Their website (http://money.cnn.com/ontv/inthemoney/) says that you can
order tapes (literally tapes, ie VHS/Beta/PAL) on this website... however it
doesn't list that program!
https://orion.fdch.com/forms/orcnn.html
Sounds like a slow news week, if they also covered "Bunnies do It's a
Wonderful Life".
Nick/Zanimum
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_11
--------------------------------------------------------------
=Monday 26 December=
A total of 257 donations were made through PayPal on Day 11, yielding the equivalent of $5,813.09
USD. The average donation that day was $22.62.
A total of about 38.10 was donated through MoneyBookers since the last update, bringing that total
to $772.68. Today was a postal holiday and thus there are no mail or Dexia donations to report.
:Grand total at end of day: '''$114,025.58'''
Breakdown of Day 11 PayPal donations:
AUD 38.09 (28.59 USD)
CAD 297.88 (245.13 USD)
EUR 1,823.94 (2,215.52 USD)
GBP 213.49 (382.85 USD)
JPY 40,160.00 (362.85 USD)
USD 2,578.16
Total 5,813.09 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-26/report/
==Special thanks to those who gave large donations==
Christian Hoffmann gave the largest donation this day; € 200. There were also many donors who
gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order); Jeff Lima, Craig
Hirsch, and 9 anonymous donors.
:<small>Note: While large donations are great, it should be noted that about 70% of all the money
donated to the Wikimedia Foundation comes from donations that are the equivalent of $50 or less
and the average donation is about $25.</small>
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-26/detail/
*"The best of what the Internet promised" by Beth Gibson
*"Danke für das große Lexikon" by anonymous
*"What a wonderful site, I use it every day. It is a natural for my Opera start-up page. I only
wish I had more to give. Thank you, thank you so much Wikipedia!" by Shari Wilson
*"Keep up the good work!" by Chris Bunch
*"Free Information for Everyone." by Christoph Dankert
*"Faites le pour nous, et pas pour votre portefeuille." by Yoann GUETTA
*"Keep it up! You help me do my degree! I love you people!" by Robert Griffin
*"Using the site quite often, so why not "paying" a little bit for it ... Just keep going!" by
Igor Brusic
*"Many thanks to all involved with Wikimedia!" by anonymous
*"El conocimiento debe ser como el agua, gratis y de libre acceso a toda la población. Ser culto
para ser libre." by Juan Herraiz
*"How could I not donate to the Encyclopedia Galactica (well, in a hundred years or so... give it
time)?" by Craig Hirsch
*"I loved the holiday card and enjoy the ever expanding Romanian encyclopedia." by Gordon
Davidescu
*"Wiki rocks" by Jeff Lima
Some of my personal favorites:
*"Paying it forward with knowledge" by anonymous
*"Plain, clear, accessible knowledge in the grand encylopedic tradition. May Wikipedia flourish!"
by William Bruneau
*"Knowledge is Power, let it run free" by anonymous
*"Blessed is the day I discovered this resource!" by anonymous
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
David Gerard wrote:
>
> [Response re: DSM-IV-TR criteria (all identifiers removed,
> original forwarded to permissions(a)wikipedia.org):
>
> We are inclined to deny Wikipedia permission to use our
> content as we do not allow anyone to alter our material and we do not
> want our material posted online. I can assure you that we have
> complete rights to our material and Fair Use does not apply to DSM
> material or any other APA/APPI content.
They want to keep for themselves they right of seling the definitions
and the right of chaning them.
I know that copyright apply only to intellectual right, not to facts.
I can not proibits people to publish that 14-Carbonuim-14 or
230-Thorium are radioactives.
If they claim that these definitions are covered by copyright rights
they are claming that they are ficticious, just like a text of a novel
is.
AnyFile
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>There is no conspiracy theory needed. You ask "would the foundation do
>this", but we need to first be clear on what 'this' means. If 'this'
>means treating our authors in any way which is unethical today, I
>stand firmly that the answer is clearly no. In the future, I can not
>answer because my crystal ball is not that powerful. If 'this' means
>to work to cause changes to be made to future versions of the licenses
>which temporarily increase the foundations ease at the expense at
>removing the protection of the authors from unethical actions in the
>future, I must answer a resounding yes because it is demonstrably
>true.
