To all NZ ISPs - a new billing proposal

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Evil Bastard, Aug 21, 2003.

  1. Evil Bastard

    Evil Bastard Guest

    To all admins/managers of ISPs - your services are absolutely essential
    for internet access. You are now a 'utility' just as much as power, phone
    and gas.

    But you are being unfairly asked to take financial responsibility for the
    costs incurred by negligent users.

    For instance, you are being forced to upgrade your bandwidth procurements
    and mailserver capabilities to deal with internet noise such as spam and
    viruses.

    Spam is hard to deal with, because it (usually) originates from overseas,
    and is not the fault of end users.

    But viruses are another matter, because in so many cases they originate
    from users' machines (when these machines are compromised).

    I'd like to suggest to you all now, that you band together and implement a
    new billing policy. Your unity on this is essential, just like with
    industrial action, so that 'scabs' don't undermine your stand.

    This new billing policy would be - to each user, apply a surcharge of $1
    for every virus which leaves their machine. You can measure virus
    transmissions via your SMTP server, and by proxying common attack ports
    such as 135 and 139.

    Make your subscribers take responsibility for their negligent choices of
    operating system. If they want to use slickly marketed yet insecure
    proprietary operating systems and internet applications for email, web
    browsing etc, let them *pay* for the privilege - don't take it lying down.

    It's totally unfair on you that you haee to extend your capacity to deal
    with noise on the network, and it's equally unfair on those of us who make
    responsible choices of operating systems and internet applications (such
    as Linux, BSD, Mozilla, Phoenix etc).

    I for one hate the feeling that part of my internet subscription goes
    towards mollycoddling those who persist with popular yet negligent choices
    of software.

    So please stop allowing people tp persist in their ignorance. Place the
    responsibility where it belongs - with them.

    If it were a power company, and ignorant consumers were plugging in
    sexily-marketed 100kVA appliances and burning out lines, the consumers
    would individually pay, that's for sure.

    So don't accept double standards just because it's the internet.

    Cheers
    EB
    Evil Bastard, Aug 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:00:14 +1200, Evil Bastard <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote:

    >To all admins/managers of ISPs - your services are absolutely essential
    >for internet access. You are now a 'utility' just as much as power, phone
    >and gas.
    >
    >But you are being unfairly asked to take financial responsibility for the
    >costs incurred by negligent users.
    >
    >For instance, you are being forced to upgrade your bandwidth procurements
    >and mailserver capabilities to deal with internet noise such as spam and
    >viruses.
    >
    >Spam is hard to deal with, because it (usually) originates from overseas,
    >and is not the fault of end users.
    >
    >But viruses are another matter, because in so many cases they originate
    >from users' machines (when these machines are compromised).
    >
    >I'd like to suggest to you all now, that you band together and implement a
    >new billing policy. Your unity on this is essential, just like with
    >industrial action, so that 'scabs' don't undermine your stand.
    >
    >This new billing policy would be - to each user, apply a surcharge of $1
    >for every virus which leaves their machine. You can measure virus
    >transmissions via your SMTP server, and by proxying common attack ports
    >such as 135 and 139.
    >
    >Make your subscribers take responsibility for their negligent choices of
    >operating system. If they want to use slickly marketed yet insecure
    >proprietary operating systems and internet applications for email, web
    >browsing etc, let them *pay* for the privilege - don't take it lying down.
    >
    >It's totally unfair on you that you haee to extend your capacity to deal
    >with noise on the network, and it's equally unfair on those of us who make
    >responsible choices of operating systems and internet applications (such
    >as Linux, BSD, Mozilla, Phoenix etc).
    >
    >I for one hate the feeling that part of my internet subscription goes
    >towards mollycoddling those who persist with popular yet negligent choices
    >of software.
    >
    >So please stop allowing people tp persist in their ignorance. Place the
    >responsibility where it belongs - with them.
    >
    >If it were a power company, and ignorant consumers were plugging in
    >sexily-marketed 100kVA appliances and burning out lines, the consumers
    >would individually pay, that's for sure.
    >
    >So don't accept double standards just because it's the internet.
    >
    >Cheers
    >EB





    Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?
    Robert Kramer, Aug 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Evil Bastard

    Evil Bastard Guest

    On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:40:13 +1200, Robert Kramer wrote:

    > Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?


