Just 4 fun!

[tim]

________________________________
move along nothing to see here folks!

[Pii]

Originally posted by harby

I enjoy philosophy

and the pursuite-of-knowlege wisdom

and even question the things i've learned.






religion taught me

? Interesting






sex is not a "dirty" thing

the experience.

overindulgence can lead to bad consequences

guns don't kill people...people kill people


But



guns do kill people

[Pii]

Originally posted by harby
i hope that you want leave in your hit=n-run fashion of posting, piquing curiosity and leaving without explanation...if u do..i will sigh Hope is something to cherish

Truth and reality are to behold.

Accept the small things with the same gratitude as you would a million gifts.







Many things can't be explained...


they just are.

[Pii]

Originally posted by harby
Agh!
people using guns kill people.

By ELAINE PORTERFIELD AND HECTOR CASTRO
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS

SPANAWAY -- A 14-year-old boy died yesterday after he was accidentally shot in the head Tuesday at the home of a friend where authorities said live ammunition and firearms were easily found

Two of the boys picked up a .22-caliber, semiautomatic rifle that was lying around and began playing with it. It apparently fired, and a bullet hit the other one in the head


were the kids USING the gun?

[eclectica]

Originally posted by harby
anyways I was visiting the place that helped catylise dionysians...p2p-zone and read in the Peer2Peer forum a post by hgreen. I replied to her via her email at businessweek.com. lol i am awaiting eclectica's thoughts on the action..whether he thinks it wise or not to talk to this person...i've done nothing so far to incriminate myself in any legal matters.
It's okay to talk to her. In June someone from USA Today asked me a couple of questions (http://3-3-3.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69) and I answered all of them. But they used just a small extract for their article. Don't expect them to use much for their article. You may be eager to make a name for yourself or be heard, but make sure that what you write is bullet proof, and does not make p2p look bad. What concerns me about the public canvassing of people, is what type of spin they will actually put on the article. Are they going to say that we are engaged in freedom and sharing or are they going to say we are engaged in stealing?

This reporter Heather Green had asked for submissions from the public prior to the request (http://www.p2p-zone.com/underground/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18257) made in P2P-Zone. They created a special section for her in September here (http://www.p2pforums.com/viewforum.php?f=35) at P2P Forums. At that time her specifications were clear: she wanted replies from people aged no older than around 30, so I wasn't able to answer them. They had an automatic pruning set up for that forum, and everything got lost, so recently she resubmitted the questions.

I prefer the layout of everyone answering their questions on the forum rather than by way of PMs and e-mails. That way you can see what everyone else is saying, and refute what you don't believe in. Having all that content locked up in PMs and e-mails is a waste.

I would expect Business Week to approach the issue from business perspective. They probably believe that pay-for-play is a legitimate alternative to peer-to-peer. Read this:
http://www.timzilla.net/archives/000104.html