>
Absolutely. A solid foundation for protecting individual rights is
preferable to a quick fix for the benefit of the impatent. A big part
of ethics can be the consciousness of the effects and implications of
one's actions. We cannot forsee all the effects of our actions, but we
do have a duty to consider the most likely.
>The Wikimedia foundation has been quietly advocating to the Creative
>Commons and the Free Software foundations alterations to further
>versions of the appropriate licenses which will allow the operators of
>websites such as Wikipedia the authority to permit redistribution of
>content submitted to their website with attribution to the site rather
>than the author of the content. In effect, the *single* remaining
>tangible return an author of freely licensed content receives (their
>authorship credit) will be removed and granted to the priesthood of
>intellectual property barons who have apparently earned the right to
>take credit for the blood and sweat of a world of people because of
>their great feat of operating a website.
>
The phrasing is a little dramatic. ;-) . Nevertheless it does point
to issues around moral rights which, as I see it, go beyond copyrights.
In the strict sense copyright is an economic right, and judicial systems
are often established with economic rights in mind. Attempting to
attach a monetary value to a moral right makes for a difficult transition.
>For the latest in the implementation of this grand vision, take a look
>at the terms of the CC-Wiki license, or the mysteriously vague
>attribution terms so cowardly sneaked into CC-BY-SA v2.0. These
>changes to cc-by-sa could have been implemented as another CC license
>flag 'CA' (community attribution) but instead it was decided to
>include the changes into the root license with no mention in the
>layman version, presumably because such a change would fail to change
>the license of existing works against the consent of the authors and
>would probably too much attention to this difficult issue. Although
>this has not been widely noticed, I certainly am not the only one...
>For example see the interesting distribution terms on enwiki
>User:Jamesday.
>
Having a "layman version" of a law or license only eacerbates the
difficulties of having a law for the rich and a law for the poor. The
layman can go on believing that his simplified version is the law until
someone with greater access can trump him with some obscure clause from
the full version. The only way that a simplified version can work is if
any conflict the detailed cannot override the layman's version, but if
that is the case then what's the point of having a detailed version.
This is roughly akin to those politicians who proclaim that they want a
simplification of tax forms without understanding that what is needed is
a simplification of the underlying tax laws.
>The argument used to advance this change is that, somehow, by being
>submitted to a collaborative authorship site a document no longer has
>authors but is somehow authored by the 'community'. In some cases a
>compelling argument can indeed be made that there was no effective
>single person author of the work, but even in these cases (which I
>contend are rare) it takes a fantastic leap of faith to make the claim
>that some organization (non-profit or otherwise) is the sole official
>legal voice of the above mentioned ephemeral 'community' of authors
>simple because they operate a website which is used by that community.
> But, indeed, that is exactly what is being claimed and what is being
>swallowed because it's a lot easier to pretend that a website operator
>represents the community because the reality of the matter (that the
>community is a shifting cloud of unclear membership and
>representation) is useless for solving the real challenges presented
>by the requirement of preserving something as simple as authorship
>credit in the world of paper.
>
I believe that if that website operator is going to defend the community
then that defence also extends into the courts.to defend the collective
rights of that community. It should be viewed as a duty. But that duty
does not imply that it is the "sole" official voice. The individual
authors should still reserve the right to mount their own defence, and
the community needs to safeguard the evidence that will allow them to
mount that defence.
>Basically we're reaching a point where silly details like the moral
>obligation to credit the authors of a work are hindering the grand
>vision of the knowledge of the world made available to all at the
>lowest cost possible. This is a hard problem, so rather than dealing
>with it head on, the details are being swept under the rug. Licenses
>will and have been retroactively changed to reflect this
>prioritization of the quick solution over ethical obligations.
