" view, which is fair enough. Though hardly in the spirit of sharing.

[manker]

you are right, I hadn&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent before deciding to accept an invite to gmail, how oppresive of me.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by manker@5 July 2004 - 01:53
you are right, I hadn&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent before deciding to accept an invite to gmail, how oppresive of me.

I didn&#39;t say you were being oppressive, just that you were supporting a system that was likely, in the long run, to be oppressive. If this system is accepted then there is no justification in opposing other, similar systems. That&#39;s how precedent works.

To those who do not wish to consider where this may lead. Congratulations, you are doing a fan-tastic job of supporting those who you think you are opposing.

[manker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+5 July 2004 - 01:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 5 July 2004 - 01:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-manker@5 July 2004 - 01:53
you are right, I hadn&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent before deciding to accept an invite to gmail, how oppresive of me.&nbsp;

I didn&#39;t say you were being oppressive, just that you were supporting a system that was likely, in the long run, to be oppressive. If this system is accepted then there is no justification in opposing other, similar systems. That&#39;s how precedent works.

To those who do not wish to consider where this may lead. Congratulations, you are doing a fan-tastic job of supporting those who you think you are opposing. [/b][/quote]
lets make this clear, I&#39;m not supporting gmail. in fact if everyone did what I&#39;m doing and fill up their gmail account with 1 gig of programs/vids then gmail would very quickly cease to be.

MS is an oppressive organisation, much more so than google, yet I doubt you&#39;re typing on an imac.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by manker+5 July 2004 - 02:10--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (manker @ 5 July 2004 - 02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@5 July 2004 - 01:00
<!--QuoteBegin-manker

@5 July 2004 - 01:53
you are right, I hadn&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent before deciding to accept an invite to gmail, how oppresive of me.

I didn&#39;t say you were being oppressive, just that you were supporting a system that was likely, in the long run, to be oppressive. If this system is accepted then there is no justification in opposing other, similar systems. That&#39;s how precedent works.

To those who do not wish to consider where this may lead. Congratulations, you are doing a fan-tastic job of supporting those who you think you are opposing.

lets make this clear, I&#39;m not supporting gmail. [/b][/quote]
Yes you are.

[manker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+5 July 2004 - 01:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 5 July 2004 - 01:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by manker@5 July 2004 - 02:10

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@5 July 2004 - 01:00
<!--QuoteBegin-manker

@5 July 2004 - 01:53
you are right, I hadn&#39;t considered the ramifications of precedent before deciding to accept an invite to gmail, how oppresive of me.

I didn&#39;t say you were being oppressive, just that you were supporting a system that was likely, in the long run, to be oppressive. If this system is accepted then there is no justification in opposing other, similar systems. That&#39;s how precedent works.

To those who do not wish to consider where this may lead. Congratulations, you are doing a fan-tastic job of supporting those who you think you are opposing.

lets make this clear, I&#39;m not supporting gmail.

Yes you are. [/b][/quote]
if mis-using a system for selfish reasons is tantamount supporting it then yes, I am supporting gmail. but you are calling for people not to use gmail because it has the potential to be oppressive, yet you send money to microsoft.

the words pot and kettle spring to mind.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by manker@5 July 2004 - 02:53
you send money to microsoft.

the words pot and kettle spring to mind.

When did I do this.