[29317] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 561 Volume: 11
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sat Jun 23 00:14:47 2007
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:14:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Fri, 22 Jun 2007 Volume: 11 Number: 561
Today's topics:
MI5 Persecution: Grievous Bodily Harm 2/10/95 (2075) MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
MI5 Persecution: Jeff Rooker MP 5/3/96 (9645) MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
MI5 Persecution: Leant On 7/4/96 (14187) MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
MI5 Persecution: Shoot to Kill 4/4/96 (12673) MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
MI5 Persecution: Stasi 21/4/96 (15701) MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Re: Perl Best Practices - Code Formatting. <stoupa@practisoft.cz>
Re: The Modernization of Emacs <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 2007 01:50:30 GMT
From: MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Grievous Bodily Harm 2/10/95 (2075)
Message-Id: <m07052301502224@4ax.com>
From: jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk (James Eibisch)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.politics,uk.media,rec.arts.tv.uk.misc
Subject: Re: Auntie gets it in the emails
Reply-To: jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk
Date: Mon Oct 2 19:44:19 1995
lig0007@queens-belfast.ac.uk (TOM OATES) wrote:
>However, I'm pleased to say that, in the past couple of days, Mike Corley has
>stopped doing it and he appears (I say this cautiously) to be acting more
>reasonably. True, his postings are still based on paranoid delusions.
>However, so long as he doesn't go back to his old practices of multiple,
>identical, unreadable postings, I'm sure that most people on this newsgroup
>are willing to put up with him.
Time to come out of the woodwork of this thread (or variations
thereof)...
I find it annoying that discussion of Mike's situation is spread over
multiple threads - it makes it hard to follow, and especially to follow
up. If it could be consolidated into one thread on relevant newsgroups
(I'm reading this on uk.media btw).
I'm a little surprised with the volume of abuse Mike has received, but
believe strongly in freedom of speech if such a thing were to exist,
which clearly includes abuse as much as anything.
One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple
prognosis: that maybe Mike is right and that, despite his admitted
mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by
now-influential ex-students of his university.
Does anyone remember the TV series GBH, a fictional account of security
service and governmental power games? Fictional, certainly, but one of
the most powerful pieces of TV drama I've seen in many years,
fascinating and quite believable, even.
The fact is, as Mike has pointed out (oh, so many times :-), that the
security services _do_ have the influence, contacts, resources, and time
to conduct such a campaign of surveillance and even psychological terror
if they so chose. If they have this power, then they will surely use it
We still don't have all the facts from Mike, and the most pertinent here
I think would be about his time at university - the people who took
against him, the ringleaders. We need to know far more about Mike: his
political and social affiliations, put in context with his univeristy
years, the enemies he made, the reasons people ganged up on him at the
very early stages.
I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories generally, but I know there is
far more that goes on in the universities, old boy's clubs, civil and
secret services and Parliament than is ever made public.
Mike, I leave it to you to construct a _single_ thread in a relevant
newsgroup about this topic and keep to this thread to give us new
information and answer questions about your situation. Ignore the 'Mike
Corley is a nutter' posts unless they are relevant.
Give us more detail. Who knows? It may be true, stranger things have
happened.
_
James Eibisch ('v') N : E : T : A : D : E : L : I : C : A
Reading, U.K. (,_,) http://metro.turnpike.net/J/jeibisch/
=======
-------------------------------
Tue, 03 Oct 1995 04:01:34 uk.misc Thread 3 of 14
Lines 58 Re: Auntie gets it in the emails Respno 16 of 16
J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk John J Smith at Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd
In article <812677261.12841@revolver.demon.co.uk>,
James Eibisch <jeibisch@revolver.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>lig0007@queens-belfast.ac.uk (TOM OATES) wrote:
>One thing which has been missing from this discussion is this simple
>prognosis: that maybe Mike is right and that, despite his admitted
>mental condition, there really is a campaign against him organised by
>now-influential ex-students of his university.
We're trying to find this out on uk.misc. He's posted some *new* *huge*
replies (which I'd have to give up my day job to reply to), detailing
some things like:
a) Mike Corley is *not* his real name
b) Exactly what the "abuse" is (it seems be such things, as taking
completely unrelated newspaper articles, striving to make them a
disgusting insult, then redirecting against himself).
c) How he came to the conclusion.
I think he's doing rather better nowadays..
>Does anyone remember the TV series GBH, a fictional account of security
>service and governmental power games? Fictional, certainly, but one of
>the most powerful pieces of TV drama I've seen in many years,
>fascinating and quite believable, even.
This would be a point, apart from the fact that this was directed against
someone of political importance. I don't believe Mike is...
>The fact is, as Mike has pointed out (oh, so many times :-), that the
>security services _do_ have the influence, contacts, resources, and time
>to conduct such a campaign of surveillance and even psychological terror
>if they so chose. If they have this power, then they will surely use it
>at some point against some people.
It appears he has formed the Security Service conclusion, because they
are the only ones capable of doing it. A "searching for an enemy capable
of it".
>We still don't have all the facts from Mike, and the most pertinent here
>I think would be about his time at university - the people who took
>against him, the ringleaders. We need to know far more about Mike: his
>political and social affiliations, put in context with his univeristy
>years, the enemies he made, the reasons people ganged up on him at the
>very early stages.
I'm beginning to think that we never will get all the facts from Mike. We
may, however, get enough...
>Mike, I leave it to you to construct a _single_ thread in a relevant
>newsgroup about this topic and keep to this thread to give us new
>information and answer questions about your situation. Ignore the 'Mike
>Corley is a nutter' posts unless they are relevant.
Uk.misc, me boy...
Smid
==========================================================
From: flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk (Peter Kr|ger)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,soc.culture.british,uk.media,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: What it's like to be watched by the security services
Date: Tue Oct 3 15:41:54 1995
In article <44rrrh$t6v@news.ox.ac.uk>, idaniel@jesus.ox.ac.uk (Illtud Daniel) says:
>
>And what do you mean when you state that the symptoms are too
>'textbook'? Are the textbooks wrong?
I think what is meant by 'textbook' is that some of the symptoms
of 'illness' displayed in the posts seem to have been lifted from
textbooks describing mental instability and personality disorders.
I must admit I haven't seen Mike's postings before has he only just
started posting again?
Peter Kruger
------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gold.net/flames/
flames@flames.cityscape.co.uk
2075
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 2007 02:51:02 GMT
From: MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Jeff Rooker MP 5/3/96 (9645)
Message-Id: <m07052302505472@4ax.com>
From: rael@midnight.org (Rael A. Fenchurch)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british
Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K.
Date: Tue Mar 5 04:37:52 1996
Mike,
>"go away" replies, and one from a Labour MP saying he was aware of my situation
>but wouldn't help me because he regarded me as the "bad guy". Gee thanks, they
>do this and then offload the shame they should feel onto you by telling you "oh
>but it's your fault". It's a mad world.
Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned
copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment,
you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the
main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So?
Rael...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Rael A. Fenchurch (rael@midnight.org, http://www.midnight.org/rael/) ---
--- "I don't think compassion's the language of our time" ---
--- "Doubt or Die" ---
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
==========================================================================
From: Andy Howard <andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british
Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K.
Reply-To: andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk
Date: Tue Mar 5 06:06:15 1996
In article: <DnrMsq.239.0.bloor@torfree.net> bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wr
I got a few
> "go away" replies, and one from a Labour MP saying he was aware of my situatio
> but wouldn't help me because he regarded me as the "bad guy".
Which Labour MP Mike?
>
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Andy Howard EMail andy@kiss100.demon.co.uk |
| My opinions, not my employer's (Jolly nice people though they are). |
| If my employers shared my opinions... Well, frankly I'd be amazed |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
====================================================================
Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K.
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.br$
Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.b$
References: <DnFtLs.E37.0.bloor@torfree.net> <4h45nq$87o_002@leeds.ac.uk> <4h6gkb$ivc$
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Distribution:
Mike Corley (bu765@torfree.net) wrote:
: >Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned
: >copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment,
: >you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the
: >main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So?