    Your failure to answer any of the argument puts you in danger of
    qualifying for the 'nutter' label yourself.

    Maybe I should simplify my argument with an analogy:

    The 'Microsport' - A new technology sports car hits the market. It's slick
    and sleek, acceptably fast and much more comfortable than the
    alternatives. It's such a hit that even when similarly comfortable cars
    with even better technoligy hit the market, it takes them years to start
    getting a foot-hold in the market, although the trucks made by this rival
    sell much better.

    It gets more obvious that this car uses tyres which chew up the road, and
    cause the road to need more frequent and expensive maintenance.

    In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car until
    such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively, impose
    a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.

    But there's a huge double standard between the internet and the real
    world. Within cyberspace, people and companies get away with far more than
    they would if their scenarios were manifesting in tangible real life.
    Evil Bastard, Aug 21, 2003
    #3
  4. Evil Bastard

    madknoxie Guest

    In article <pan.2003.08.21.00.00.13.562989@127.0.0.1>,
    Evil Bastard <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote:

    > *snip*
    > So don't accept double standards just because it's the internet.



    As an ISP end user, I would hate to see all ISPs do this, because I
    would then be subsidising the cost of implementing this plan. It makes
    no sense to me.

    I think you view your ISP account slightly different than I view mine, I
    don't want to pay for moving bits and bytes around. I just want to be
    connected. I don't care if I'm subsidising other users because it costs
    less to do that, than to make sure all my machines are virus free, and
    their integrity hasn't been compromised.

    I spend $50 a month connecting, of which only $20 goes to Orcon. I don't
    know how much of a saving, you think they could make (plus I think it
    would cost more to implement), but if it were free (theoretically) then
    if I had to spend more than 30 mins a month making sure I wasn't sending
    out viruses, it would be costing me more than if I spent that time
    working. The point that I am trying to make is that it would actually
    increase the cost of being connected to the internet for most people.
    Our time isn't free.

    And I don't think that ISPs are being unfairly asked to burden negligent
    users. Its a part of operating an ISP. Besides, who annoys you more? The
    novice user who unwittingly helps spread viruses around even though they
    won't affect the integrity of your Linux machine? Or the geek who uses
    *nix and leeches bandwidth downloading and uploading porn, mp3s, video,
    and all other types of crap 24/7 with no break?

    It appears to me that you have some beef with 'slick marketing'. Well
    why not think about the marketing of the internet itself? Why did it
    become so popular? Because anyone and everyone could connect to it.
    There were very few barriers. So whats the point of adding another
    barrier and further widening the gap between the haves and have-nots of
    this country?

    Last time I checked this is a free country, so theres nothing stopping
    you from starting your own ISP. Then you can operate your model to your
    hearts content, making sure all your customers are using *nix, and
    charging your little $1 increments.

    You wouldn't have to get the entire industry to support you cause, nor
    would you have to worry about "scabs". If you are correct with your
    beliefs then customers will come to you. Thats the beauty of 'slick
    marketing'

    --
    madknoxie
    $35 .nz domain names: http://www.ivision.co.nz/
    madknoxie, Aug 21, 2003
    #4
  5. Evil Bastard

    madknoxie Guest

    In article <pan.2003.08.21.00.55.30.807712@127.0.0.1>,
    Evil Bastard <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote:

    > In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car until
    > such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively, impose
    > a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.


    Just like they do with trucks? Whatever, the downfall of rail transport
    was that the Govt. was and is still subsidising road transport even
    though they damage raods quicker, and cause a lot more noise pollution
    in residential areas than the 'Microsport'.

    --
    madknoxie
    $35 .nz domain names: http://www.ivision.co.nz/
    madknoxie, Aug 21, 2003
    #5
  6. >
    > If it were a power company, and ignorant consumers were plugging in
    > sexily-marketed 100kVA appliances and burning out lines, the consumers
    > would individually pay, that's for sure.
    >
    > So don't accept double standards just because it's the internet.
    >
    > Cheers
    > EB
    >


    It's so incredibly cheap to subscribe to the internet anyway, such problems
    aren't worth a second thought.