>
Retroactive changes open up yet another hornets' nest. This section is
interesting:
> Each version of the License is given a distinguishing version
> number. If the Document specifies that a particular numbered
> version of this License "or any later version" applies to it, you
> have the option of following the terms and conditions either of
> that specified version or of any later version that has been
> published (not as a draft) by the Free Software Foundation. If the
> Document does not specify a version number of this License, you
> may choose any version ever published (not as a draft) by the Free
> Software Foundation.
This seems to protect people from being bound by any changes which may
be made to the license subsequent to their edits. Without conscious
compliance to the new version the option to be bound by the old version
would remain.
>Normally I would not worry about this, because such changes which defy
>the character of the licenses agreed to by the creators of content
>would never stand... but the more I consider the issue the more I
>realize how many differing forces will support such changes for both
>laudable (in the case of the foundation) and selfish reasons, and it
>leaves me feeling unsure and angry.
>
Sure! But the arguments that will convince the most people will be
those rooted in convenience.
>I fear that we, the community of authors and spokesmen who support the
>propagation of knowledge freely to the world, have become so impatient
>with the slowness of achieving our goals that we have begun to take
>steps to extinguish the protective flame of decentralization which
>immunizes our work from the privatization, exploitation, and
>commercial imprisonment by greedy self interests, simply because the
>resulting legal obligations of that decentralized existence have
>become a temporary hindrance to our important goals.
>
I'm encouraged by hearing someone else understand that. I have no
problem with undermining the entire copyright system as it is known
because it undermines the greedheads. There are no shortcuts to that
goal; shortcuts could even destroy the mission.
>Such a move to promote the notion that the operator of a
>telecommunication service (isn't that what the foundation claims to be
>when it invokes the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA as a
>reassurance that our negligent handling of copyright matters will go
>unpunished) is granted a special position of unique control over the
>creative works by the users of that service will not only be supported
>by the operators of Wiki's who are currently so inconvenienced, but it
>will also be strongly supported by the newly re-merged
>telecommunications giants so eager to exercise their believed right to
>extract maximum profit from every bit transferred across their glass.
>
In other words we can't have it both ways. But there is more to this
than mere negligence that can be repaired when it is brought to our
attention. This is why I have always maintained that the real problem
will not be with rights that Wikipedia has violated, but with the rights
of Wikipedians that have been violated by others.
>The words "theft" and "steal" constantly create confusion when applied
>to information, it is unfortunate that we use them. You are quite
>correct that no one can take away what we already have, but it is
>quite possible that through changes in license that powerful interests
>will be able to claim special rights over the works of others because
>of their ownership of telecommunications infrastructure at least that
>is the notion embodied by the proposed license changes. So that
>while you will be free to use the content you helped create, another
>group, by virtue of their operation of a telecommunications service,
>will be far more free. You can not claim that you are free so long as
>there is another group which has more freedom with the work you
>created.
>
The introduction of terms like "theft" and "piracy" has diverted
attention away from what IIRC is the Jeffersonian principle in
intellectual property that if you still have the item that is
purportedly stolen it hasn't been stolen.
>Welcome to the new serfdom.
>
>Today we love and trust our telecommunications service providing
>masters, but what changes does the future bring?
>
All surfers are equal, but some are more equal than others. :-)
Ec
PS: I don't know why this thread is on the Wikitech list, so I've
copied this response to the Foundation list, which really seems more
appropriate.
Ec
- In Wednesday probably Filip Maljkovic and Djordje Stakic would have
presentation of Wikipedia for 160 students of University of Novi
Pazar. (Presentation is based on one German Power Point presentation.)
- In Thursday Djordje Stakic would have presentation of Wikipedia on
the Faculty for Mathematics of Belgrade University.
- We started with cooperation with Free Software Network of Serbia,
which is associate organization of Free Software Foundation Europe and
the next steps we would work together.
- In the second half of January we would have two
presentations/speeches in the Youth Cultural Center of Belgrade (the
most important alternative cultural center in Belgrade;
http://www.domomladine.org/): The first one would be presentation of
Wikipedia, the second one would be the talk about free software and
projection of the movie Revolution OS.
- In February we would have two presentations/speeches, but we didn't
make materials yet.
- In the first half of March Richard Stallman would come in Belgrade.