: The letter was by email, not on paper. (In addition to snail-mailing, I
: emailed all the relevant addresses I could find.) I'll see if I can find
: it, I keep a record of most of this correspondence so I may still have it.
I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the correspondence. In future I will keep
useful letters, so with luck there may be a "next time".
The MP was Jeff Rooker, Labour MP. Having looked again at the Labour web page I
find he doesn't have an address listed, but I have a record of his address as
having been jeff.rooker@geo2.poptel.org.uk. I don't know where I got the
address from. I'm so disorganised!
====================================================================
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,alt.politics.british
From: J.J.Smith@ftel.co.uk (John J Smith)
Subject: Re: Persecution in the U.K.
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: death-on-the-rock.ftel.co.uk
Message-ID: <Dnw49L.D1H@ftel.co.uk>
Sender: smid@death-on-the-rock.ftel.co.uk (RFC931)
Organization: Fujitsu Telecommunications Europe Ltd
References: <DnFtLs.E37.0.bloor@torfree.net> <DnrMsq.239.0.bloor@torfree.net> <Dnsrnu.Jr1.0.bloor@torfree.net> <DntKEo.86E.0.bloor@torfree.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 09:12:56 GMT
Lines: 54
In article <DntKEo.86E.0.bloor@torfree.net>,
Mike Corley <bu765@torfree.net> wrote:
>Mike Corley (bu765@torfree.net) wrote:
>: >Do you happen to have a copy of this MPs letter? After all, a scanned
>: >copy of it would lend great weight to your case here. At the moment,
>: >you've offered us nothing in the way of evidence, which is one of the
>: >main reasons we all think you've truly gone fishing. So?
>
>: The letter was by email, not on paper. (In addition to snail-mailing, I
>: emailed all the relevant addresses I could find.) I'll see if I can find
>: it, I keep a record of most of this correspondence so I may still have it.
>
>I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the correspondence. In future I will keep
>useful letters, so with luck there may be a "next time".
Don't believe you. Because that might be proof, and we just *cant* have that.
>The MP was Jeff Rooker, Labour MP. Having looked again at the Labour web page I
>find he doesn't have an address listed, but I have a record of his address as
>having been jeff.rooker@geo2.poptel.org.uk. I don't know where I got the
>address from. I'm so disorganised!
I did Email this MP yesterday. This is what I wrote:
Smid>I am sorry to bother you, but there is a person with a known
Smid>personality disorder on the internet usenet, claiming that you
Smid>as an MP have backed up his claims that he is being persecuted
Smid>by MI5.
Smid>His name is Mike Corely, and posts from canada (email address
Smid>available if you require).
Smid>
Smid>He claims that you have told him that his claims that the
Smid>"television is watching him", are justified, yet cannot find the
Smid>email in which he did so..
Smid>I'd be interested in what you have said to him, because we have
Smid>had a long term battle to convince him that he really is schizophrenic
Smid>and that Chris Tarrent, MI5 and Martin Lewis from News On Ten are
Smid>persecuting him... If you do have the original Email, then that'd
Smid>be nice...
Smid>If you nothing of this subject, it would not suprise me, however.
His reply, surpise, suprise was:
MP>No idea what you are on about. I am getting really sick of some of
MP>the junk on E mail. I just dump it so he may have contacted
MP>but as to an answer I 've better things to do.
Your move, Mike.
Smid
9645
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 2007 03:29:13 GMT
From: MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Leant On 7/4/96 (14187)
Message-Id: <m07052303290571@4ax.com>
From: Green <Green@guidion.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their Job?
Reply-To: Green@guidion.demon.co.uk
Date: Sun Apr 7 21:13:30 1996
In article <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net>
bu765@torfree.net "Mike Corley" writes:
> Last Easter (1995) I went into the local police station in London and spoke to
> an officer about the harassment against me. But I couldn't provide tangible
> evidence; what people said, in many cases years ago, is beyond proof, and
> without something to support my statements I cannot expect a police officer to
> take the complaint seriously.
This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you.
The old bill operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on
them by that pillock Michael Howard, and without evidence, they
often have higher priorities than chasing something that cannot go
to court.