    If the all the ISPs suddenly loose their minds and adpot a rude policy
    against their biggest customer base (users who are happy to use Windows and
    really don't give a shit cause there are far more important things to worry
    about), then I shall start an ISP that doesn't use the policy.

    Something tells me i won't be giving up my day job any time soon.

    People who put there computer online and leech huge files 24/7 are a bigger
    problem than the one you describe, but once again who really cares? If it's
    actually important to you, as a user, then perhaps you need to reconsider
    your perspective.

    Switch off your computer and go outside.

    Steve
    Stephen Williams, Aug 21, 2003
    #6
  7. Evil Bastard

    k y l e Guest

    "Anthony Neville" <> wrote in message
    news:cpV0b.12800$...
    > "Evil Bastard" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    > news:pan.2003.08.21.00.00.13.562989@127.0.0.1...
    > [...]
    > > So please stop allowing people tp persist in their ignorance. Place the
    > > responsibility where it belongs - with them.
    > >
    > > If it were a power company, and ignorant consumers were plugging in
    > > sexily-marketed 100kVA appliances and burning out lines, the consumers
    > > would individually pay, that's for sure.
    > >
    > > So don't accept double standards just because it's the internet.

    >
    > Fine. Users should be responsible for downloading the latest security

    updates,
    > setting up a firewall and using a virus checker. Though, user

    responsibility must
    > end there. I do not under estimate the cunningness of virus makers to

    find an
    > exploit somewhere in internet applications at any point in time, and so I

    think
    > it is unjust to hold users accountable because of some hitherto unknown
    > and therefore unpublicized exploit in their choice of OS.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > Tony.
    >
    >


    Hear, hear to all comments to the contrary given above. I think the OP needs
    to aquire a sense of perspective, take a few chill pills, go outside perhaps
    and breathe a bit of fresh air. As far as the topic is concerned, it is
    nutty to say the least. It is your own personal responsibility how you guard
    yourself against viruses and the like. It is your own free choice to protect
    yourself with Nortons or AVG or whatever. You can also be cunning and
    operate 2 machines, one for internet only, which is virus-protected, and a
    second offline machine for your crucial apps, with the OS of your choice.
    Billing proposal? It comes across more as the bitter manifesto of a wounded
    caged tiger. I just want to connect thanks, pay my monthly fee, and shut up.
    And who gives a shit about what other people do with their pcs? If they get
    / spread a virus via their own inherent stupidity, that's their problem not
    mine. Geez, all you need is Nortons Live Update, relax, have a cuppa tea,
    and watch the rest of the world wallow. Sweet.
    k y l e, Aug 21, 2003
    #7
  8. Evil Bastard

    Who is this Guest

    In article <pan.2003.08.21.00.00.13.562989@127.0.0.1>,
    Evil Bastard <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote:


    > So please stop allowing people tp persist in their ignorance. Place the
    > responsibility where it belongs - with them.


    Better add an extra charge then for all the people swapping music files,
    ie all traffic that goes to gnutella etc. If a music file is discovered
    then bill them $3 for the file so it can be passed on. Actually the
    linux users should be buying CDs not down loading disc images as that
    takes up bandwidth too.
    As for voice over IP, use the telephone, or bill the abusers the same
    rate as an international call.

    etc
    etc
    etc
    Who is this, Aug 21, 2003
    #8
  9. Evil Bastard

    madknoxie Guest

    In article <%301b.122596$>,
    "The Flash" <> wrote:

    > "madknoxie" <> wrote in message
    > news:madknoxie-> Last time I checked this is a free country, so theres
    > nothing stopping
    > > you from starting your own ISP. Then you can operate your model to your
    > > hearts content, making sure all your customers are using *nix, and
    > > charging your little $1 increments.

    >
    > Free Country?
    >
    > Where have you been?
    >
    > For a company, company tax, fringe benefit tax, Goods and Service Tax,
    > Employer ACC premiums, public liability insurance, business insurance on
    > buildings and vehicles etc, PAYE tax, provisional tax etc etc.
    >
    > Then you need to get some bandwidth for you traffic, it ain't free!, And now
    > purchase a Ip segment to allocate to users, hardware, software, oh you want
    > a help desk - better train staff? Adverising etc etc.
    >
    > Yup, start your own ISP for just $1 only have half a million bucks in
    > reserve. ;-)


    FFS, I own two companies, so I'm quite familiar with the thiefs at the
    IRD. Also, no one will physically stop you setting this up, if that was
    your goal. Thats what free means to me, kind of like the free in 'free
    software'.

    Lastly, you can buy all those services from someone else for a fraction
    of the cost of setting it up yourself for yourself.

    Why do people like you always look at the obstacles in life, rather than
    the rewards?

    --
    madknoxie
    $35 .nz domain names: http://www.ivision.co.nz/
    madknoxie, Aug 21, 2003
    #9
  10. Evil Bastard

    madknoxie Guest

    In article <ST%0b.122584$>,
    "The Flash" <> wrote:

    > "madknoxie" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <A9V0b.122235$>,
    > > "The Flash" <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Why do we not register every internet capable computer, and then make a
    > > > computer users license, say at $50 per year, this fee would be split

    > 50/50
    > > > with the governt and the Isp. This would weed out those who are not

    > capable
    > > > of meeting their socail responsabilities in the digital age.

    > >
    > > You've got to be kidding me, you want youself and everyone else to be
    > > forced to deal with the Govt. just to be able to connect to the
    > > internet? AND (and this is the best part) you want to pay *more* tax, to
    > > be able to do so?
    > >
    > > Fark me!

    >
    > Looks like a legitimate business expense, thus would be paid by before tax
    > dollar. Net impact to my wallet would be in the order of ~$25 personal
    > dollars. $25 a year to get rid of 10% of the idiots who cause 90% of the
    > problems. Where do I pay?



    Shyte, suckers like you don't come along that often. My bank details are
    on my website...

    --
    madknoxie
    $35 .nz domain names: http://www.ivision.co.nz/
    madknoxie, Aug 21, 2003
    #10
  11. Evil Bastard

    Who is this Guest

    In article <>,
    madknoxie <> wrote:

    >
    > FFS, I own two companies, so I'm quite familiar with the thiefs at the
    > IRD. Also, no one will physically stop you setting this up, if that was
    > your goal. Thats what free means to me, kind of like the free in 'free
    > software'.
    >
    > Lastly, you can buy all those services from someone else for a fraction
    > of the cost of setting it up yourself for yourself.
    >
    > Why do people like you always look at the obstacles in life, rather than
    > the rewards?


    The what are you winging about, you obviously have the business sense
    and supposedly the knowledge.....so set it up yourself, if this is to be
    a sure fire winner you are out to make a killing.
    Who is this, Aug 21, 2003
    #11
  12. Evil Bastard

    madknoxie Guest

    In article <>,
    Who is this <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > madknoxie <> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > FFS, I own two companies, so I'm quite familiar with the thiefs at the
    > > IRD. Also, no one will physically stop you setting this up, if that was
    > > your goal. Thats what free means to me, kind of like the free in 'free
    > > software'.
    > >
    > > Lastly, you can buy all those services from someone else for a fraction
    > > of the cost of setting it up yourself for yourself.
    > >
    > > Why do people like you always look at the obstacles in life, rather than
    > > the rewards?

    >
    > The what are you winging about, you obviously have the business sense
    > and supposedly the knowledge.....so set it up yourself, if this is to be
    > a sure fire winner you are out to make a killing.


    Um, are you sure you read the post right? I replied to the OP by saying
    why not start up your own ISP and use the model you were originally
    talking about (where by charging users $1 for every virus passed on,
    etc).

    I've got no interest in starting an ISP. I'm very happy with the current
    industry model, and am quite happy to pay my $50 a month to be connected
    and for that to be that. In short I'm happy.