(Not 100% sure, but we would know that in the next couple of days.)
- In the second half of April Jimbo would be in Belgrade (I hope in
Zagreb and Ljubljana, too).
- In May we would organize free knowledge/free software
(Wikipedia/GNU) festival in Belgrade.
Hoi
An e-mail awaits I was extremely happy to sen awaits approval for
further distribution.. Its problem is that it has too many
recipients..
Could someone please oblige me :)
Thanks,
GerardM
Hoi,
I am extremely happy that I can inform you on Boxing day that a tired
Erik has produced the first tangible result of the Wikidata / Ultimate
Wiktionary project. It shows that we want great content in many
languages, that we want to include thesaurus information and that we
are happy to include with gratitude content like the Gemet thesaurus.
:) I want to thank Erik for working really hard to make this happen :)
Thanks,
Gerard ..
This is the text of Erik's E-mail to the Wikitech mailinglist:
*****************************
Ho ho ho,
we now have our first read-only prototype of Ultimate Wiktionary /
Wikidata, using a subset of the final UW design. This subset is a
complex, versioned relational database that can model
- lexical items (words, short phrases) with multiple meanings
- synonyms and translations, on the meaning level
- other relationships between them, on the meaning level.
The prototype is at:
http://epov.org/wd-gemet/index.php/Main_Page
It contains over 70,000 words in 22 languages; many of them have
definitions. The definitions usually come in 4 languages. As I
understand it, we can have this data under the GFDL, but it's just one
of many building blocks we will use in seeding the UW.
There will be at least one significant upgrade to this protoype before
the end of the year. All the tables and fields for versioning complex
relations without ballooning up the database are already there. I'm not
sure if the model I have in mind for versioning works yet, and I hope to
test and demonstrate it soon. (Versioning, in my opinion, is the single
greatest challenge for Wikidata.) I also want to show how we try to "eat
our own dogfood" in Ultimate Wiktionary by localizing the user interface
using the content of the dictionary.
All the records are already hooked up to pages and revisions, so you can
use [[Special:Allpages]] and the like to navigate. When there are
identical words in different languages, all the translations and
definitions are shown on the same page.
Our goal with Ultimate Wiktionary is to provide an even more complex
application that will make this data collaboratively editable, to add
dynamic user-based views, APIs, and crucial features such as
inflections, etymologies, complex relations and attributes, and much
more. This will be a huge challenge. Fortunately, more funding seems to
be on the horizon, allowing us to put more developers on the job.
Ultimate Wiktionary is just one application of Wikidata, and we will try
to generalize as much functionality as possible, so that it will be
reasonably straightforward to build new Wikidata apps. In particular,
versioning and all basic relation types should be handled on the
Wikidata level. There are thousands of possible new applications for
Wikimedia and other MediaWiki users if we get this right.
Please take a look at the prototype. The view component is a quick and
dirty hack, but the backend is approaching some stability. There are
some small inconsistencies in the data here and there, some of them
inherited from GEMET. Due to time constraints, I also had to stop the
import at about 80% leading to a few red links; I'll try to import the
remaining terms in the next few days.
Finally, expect a paper explaining some of the key ideas of Wikidata and
UW, showing the first user interface prototypes, and defining future
development milestones and applications. I will also try to describe
some of the forthcoming changes to the MediaWiki core that come with the
need of Wikidata to handle multiple languages in one instalation; these
changes will benefit multi-language projects like Meta and Commons.
I will be at the 22C3 on December 30 to demonstrate this prototype as
well as the completed namespace manager, and to answer questions.
Best,
a very tired Erik
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_9
-------------------------------------------------------------
==Saturday 24 December==
A total of 264 donations were made through PayPal on '''Day 9''', yielding the equivalent of
$8948.90 USD. The average donation that day was $33.90. This is an increase of $2137.63 over Day 8
and is also the highest average donation so far in the drive. Most notably, we passed the $100,000
milestone on this day!
MoneyBookers donations rose by $46.73 that day, bringing that total to $734.58. The Wikimedia
office was closed on Saturday, so there are no new mail donations to report. Hopefully, the first
Dexia updates will arrive in my mail box on Tuesday (Monday is a federally-observed holiday). Once
they arrive, I'll update each of the daily reports to reflect those daily totals.