I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably
realise that if they looked into this, they would be leant on hard.
The met always stays away from anything that looks like it has Defence,
Security or secret service interest already, because they realise that
they are below these government agencies in the general pecking order.
This attitude was made clear in a TV show where a left wing comedian
heckled some aristocratic Tory candidate in a local election. The
police officer gave the comic a ticking off, even though you could see
that this young copper sympathised with the comedian, and regarded
the Tory as an upper-crust wanker. He said, and I quote "I'm giving you
the ticking off and not him because he's a Lord and I'm a Police Constable."
If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me,
they would show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because
that bored desk seargant with only five years to go before he retires
doesn't want to start fucking about with somebody who has incurred the
wrath of Stella Rimington. He would rather deal with the lost dogs and
driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss
off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having
a go at his boss and getting him a bollocking.
In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember
that saying about the enemy of your enemies.
Have a nice day.
******************************************* QUOTE OF THE DAY******************
* You have just read the opinons of : * "Common sense is merely the set *
* * of prejudices a person acquires*
=========================================================================
Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: Why Aren't the British Police Doing Their Job?
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
References: <DpIE0r.736.0.bloor@torfree.net>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Distribution:
>This in itself dos not suggest that the police have it in for you.
>The old bill operates on extremely tight spending limits forced on
>them by that pillock Michael Howard, and without evidence, they
>often have higher priorities than chasing something that cannot go
>to court.
I think the police know well what's going on. It is up to them to do
something about it. They know I've made a complaint at a police station.
I could probably do more to try to help myself (I think someone suggested
making a written complaint to the chief constable) but even then I nthink
they would not take action.
>
>I doubt that the police are actually being leant on, but they probably
>realise that if they looked into this, they would be leant on hard.
>The met always stays away from anything that looks like it has Defence,
>Security or secret service interest already, because they realise that
>they are below these government agencies in the general pecking order.
>
So we have a situation where the security service breaks the law,
everyone knows MI5 breaks the law, and the police won't investigate
crimes that would otherwise earn a jail sentence.
Oh good, I'm really glad the UK is a democracy. (<sarcasm>, for those of
you who didn't catch that)
>If I walked into my local nick and complained that MI5 were snooping on me,
>they would show me the door without even looking at my evidence, because
>that bored desk seargant with only five years to go before he retires
>doesn't want to start fucking about with somebody who has incurred the
>wrath of Stella Rimington. He would rather deal with the lost dogs and
>driving licence producers, eat his cheese and pickle sandwiches and piss
>off home at the end of his shift than have some high ranking spook having
>a go at his boss and getting him a bollocking.
In this case I think it is 'high-ranking' police officers who are aware
of the persecution, they know a complaint has been made, and they're
doing nothing. What is more, I don't think there is anything I can do
that would make them take action, both because they may be being 'leant
on' and through the wider view that it could be deleterious to the state
to have a persecution by state organs exposed.
They're wrong in taking that point of view, because sooner or later this
will all out anyway, and they it will be n years of police inaction
(n>=6) that will be questioned.
>
>In short, you have earned much sympathy but little surprise. Just remember
>that saying about the enemy of your enemies.
>
>Have a nice day.
14187
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 2007 03:17:02 GMT
From: MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Shoot to Kill 4/4/96 (12673)
Message-Id: <m07052303165440@4ax.com>
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
From: jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker)
Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: How and Why Did it Start?
Reply-To: jbaker@pobox.com
Date: Thu Apr 4 05:03:01 1996
jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker) wrote:
>bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wrote:
>>Why would
>>the security services expend hundreds of thousands of pounds and more than fiv
>>years of manpower to try to kill a British citizen? Because ...
>So why didn't they just shoot you dead?
>It would have been a lot cheaper.
Please make the effort to respond to this point Mike.
It was a serious question.
Jill (my opinions are entirely my own, no-one else's)
=================================================================
Subject: Re: MI5 Persecution: How and Why Did it Start?
