are you here for a reason
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
 
 Advanced search
MATCHING GROUPS



more...
POPULAR GROUPS

more...
found 13101 articles for 3.882 sec
On Jun 7, 11:47 pm, "Daniel W. Rouse Jr." <dwrous...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote: > "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:huj3kl$qvt$1@news.eternal-september.org... > > > > > On 2010-06-07, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. <dwrous...@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote: > > >> "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > >>>> Wrong, simply wrong, absolutely wrong     

Group: rec.autos.driving · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in rec.autos.driving
Author: Larry G
Date: Jun 8, 2010 03:29

On Jun 7, 8:53 pm, Marina <marina.samue...@gmail.com> wrote: I think logically it makes sense that soccer ball B would be unreasonable since it is the same price as A but heavier.  HOWEVER the question says a ball is unreasonable if there is another ball that is cheaper AND lighter.  In this case A is lighter than B but it is NOT cheaper. So B would be considered reasonable. This
Show full article (5.98Kb) · Show article thread
On 6/8/2010 12:54 AM, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote: > > "Brent" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:hukgsa$dke$1@news.eternal-september.org... >> A new twist on control freakism hiding behind the vehicle code. The >> speed limit is 55mph on the interstate I typically drive, your 70mph is >> not in any way morally superior than the other guy's 90mph. Actually >> that's     

Group: uw.cs.cs240 · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in uw.cs.cs240
Author: Coltin
Date: Jun 7, 2010 23:12

On 2010-06-08, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. <dwrousejr@nethere.comNOSPAM> wrote: And if not, so what? As soon as the passing is done, one can move to a lane to the right, but at the same time, if they traffic catches up before the passing is completed it is *they* who are too fast for traffic conditions. So what? Let's say I take the lane with my bicycle because there's another bicyclist in
Show full article (1.91Kb) · Show article thread
On 6/7/2010 11:35 PM, Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote: > "Scott in SoCal" <scottenaztlan@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:lsvp069sj6v6grlqhep1tcv01mq9v7dol1@4ax.com... >> Example: you are going 70 MPH in the left lane. If I gun it up to 80, >> merge in front of you, complete my pass, and return to the right lane, >> all without affecting you, that is not MFFY. > You gun it up to 80 and merge     

Group: rec.autos.driving · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in rec.autos.driving
Author: Arif Khokar
Date: Jun 7, 2010 22:20

I think logically it makes sense that soccer ball B would be unreasonable since it is the same price as A but heavier. HOWEVER the question says a ball is unreasonable if there is another ball that is cheaper AND lighter. In this case A is lighter than B but it is NOT cheaper. So B would be considered reasonable. This contradiction is a bit confusing. Is it ok to simply use either method
Show full article (1.98Kb) · Show article thread
On Jun 7, 1:04 pm, gpsman <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 7, 10:22 am, Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > there is faster traffic already in the lane which catches up to them > > before they complete their pass. > > Oh.  So they should alter their course and/or speed and relinquish > their ROW...? That's right butterbean. Instead of forcing the driver who was     

Group: rec.autos.driving · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in rec.autos.driving
Author: Brent
Date: Jun 7, 2010 21:27

To: dwhelan@forbes.com, carol@drcarolgoodheart.com, lPickering@cdc.gov, Durland.fish@yale.edu, Aag1@columbia.edu, gary_wormser@nymc.edu, scientificintegrity@ostp.gov, pkrugman@princeton.edu, Stanley.fish@fiu.edu, emcsweegan@niaid.nih.gov, afauci@niaid.nih.gov, SpinLyme@yahoogroups.com, kshepard@calea.org, fitzmas@gmail.com, patrick.fitzgerald@usdoj.gov, modelt1918@sbcglobal.net, jdrazen@nejm
Show full article (3.52Kb) · Show article thread
To: dwhelan@forbes.com, carol@drcarolgoodheart.com, lPickering@cdc.gov, Durland.fish@yale.edu, Aag1@columbia.edu, gary_wormser@nymc.edu, scientificintegrity@ostp.gov, pkrugman@princeton.edu, Stanley.fish@fiu.edu, emcsweegan@niaid.nih.gov, afauci@niaid.nih.gov, SpinLyme@yahoogroups.com, kshepard@calea.org, fitzmas@gmail.com, patrick.fitzgerald@usdoj.gov, modelt1918@sbcglobal.net, jdrazen@nejm     

Group: rec.autos.driving · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in rec.autos.driving
Author: Arif Khokar
Date: Jun 7, 2010 20:49

There is no other rationale explanation for the 9/11 attack on USA but for US support for Isreali atrocities. Blaming it on Alqaedah is just nonsense. Blaming tha Alqaedah is against US freedom or general freedom is just nonsense and these people must be mad. The people who kill themselves in 9/11 are not Alqaedah. Alqaedah simply connect these people together in order to punish US for supporting
Show full article (1.38Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: uw.cs.cs240 · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in uw.cs.cs240
Author: Marina
Date: Jun 7, 2010 17:53

Show full article (1.30Kb)
    

Group: rec.autos.driving · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in rec.autos.driving
Author: kilton9
Date: Jun 7, 2010 15:07

Show full article (0.74Kb)
    

Group: alt.support.childprotectiveservices · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in alt.support.childprotectiveservices
Author: Mort Zuckerman
Date: Jun 1, 2010 03:50

Show full article (5.99Kb)
    

Group: sci.military.naval · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in sci.military.naval
Author: Mort Zuckerman
Date: Jun 1, 2010 03:50

Show full article (5.99Kb)
    

Group: soc.culture.australian · Group Profile · Search for are you here for a reason in soc.culture.australian
Author: Ir. Hj. Othman bin Hj. Ahmad
Date: Jun 1, 2010 02:13

Show full article (3.66Kb)
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · next