At 04:04 PM 4/18/03 -0600, Kestrel wrote:

>> >> Yahoo ACTIVELY participates.
>> >
>> >does it, really? I should hate to fall into a false contusionoid.....
>>
>> Last year?  Year before?  They sent out a message to anyone who was
>> registered in a Yahoo group or other site (...)
>
>yeah -- you're right. And because they changed the policy, all those who'd
>indicated they didn't want that sort of thing started getting it -- UNLESS
>they followed this *tiny*, hard to see, un-important looking link to a page
>that would allow you to opt out of the things you'd already told them (under
>the old policy) you didn't want to be a part of. They were also tracking ppl
>who visited the Yahoo site and installing some rather intrusive cookies --
>more intrusive than the usual intrusive cookies.

And to go tell them from that *tiny*, hard to see, un-important link, you
had to have your password and I had forgotten mine, so I just said to hell
with it, and I'm sure this is why I'm getting so much blankety-blank
expletive deleted sailors' language spam.  Yahoo can go to hell.

>> that come from not having that much time left?   I dunno.  I'm getting to
>> the point where I'd be happy to spend my remaining time tracking down and
>> rubbing out spammers.
>
>
>Need any donations to the cause? :)

Heeheehee.

>> No, it's because people got lazy and stopped teaching their children about
>> responsibility and about having to deal with the consequences of their own
>> actions.
>
>well, at least when it comes to the wild creatures, "the consequence of
>going outside is being eaten" just doesn't seem quite fair -- though there
>are those members of the human species I wouldn't mind feeding to the bears
>and wolves :) 

Where do you think mankind learned about the consequences of one's actions
in the first place?  Modern living has put that out of mind, unfortunately,
but it still holds true.

>Actually, some of them are the ones who build their houses in
>cougar country and then complain and start demanding the cougars be killed
>because their chihuahua gets eaten in one drooly chomp. And then there are
>those who live in the woods and get pissed when the deer eat their
>ornamental plants so they start shooting and poisoning the deer. 

Um, well, I am guilty of COMPLAINING about the deer eating my ornamentals.
Actually, it was my vegetable garden they ate.  And a lot of ornamentals,
too.  So I don't vegetable garden any more -- or won't, until there is
space cleared out enough so that I can do it indoors via hydroponics, but
that won't be until Elizabeth moves out, and at the rate things are going
that'll be another 10 years.    And I have been slowly learning what
plants the deer won't eat, and that's what I'm planting.  There's PLENTY of
wiregrass (one of their staple foods in these parts) both in the woods and
still in my yard.  They can eat all of that they want.

But I never shot or poisoned a deer.  I don't mind cheering on the hunters
during hunting season, though -- these old boys around here do eat what
they shoot, and judging from their living conditions, they truly need the
dietary supplementation, most of them.

>Or complain
>about "the bear problem" because bears are getting into their
trash... so
>some ranger comes out and shoots the "problem bear" when
frankly I'm more in
>favor of shooting (or re-locating) the problem human who can't be bothered
>to be responsible about the area they're moving into.

Why doesn't the ranger teach the problem human how to handle their trash so
the bear doesn't get into it?

Just asking . . .

>but I sense I rant so I shall stop here :)

Must be something in the air.

Heeheehee.

Veloci--spleen vents inserted while-u-wait--raptor
 

--- Rachel's Little NET2FIDO Gate v 0.9.9.8 Alpha