Newsgroups: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
Followup-To: uk.misc,uk.politics,alt.politics.british,soc.culture.british
References: <Dp5IAr.1EB.0.bloor@torfree.net>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Distribution:
jbaker@pobox.com (Jill Baker) wrote:
>bu765@torfree.net (Mike Corley) wrote:
>>Why would
>>the security services expend hundreds of thousands of pounds and more
than fiv
>>years of manpower to try to kill a British citizen? Because ...
>So why didn't they just shoot you dead?
>It would have been a lot cheaper.
I think there are two reasons nobody has taken physical action as opposed
to verbal;
a) A lot of people "know". Perhaps you the reader might not know, but
lots of people in the media etc do. Remember, I was born in the UK and
lived there until a couple of years ago. I don't think these people would
condone state-sponsored murder of someone who might be seen on a good day
as one of their own.
b) Rather than doind anything directly, they're going for spying, verbal
harassment, media harassment, every form of persecution short of the
physical. Because as soon as anything turns physical, the police become
involved; and unless it turns physical, the police can shrug and say 'not
our problem'.
So they persecute you and try to get you to react, either by hitting one
of them (in which case I clearly find myself in the wrong as far as the
police are concerned), or by trying to harm myself (in which case they
can pretend they weren't responsible).
It's a pretty unproductive form of harassment actually, because if you
don't react then they're wasting they're time. Or perhaps they're just
cheap bullies and trying to wreck someone's life, without any ulterior
motive?
12673
------------------------------
Date: 23 Jun 2007 03:42:51 GMT
From: MI5Victim@mi5.gov.uk
Subject: MI5 Persecution: Stasi 21/4/96 (15701)
Message-Id: <m07052303424363@4ax.com>
Subject: Chief Constable Alderson Condemns "Stasi" MI5
Newsgroups:uk.misc,uk.politics,uk.media,uk.legal,soc.culture.british
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
Summary:
Keywords:
John Alderson, former Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, had the
following to say about the expansion of the Security Service's powers, in
a recent magazine article;
"It is fatal to let the secret service into the area of ordinary crime.
MI5 is not under the same restraints as the police. They infiltrate
organisations, people's jobs and lives. They operate almost like a cancer."
"At the moment the acorn of a Stasi [the former East German communists'
secret service] has been planted. It is there for future governments to
build on."
The message is clear. Criminal subversion and criminal harassment by an
unpoliced minority not subject to the law, "infiltration of people's jobs
and lives" is with us today.
15701
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 05:43:52 +0200
From: "Petr Vileta" <stoupa@practisoft.cz>
Subject: Re: Perl Best Practices - Code Formatting.
Message-Id: <f5i55m$22ot$1@ns.felk.cvut.cz>
Wayne M. Poe wrote:
> Err, it's the difference of a single \n vs a single space just before
> the opening curly brase... how can that possibly be enough of a
> difference to change if it's "human readable" or not?
>
> It's just " {\n" vs "\n{\n" - esstentially the differce of ONE
> character. ONE. So what is really the big deal?
>
I don't want to start flamewar but what is nicer for eyes?
if($something {
if($other {
do_something;
}
else {
do_some_other;
}
else {
do_some_different;
}
OR
if($something
{
if($other
{
do_something;
}
else
{
do_some_other;
}
else
{
do_some_different;
}
Yes, I know ;-) For the second formating style I must to have a big monitor
and high resolution but at the first glance I see what the script do.
--
Petr Vileta, Czech republic
(My server rejects all messages from Yahoo and Hotmail. Send me your mail
from another non-spammer site please.)
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 03:17:19 +0100
From: David Golden <david.golden@oceanfree.net>
Subject: Re: The Modernization of Emacs
Message-Id: <Wo%ei.20487$j7.377881@news.indigo.ie>
Twisted wrote:
> If I sit down at a windows text editor (or
> even kwrite or similar) I can just focus on the job. Faced with emacs
> or most other text-mode editors (but not MS-DOS Edit, interestingly)
> the editor keeps intruding on my focus. Oops.
>
"emacs or most other text-mode editors" sounds very much like you
believe emacs works in a pure text mode too? It can, of course, and
that's a good thing, but that's certainly not how I usually use it -
it has a GUI, you know.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V11 Issue 561
**************************************