:Total donated on Day 8: '''$8995.63'''
:Grand total at end of day: '''$101,006.45'''
Breakdown of Day 9 PayPal donations:
AUD 164.50 (123.46 USD)
CAD 444.22 (365.55 USD)
EUR 1,591.07 (1,932.66 USD)
GBP 275.95 (494.86 USD)
JPY 104,248.00 (941.88 USD)
USD 5,090.49
Total 8,948.90 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-24/report/
==Special thanks to those who gave large donations==
The largest donation this day was $1000 and was made by Jeff Moe. There were also many donors who
gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order); Luis Cavique Santos,
Kazuhisa Ueyama, James Sweeney, Mike Blaszczak, Katsuji Ishikawa, Kenneth Truelove and 15
anonymous donors.
:<small>Note: While large donations are great, it should be noted that about 70% of all the money
donated to the Wikimedia Foundation comes from donations that are the equivalent of $50 or less
and the average donation is about $25.</small>
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-24/detail/
*"grazie per lo sforzo" by anonymous
*"I've saved a lot of money here that I might have spent on out-of-date reference books printed on
dead trees." by anonymous
*"I firmly believe that Wikipedia deserves the support of all of its users." by M Dunsky
*"Wenn man schon in der Hauptsache kostenfreie Dienstleistungen nutzt, sollte man auch den Anstand
besitzen, etwas zu bezahlen, vor allem wenn finanzielle Unterstützung dringend gebraucht wird." by
anonymous
*"Grateful for the wealth of information so brilliantly put together. A great idea and sincere
hopes for continuing development; hence the donation" by anonymous
*"For Mark Fox" by anonymous
*"Thank you. You have helped so many with their coursework and assignments. Always a guarantee to
find updated, easy to understand and informative stuff on Wikipedia." by anonymous
*"Wikipedia is an example of cooperation, participation and innovation. Keep information free!" by
Damon Ramsey
*"The best thing I ever saw on the net" by Maarten Braakhekke
*"頑張って欲しい" by kazuhisa Ueyama
*"Knowledge guarantees Freedom" by anonymous
*"Wish the Wikimedia Foundation another successful year in 06. BTW thank you for the Christmas
card." by Eric Bouse
*"Wikipedia is what the internet was made for. Here's a little donation to help the people who
make it possible :D" by George Kettleborough
*"zur weiterentwicklung" by Thomas Junge
*"Wikipedia: my reference work of choice! Thanks, everybody!" by anonymous
*"An indispensable resource, an elegant site, no advertisements, and a worthy cause." by anonymous
*"Keep the change" by anonymous
Some of my personal favorites:
*"You are a great resource, for the people, of the people and by the people. And in fact, I got a
crucial pointer in my research from one of your articles. Thank you." by anonymous
*"I can't think of a better project to donate to!" by anonymous
*"for freedom of knowledge and privilege of education for everyone" by Christoph Wagner
*"I wear my Wikipedia t-shirt with pride!" by anonymous
*"So much to learn, so little time..." by anonymous
*"Are you hiring?" by Mike Blaszczak
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________
Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year.
http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
To my surprise, the segment Inside, Outside on CNN"s show In the Money did a
segment on Wikipedia. Overall, it was rather positive. They did make some
jokes about the Seigenthaler incident, but one of the two commentators noted to
the anchor that it was corrected and that Wikipedia was the victim of a
prank. The anchor said that everyone, including CNN, uses Wikipedia, and they
decided that it was a necessary Internet phenomenon. They also said that
Wikipedia is striving for greater accuracy, and mentioned the fundraising drive,
which they said was to help improve quality.
While they were not 100 percent accurate, it was, overall, a very positive
spin on us.
I wonder how we can use this to our advantage. I also wonder if we can get a
copy.
