EXTREME D&D

Cubo Lemrick wrote:
> WILL SEND TRANSCRIPS IF NEEDED.

Yes, can you send the blow-by-blow?
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

In article <6789cf61-35da-47e6-b70d-13d5da10f690 DeleteThis @u72g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
shawn <shawn.roske DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 24, 1:12 am, Tetsubo <tets... DeleteThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>> Jasin Zujovic wrote:
>> > Werebat wrote:
>> > Have you tried Thunderbird? I haven't had any complaints since I
>> > switched from Gravity.
>>
>> Is there any reason you aren't using Netscape? I'm (sadly) running a
>> Vista system and I am still using Netscape 7.2 for email and newsgroups.
>
>While I've never posted regularly on here, I do keep tabs on what's
>goin' on. I've given up on bothering with newsreaders now, and I just
>google groups. Sad, I know. I miss tin.

Been using trn from the command line since the late 80's.
Don't plan to change anytime soon.

--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am."
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

Malachias Invictus <invictusebay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspObvious.TakeThisOut@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote in message
> news:47C0625A.2070003@sgeObviousinc.com...
>> Werebat wrote:
>>>
>>> Three little sons, ages 7, 2, and 8 months. 'Nuff said!
>>
>> Excuses excuses, Ron. I have an 11 year old, a 6 year old, and a 3 year
>> old.
>
> Ten, nine, and three here. All boys.

I'm pretty sure that's about the easiest you can have it, with three
kids.


Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies.TakeThisOut@gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

In article <47C1B02F.2080200.DeleteThis@sgeObviousinc.com>,
Sea Wasp <seawaspObvious.DeleteThis@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote:
>Werebat wrote:
>> Sea Wasp <seawaspObvious.DeleteThis@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote in
>> news:47C0625A.2070003@sgeObviousinc.com:
>>> Yeah, yeah, Death of Usenet Predicted, Film at 11. You don't
>>> really
>>>believe THAT old story, do you?
>>
>>
>> I can see the number of posts per day now as opposed to then.
>
> Depends on the group. There isn't a significant decline that I can
>see over all the groups I frequent.

I see less cycling of posters than there used to be. Usenet
seems to have pretty much settled down to a core group of
people who have been reading and posting for years. I
sometimes go away from these newsgroups for years at a time,
come back and find the same people here...

I'm not saying nobody new ever comes along, but the number
seems to be vanishingly small compared to the old days.
Remember the annual September flood from psuvm?

--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am."
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

Hong Ooi wrote:
> Werebat wrote:
>> I was just reading some articles about the decline of the Usenet
>> community last night, got a little sad, and decided to swing by here
>> for a bit.
>
> Heh, I actually got an email out of the blue from a fellow Kibologist
> just last week, who was checking up on long-lost posters. Hadn't been to
> ark for years. While Usenet may not be dead, it does seem that its 15
> minutes of fame has passed.

BTW, Varl was just saying to me that you should post on Dragonsfoot....
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

Del Rio wrote:

> I see less cycling of posters than there used to be. Usenet
> seems to have pretty much settled down to a core group of
> people who have been reading and posting for years.

That does guarantee an eventual end. By 2060, almost all of you will be
dead.
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

In article <fptr02$bam$1@aioe.org>, Chris <seahen123.TakeThisOut@gmail.invalid>
wrote:

> Del Rio wrote:
>
> > I see less cycling of posters than there used to be. Usenet
> > seems to have pretty much settled down to a core group of
> > people who have been reading and posting for years.
>
> That does guarantee an eventual end. By 2060, almost all of you will be
> dead.

The next 50 years of medical advances gives us a pretty decent shot at
beating that number.

- Allen
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

Tetsubo wrote:
>
> Is there any reason you aren't using Netscape? I'm (sadly)
> running a Vista system and I am still using Netscape 7.2
> for email and newsgroups.

I'll see your Netscape and raise you (lower you?) to version 4.74 that I
still use for e-mail and newsgroups.


- Sheldon
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:04:53 GMT, Keith Davies
<keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> wrote:

>Malachias Invictus <invictusebay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Sea Wasp" <seawaspObvious.TakeThisOut@sgeObviousinc.com> wrote in message
>> news:47C0625A.2070003@sgeObviousinc.com...
>>> Werebat wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Three little sons, ages 7, 2, and 8 months. 'Nuff said!
>>>
>>> Excuses excuses, Ron. I have an 11 year old, a 6 year old, and a 3 year
>>> old.
>>
>> Ten, nine, and three here. All boys.
>
>I'm pretty sure that's about the easiest you can have it, with three
>kids.


Oh, you youngsters, just you wait until they are teenagers: mine are
16, 14, 12, 11. Oy vey!

BP
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

BP wrote:

> Oh, you youngsters, just you wait until they are teenagers: mine are
> 16, 14, 12, 11. Oy vey!

Is this a point-buy system, or did you roll well?

Um...
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

Chris wrote:

> Del Rio wrote:
>
>> I see less cycling of posters than there used to be. Usenet seems to
>> have pretty much settled down to a core group of people who have been
>> reading and posting for years.
>
> That does guarantee an eventual end. By 2060, almost all of you will be
> dead.

Rubbish. That only puts me at 85, and I'm far from the youngest here.
Life expectancy's already over 80, and from my age I'm better than half a
chance of seeing 2060 and DnD 3rd edition (they won't be using real
edition numbers in the future either). All assuming a lack of
catastrophy, knock wood, watch diet.

2080, OTOH, not so much. Death is an evolutionary imperative.

--
tussock

I'm like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gunna get.
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D 

On Mar 1, 8:20 pm, tussock <sc....DeleteThis@clear.net.nz> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> > Del Rio wrote:
>
> >> I see less cycling of posters than there used to be. Usenet seems to
> >> have pretty much settled down to a core group of people who have been
> >> reading and posting for years.
>
> > That does guarantee an eventual end. By 2060, almost all of you will be
> > dead.
>
> Rubbish. That only puts me at 85, and I'm far from the youngest here.
> Life expectancy's already over 80, and from my age I'm better than half a
> chance of seeing 2060 and DnD 3rd edition (they won't be using real
> edition numbers in the future either). All assuming a lack of
> catastrophy, knock wood, watch diet.
>

91 for me. I'm not that healthy, so I doubt I'll make it that far.
I'll probably be lucky to make it to 70.

> 2080, OTOH, not so much. Death is an evolutionary imperative.

They should have life expectancy up to 100 by then though, you could
still be around.

- Justisaur
 >> Stay informed about: EXTREME D&D