    --
    madknoxie
    $35 .nz domain names: http://www.ivision.co.nz/
    madknoxie, Aug 22, 2003
    #12
  13. Evil Bastard

    RecylerMan Guest

    The Flash wrote:
    > "Evil Bastard" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    > news:pan.2003.08.21.00.55.30.807712@127.0.0.1...
    >
    >>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:40:13 +1200, Robert Kramer wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?

    >>
    >>Your failure to answer any of the argument puts you in danger of
    >>qualifying for the 'nutter' label yourself.
    >>
    >>Maybe I should simplify my argument with an analogy:
    >>
    >>The 'Microsport' - A new technology sports car hits the market. It's slick
    >>and sleek, acceptably fast and much more comfortable than the
    >>alternatives. It's such a hit that even when similarly comfortable cars
    >>with even better technoligy hit the market, it takes them years to start
    >>getting a foot-hold in the market, although the trucks made by this rival
    >>sell much better.
    >>
    >>It gets more obvious that this car uses tyres which chew up the road, and
    >>cause the road to need more frequent and expensive maintenance.
    >>
    >>In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car until
    >>such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively, impose
    >>a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.

    >
    >
    > As the world knows money grows on taxpayers, thus you would tax everybody
    > for this cost, you would give it a snazzy name like 'Auckland Roading
    > Improvements and say it is temporary, after 12 months you would then make it
    > permanent.
    >
    > Even if you choose to drive a car that repairs the road as you drive you
    > would still pay this tax.
    >
    > Why do we not register every internet capable computer, and then make a
    > computer users license, say at $50 per year, this fee would be split 50/50
    > with the governt and the Isp. This would weed out those who are not capable
    > of meeting their socail responsabilities in the digital age.
    >


    A pollititon for shure put levvies or takes on everything (nanny state)
    will look after everything just make the people pay pay pay. I have some
    times up to 10 computers here at home 2 shitters another 2 not so shitty
    not going un connected (dx4 100) 486's then two crappy pentium 133's a
    dodgy 500MHZ machine (f--ked mother bord)90% operational one pentium 166
    as a server and a 990Mhz machine as a work horce that to ma would meen
    $50x10=$500.00 now most of these machines are put to uce for lurning
    about networking and I quite often give some away as I see fit to people
    who have a need grater than mine. I would become poorer than I alredy
    am. How would you like a tax to pay for the problem of unpayed fines
    seing as the lay brakers wont pay whay not make the law abiding people do.

    >
    >>But there's a huge double standard between the internet and the real
    >>world. Within cyberspace, people and companies get away with far more than
    >>they would if their scenarios were manifesting in tangible real life.

    >
    >
    >
    >



    --
    RecylerMan ICQ 22245595
    Mail to :- l i n u x u s r AT i h u g DOT c o DOT n z
    The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse always gets the cheese
    RecylerMan, Aug 22, 2003
    #13
  14. Evil Bastard

    Col^ Guest

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 07:25:49 +1200, RecylerMan <0.nz>
    wrote:

    >The Flash wrote:
    >> "Evil Bastard" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    >> news:pan.2003.08.21.00.55.30.807712@127.0.0.1...
    >>
    >>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:40:13 +1200, Robert Kramer wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?
    >>>
    >>>Your failure to answer any of the argument puts you in danger of
    >>>qualifying for the 'nutter' label yourself.
    >>>
    >>>Maybe I should simplify my argument with an analogy:
    >>>
    >>>The 'Microsport' - A new technology sports car hits the market. It's slick
    >>>and sleek, acceptably fast and much more comfortable than the
    >>>alternatives. It's such a hit that even when similarly comfortable cars
    >>>with even better technoligy hit the market, it takes them years to start
    >>>getting a foot-hold in the market, although the trucks made by this rival
    >>>sell much better.
    >>>
    >>>It gets more obvious that this car uses tyres which chew up the road, and
    >>>cause the road to need more frequent and expensive maintenance.
    >>>
    >>>In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car until
    >>>such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively, impose
    >>>a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.