Danny
Copied from:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Fund_drives/2005/Q4/Day_8
-------------------------------------------------------------
==Friday 23 December==
A total of 359 donations were made through PayPal on Day 8, yielding the equivalent of $6,811.27
USD. The average donation that day was $18.97. While this is both the lowest daily total and the
lowest average donation so far in the drive, it was not unexpected; a great many people were very
busy getting ready for Christmas that day.
Moneybookers donations rose by about $140, bringing that total to $687.85. Mail donations
increased by $625, our largest daily increase in mail donations in the drive so far, bringing that
total to $720. I'm still waiting for the first Dexia updates to arrive in the mail. Once they
arrive, I'll update each of the daily reports to reflect those daily totals.
:Total donated on Day 8: '''$7671.27'''
:Grand total at end of day: '''$93,418.67'''
Breakdown of Day 8 PayPal donations:
AUD 197.99 (148.59 USD)
CAD 142.46 (117.23 USD)
EUR 1,912.28 (2,322.83 USD)
GBP 178.50 (320.10 USD)
JPY 30,883.00 (279.03 USD)
USD 3,623.49
Total 6,811.27 USD
Copied from: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-23/report/
==Special thanks to large donors==
The largest donation this day was $200.00 USD and was made by Barry Langdon-Lassagne. There were
also many donors who gave the equivalent of about $100 or more (listed in no particular order);
Romary Daval, Domas Mituzas, KENGO Nakajima, Alan Rhodes, Lutz Kayser, Peter Hare, and seven
anonymous donations.
:Note: While large donations are great, it should be noted that about 70% of all the money donated
to the Wikimedia Foundation comes from donations that are the equivalent of $50 or less and the
average donation is about $25.
==Selected donor comments==
Let's all thank everybody who donated on this day by reading their comments.
:Full listing at: http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/2005q4/index.php/2005-12-23/detail/
*"An eminently worthy undertaking" by Craig Glennie
*"Longue vie au libre partage des connaissances!" by Philippe Teuwen
*"I don't know how we got on without Wikipedia. Please don't cave it to pressure groups." by
anonymous
*"This donation to Wikipedia is in memory of McRae Family, Ottawa,Ontario,Canada" by Craig McRae
*"Poursuivez votre labeur fantastique" by anonymous
*"The best reference that ever existed" by David Kirkpatrick
*"I'm very grateful to Wikimedia. Because of it I can do research very quick. I am living with
Wikimedia whenever I have free time during the day" by Tam Nguyen
*"Wissen ist Macht! Keep up the great work!" by André Heßling
*"I donate for a clean and proven Wikipedia" by anonymous
*"Merry Christmas and many Greetings from Austria to Wikipedia" by Manfred Halver
*"Wikipedia's open/free nature is really what allows it to thrive. I think a service like this
would not be possible if it weren't for Free Software. Please consider donating to at www.fsf.org"
by Pol Danilov
*"Wikipedia ist der wahre Geist des Webs! Weiter so!" by Peter Köller
*"I hope you guys realize what a huge effect you have on the Internet community, and we the users
truly appreciate the immense work you put in. LONG LIVE WIKIPEDIA!" by Edwin Choi
*"I will be giving more as money comes in (chrismas is a costly time)" by anonymous
*"Por plibonigado de Vikipedio." by Gokhan San
*"In honor of my Godparents Lucy, John, Theresa and Ron...Happy Christmas!" by Josh Courteau
*"This project has saved me much more than this in time, convenience and useful knowledge. I'll be
*paying another visit here soon enough." by Stephen Allen
*"in honor of Aaron Kuntz" by anonymous
*"gracias a vosotros" by Raul Aguaviva
*"Best..website..ever." by anonymous
*"naturally..." by KENGO Nakajima
Some of my personal favorites:
*"Use the site so much, would be criminal not to!" by Jack Hynes
*"You changed my life, guys. I am sorry I can only contribute with such a modest amount." by
anonymous
*"The greatest progress of mankind in the last 5 years." by Michael Young
*"let us be even more successful than Britannica" by anonymous
*"My bonus check, with love." by Jeffrey Friedlander
*"Rock on, Wikipedia. Rock on." by anonymous
*"No comment." by anonymous
-- Daniel Mayer
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com