X-Message-Number: 17330
From: 
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 08:47:16 EDT
Subject: From : herarchy to hierarchy to hierchth

From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: anarchy/hierarchy:

>?Herarchy? is a non-word that sounds like it would go with ?himarchy?.
>Hierarchy.  Hierarchy.  Hierarchy.  Hierarchy.  (Not intended as an
>endorsement; I like the concept of anarchy, that is, as you put it,
>?organization without h[i]erarchy?.
>-- 
>May you live long and prosper,
>Kennita

Why not herearechi? (here are chi), the greek letter chi rendered often with 
X as in arXiv on the Los Alamos server would give hereareX or hierarX... 

Another fine solution to solve the y problem:
For foreigners, the first english contact bring this question: What a lot of 
"th", they put them everywhere! Why have they not made a single letter for it?
Well, "they" have with the thorn. In old times, it was rendered in printed 
form with "y"if I recall well. So ye y was ye y in print. I understand ye use 
of y for y is not common yese days, so no more hierarchy, I go to hierarchth! 
:-)

From: Wesley Eddy <>:
>Your insistence upon association of open-source and anarchy demonstrates
>significant lack of understanding in regards to both topics.  As someone
>who has contributed to several open source projects, I tell you that there
>is nothing even approaching remote resemblence to anarchy in the system.
>Please forgive me if I doubt the OSS credentials of someone who uses an AOL
>email address. 

My aol is not your aol: It is not aol-Time-Warner, it is 
aol-Cegetel-Vivendi-Universal.

> Your apparent mastery of the English language at no higher
>than a fifth-grade level doesn't particularly help your cause.

This is too much for me, I have problems adding one and one (no smiley here). 
About english, I don't even know some words you use, such: "resemblence" and 
"relevency". Not everyone can have an .edu e-mail ...

>Furthermore, as you have failed to even address my rebuttals to your claims 
>of anarchy in Linux development and Napster file-sharing, I assume you have
>concede defeat,

Oh! That was a game, I had not even figured it out.

>(...) and therefore consider this discussion to be closed, and
>will no longer participate in its debate on Cryonet, where its relevency is
>highly questionable.

Ok, I'll go back to the design of my next bomb: One foot in diameter and  10 
000 psi brusting pressure. If anyone has an idea to make it cheaply, please 
let me know, don't forget to send a copy to the CIA, DIA and NSA, you'll 
spare their time and the taxpayer money :-).

Yvan Bozzonetti
From France and AOL.

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17330