    >>
    >>
    >> As the world knows money grows on taxpayers, thus you would tax everybody
    >> for this cost, you would give it a snazzy name like 'Auckland Roading
    >> Improvements and say it is temporary, after 12 months you would then make it
    >> permanent.
    >>
    >> Even if you choose to drive a car that repairs the road as you drive you
    >> would still pay this tax.
    >>
    >> Why do we not register every internet capable computer, and then make a
    >> computer users license, say at $50 per year, this fee would be split 50/50
    >> with the governt and the Isp. This would weed out those who are not capable
    >> of meeting their socail responsabilities in the digital age.
    >>

    >
    >A pollititon for shure put levvies or takes on everything (nanny state)
    >will look after everything just make the people pay pay pay. I have some
    >times up to 10 computers here at home 2 shitters another 2 not so shitty
    >not going un connected (dx4 100) 486's then two crappy pentium 133's a
    >dodgy 500MHZ machine (f--ked mother bord)90% operational one pentium 166
    >as a server and a 990Mhz machine as a work horce that to ma would meen
    >$50x10=$500.00 now most of these machines are put to uce for lurning
    >about networking and I quite often give some away as I see fit to people
    >who have a need grater than mine. I would become poorer than I alredy
    >am. How would you like a tax to pay for the problem of unpayed fines
    >seing as the lay brakers wont pay whay not make the law abiding people do.
    >


    Nice to see you are using recycled spelling .

    --

    Col

    Col's law.
    Thinly sliced cabbage..
    Col^, Aug 22, 2003
    #14
  15. Evil Bastard

    Bret Guest

    On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:25:26 +1200, Col^ <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 07:25:49 +1200, RecylerMan <0.nz>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>The Flash wrote:
    >>> "Evil Bastard" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    >>> news:pan.2003.08.21.00.55.30.807712@127.0.0.1...
    >>>
    >>>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:40:13 +1200, Robert Kramer wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?
    >>>>
    >>>>Your failure to answer any of the argument puts you in danger of
    >>>>qualifying for the 'nutter' label yourself.
    >>>>
    >>>>Maybe I should simplify my argument with an analogy:
    >>>>
    >>>>The 'Microsport' - A new technology sports car hits the market. It's slick
    >>>>and sleek, acceptably fast and much more comfortable than the
    >>>>alternatives. It's such a hit that even when similarly comfortable cars
    >>>>with even better technoligy hit the market, it takes them years to start
    >>>>getting a foot-hold in the market, although the trucks made by this rival
    >>>>sell much better.
    >>>>
    >>>>It gets more obvious that this car uses tyres which chew up the road, and
    >>>>cause the road to need more frequent and expensive maintenance.
    >>>>
    >>>>In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car until
    >>>>such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively, impose
    >>>>a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> As the world knows money grows on taxpayers, thus you would tax everybody
    >>> for this cost, you would give it a snazzy name like 'Auckland Roading
    >>> Improvements and say it is temporary, after 12 months you would then make it
    >>> permanent.
    >>>
    >>> Even if you choose to drive a car that repairs the road as you drive you
    >>> would still pay this tax.
    >>>
    >>> Why do we not register every internet capable computer, and then make a
    >>> computer users license, say at $50 per year, this fee would be split 50/50
    >>> with the governt and the Isp. This would weed out those who are not capable
    >>> of meeting their socail responsabilities in the digital age.
    >>>

    >>
    >>A pollititon for shure put levvies or takes on everything (nanny state)
    >>will look after everything just make the people pay pay pay. I have some
    >>times up to 10 computers here at home 2 shitters another 2 not so shitty
    >>not going un connected (dx4 100) 486's then two crappy pentium 133's a
    >>dodgy 500MHZ machine (f--ked mother bord)90% operational one pentium 166
    >>as a server and a 990Mhz machine as a work horce that to ma would meen
    >>$50x10=$500.00 now most of these machines are put to uce for lurning
    >>about networking and I quite often give some away as I see fit to people
    >>who have a need grater than mine. I would become poorer than I alredy
    >>am. How would you like a tax to pay for the problem of unpayed fines
    >>seing as the lay brakers wont pay whay not make the law abiding people do.
    >>

    >
    >Nice to see you are using recycled spelling .


