[MD] Rhetoric

Tuukka Virtaperko mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net
Wed Jan 4 05:37:21 PST 2017


Horse,

I just hear AH AH AAAH. But that's not what you think you're saying. 
Perhaps you think of yourself as a bit like Bileam's ass. In any case, 
if you don't give a shit about me fucking you here and now I might as 
well keep going. Don't worry, Bo is surely watching even though he isn't 
here. In fact, all the world is looking.

You are concerned about what I'm doing and why. The tender naivete 
underlying these questions reminds me of a YouTube video I saw:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azOWjmfUqVw

Worry not, for in the end of this apparent violence there will be 
insemination of ideas.

This dialectical technique I am using against you is a variant of 
reductio ad absurdum. Wikipedia describes the latter:

"In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for 'reduction to absurdity'; or 
argumentum ad absurdum, 'argument to absurdity') is a form of argument 
which attempts either to disprove a statement by showing it inevitably 
leads to a ridiculous, absurd, or impractical conclusion, or to prove 
one by showing that if it were not true, the result would be absurd or 
impossible."

It is ridiculous, absurd and impractical that you should allow me to 
behave in this manner. However, you are unable to use Pirsig's MOQ to 
identify the reason for why this behavior is wrong.

I personally know my behavior is wrong because it is not aesthetical. 
This is not nice. This is the opposite of courtesy. But it is in 
accordance with intellect dominating sociality, so Pirsig says I should 
do this.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

At this point I propose, so to say, that you change the game. Adopt the 
theory of artistic quality as an alternative to Pirsig's materialistic 
and empiricistic theory of static quality. The lowest level of artistic 
quality is the prescription level, which contains rules such as: "If you 
ask someone a question it's impolite to ask the same question again 
before the other has had time to answer".

If you had believed prescriptions exist as metaphysical entities you 
could have made a metaphysical argument according to which my behavior 
is inappropriate. But if you do that now, your metaphysics says you're 
just pussies sick of being pounded. Even if you are, just wait a bit. 
Something begins to grow inside you and you will most likely feel a 
compulsion to nurture it.

Of prescriptions emerge cultures. Cultures are Wittgenstenian language 
games, in a way, but they are real-life games involving body language 
and facial expression, and not just abstract manipulation of symbols 
that are inherently meaningless - that have been sterilized from 
ambiguity. In art, ambiguity is a good thing. It can be achieved even in 
text, obviously, since literature is also an art. And what would be 
better literature than this?

Of cultures emerges freedom. Freedom patterns are those that are 
designed to encourage people to defy cultural prescriptions when it is 
better to do so. The Diamond Sutra is a freedom pattern. And, at the 
time of its discovery in the orient, such freedom was probably 
inherently aesthetical.

However, technically the aesthetical level emerges from the freedom 
level. Aesthetics means that which we choose to do after we have become 
free to do anything. Free from carnal desire. Free from jealousy. Free 
from hunger and thirst and cold and heat. Perhaps willing to play with 
all of them.

Aesthetics refers to what we choose to remember after all those years.

After you have the theory of artistic quality you can use it to argue 
that my behavior is not aesthetical. I could argue so, too. But on the 
other hand I could argue that since I'm behaving in an unaesthetical 
manner to introduce the notions of "aesthetical" and "unaesthetical" to 
other people, I am innocent, and my activity is consequently aesthetical.

It is aesthetical because, in a sense, you have been bragging all the 
time you have ignored the existence of aesthetics. You have behaved like 
know-it-alls. So you brought this upon yourselves. I don't know about 
you but I don't think karma travels along rail roads and ski tracks. I 
think karma travels along the rules of aesthetics.

You can say the safeword if you want to, but "I don't give a shit" isn't 
exactly the safeword, and wouldn't you like to know where all this leads to?