    I particularly like the idea of a need grater, does anyone know where
    these can be purchased.

    PS RecylerMan: I don't mind how you spell, I understand what you post.
    Bret, Aug 22, 2003
    #15
  16. Evil Bastard

    k y l e Guest

    "Bret" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 08:25:26 +1200, Col^ <> wrote:
    >
    > >On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 07:25:49 +1200, RecylerMan

    <0.nz>
    > >wrote:
    > >
    > >>The Flash wrote:
    > >>> "Evil Bastard" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    > >>> news:pan.2003.08.21.00.55.30.807712@127.0.0.1...
    > >>>
    > >>>>On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:40:13 +1200, Robert Kramer wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>Gee is this nerws group full of nutters..?
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Your failure to answer any of the argument puts you in danger of
    > >>>>qualifying for the 'nutter' label yourself.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Maybe I should simplify my argument with an analogy:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>The 'Microsport' - A new technology sports car hits the market. It's

    slick
    > >>>>and sleek, acceptably fast and much more comfortable than the
    > >>>>alternatives. It's such a hit that even when similarly comfortable

    cars
    > >>>>with even better technoligy hit the market, it takes them years to

    start
    > >>>>getting a foot-hold in the market, although the trucks made by this

    rival
    > >>>>sell much better.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>It gets more obvious that this car uses tyres which chew up the road,

    and
    > >>>>cause the road to need more frequent and expensive maintenance.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>In such a scenario, the roading authority would soon ban this car

    until
    > >>>>such time as it is shown not to damage the roads. Or alternatively,

    impose
    > >>>>a hefty toll on drivers of these cars.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> As the world knows money grows on taxpayers, thus you would tax

    everybody
    > >>> for this cost, you would give it a snazzy name like 'Auckland Roading
    > >>> Improvements and say it is temporary, after 12 months you would then

    make it
    > >>> permanent.
    > >>>
    > >>> Even if you choose to drive a car that repairs the road as you drive

    you
    > >>> would still pay this tax.
    > >>>
    > >>> Why do we not register every internet capable computer, and then make

    a
    > >>> computer users license, say at $50 per year, this fee would be split

    50/50
    > >>> with the governt and the Isp. This would weed out those who are not

    capable
    > >>> of meeting their socail responsabilities in the digital age.
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >>A pollititon for shure put levvies or takes on everything (nanny state)
    > >>will look after everything just make the people pay pay pay. I have some
    > >>times up to 10 computers here at home 2 shitters another 2 not so shitty
    > >>not going un connected (dx4 100) 486's then two crappy pentium 133's a
    > >>dodgy 500MHZ machine (f--ked mother bord)90% operational one pentium 166
    > >>as a server and a 990Mhz machine as a work horce that to ma would meen
    > >>$50x10=$500.00 now most of these machines are put to uce for lurning
    > >>about networking and I quite often give some away as I see fit to people
    > >>who have a need grater than mine. I would become poorer than I alredy
    > >>am. How would you like a tax to pay for the problem of unpayed fines
    > >>seing as the lay brakers wont pay whay not make the law abiding people

    do.
    > >>

    > >
    > >Nice to see you are using recycled spelling .

    >
    > I particularly like the idea of a need grater, does anyone know where
    > these can be purchased.
    >
    > PS RecylerMan: I don't mind how you spell, I understand what you post.


    My favourite phrase was the suggestiveness of 'lay brakers'
    k y l e, Aug 23, 2003
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BN

    VoIP proposal letter

    BN, Nov 10, 2003, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    5,119
  2. xyz

    How about this creative wedding proposal?

    xyz, Sep 1, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    440
  3. Gary Eickmeier

    A Proposal

    Gary Eickmeier, Feb 17, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    915
  4. Wizard

    Re: Vote on a new newsgroup proposal

    Wizard, Mar 21, 2005, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    376
    Wizard
    Mar 25, 2005
  5. James D. Murray
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    514
    Consultant
    Oct 7, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page