Tuk





On 03-Jan-17 21:08, Horse wrote:
> What are you on about? Are you a complete idiot or do you take the 
> occasional day off?
> And if you want to carry on fucking with me then please go away and do 
> it where someone gives a shit!
>
>
> On 03/01/2017 14:40, Tuukka Virtaperko wrote:
>> Horse,
>>
>> okay, but I achieved the same effect by asking you permission to do 
>> so! You see, I'm just copulating with ya.
>>
>> Tuk
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 03-Jan-17 16:19, Horse wrote:
>>> No
>>>
>>> On 03/01/2017 10:08, mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net wrote:
>>>> Horse,
>>>>
>>>> GET BACK IN HERE AND TELL ME CAN I CALL RON A "DICKWAD" OR NOT
>>>>
>>>> It is funny because it's true. Wait, what is?
>>>>
>>>> It's true that by behaving this way I am actually acknowledging 
>>>> that intellectual patterns depend on social patterns. They need 
>>>> social patterns to survive. So I try to verify that my behavior is 
>>>> in accordance with social norms.
>>>>
>>>> AND I'M STILL DOING IT WRONG
>>>>
>>>> But you don't have a category for the reason why it's wrong. I do, 
>>>> and you refuse it because I have made it a humiliating thing to 
>>>> accept. But your metaphysics doesn't explain this humiliating 
>>>> feeling. It says you should thank me. Why don't you want to do so?
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you want to thank me for dominating sociality with 
>>>> intellect while verifying that my behavior isn't socially 
>>>> inappropriate?
>>>>
>>>> Tuk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lainaus mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net:
>>>>
>>>>> Horse,
>>>>> Can we change the mailing list rules? I need to call Ron a 
>>>>> "dickwad" as
>>>>> a part of a dialectical technique that seems rhetorical to him 
>>>>> because
>>>>> he doesn't understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lainaus Tuukka Virtaperko <mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ron,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and why am I asking you this question that sounds so offensive?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "What is so good about society that you would defend it against me?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree that sounds pretty selfish. But what's *wrong* about it
>>>>>> according to the MOQ? The MOQ doesn't state it's wrong to be 
>>>>>> selfish.
>>>>>> It states that intellect is superior to society.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point I am making here is a parody of what you believe in. It is
>>>>>> also a literally accurate implementation of your beliefs, if you
>>>>>> believe in Pirsig's MOQ, but it is so grotesque it is polite to 
>>>>>> call it
>>>>>> a parody.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See, I was being polite to you. But I don't sound polite anymore
>>>>>> because I made a fuss of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My current behavior lacks aesthetic appeal. You are capable of
>>>>>> intuitively perceiving this. But since you believe in Pirsig's 
>>>>>> MOQ you
>>>>>> are compelled to search for an explanation for your intuition 
>>>>>> from the
>>>>>> four boxes Pirsig gave to you. These are labeled "inorganic",
>>>>>> "biological", "social" and "intellectual".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You just sought for an explanation for your intuition from the box
>>>>>> labeled "social". According to Pirsig's MOQ this was the wrong 
>>>>>> thing to
>>>>>> do. Intellect is superior to society so you can't find anything from
>>>>>> that box that you could use to point out that there's something 
>>>>>> wrong
>>>>>> about my behavior.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From your viewpoint, your intuition of the repugnancy of my 
>>>>>> behavior is
>>>>>> Dynamic Quality! But if you keep experiencing it over and over 
>>>>>> again it
>>>>>> will cease to appear to be so Dynamic. So it should become 
>>>>>> static. But
>>>>>> if you believe in Pirsig's MOQ, this means your intuition should
>>>>>> eventually settle down in one of the four boxes provided by Robert
>>>>>> Pirsig.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I'm going to keep doing this until you:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Assign my repugnant behavior to a category provided by Pirsig and
>>>>>> explain the assignment
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Assume that you need more categories (which I have provided)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so, which one is it going to be?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 02-Jan-17 14:06, Tuukka Virtaperko wrote:
>>>>>>> Ron,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what is so good about society that you would defend it against me?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02-Jan-17 13:32, Tuukka Virtaperko wrote:
>>>>>>>> Ron,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If someone can devote time and effort for researching the   
>>>>>>>> purported topic of this mailing list, it is regarded by 
>>>>>>>> someone   else as a bad thing. That someone else is put off by 
>>>>>>>> himself having a job which precludes him from participating 
>>>>>>>> except in a mediocre way. However, Phaedrus's aim in ZAMM was 
>>>>>>>> not to define or  discover or understand mediocrity. It was to 
>>>>>>>> understand  excellence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 02-Jan-17 13:22, Tuukka Virtaperko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Please consider what it does to a person not to have a 
>>>>>>>>> credible   intellectual authority as a child. You are implying 
>>>>>>>>> that I have caused this burden to fall upon me. But I have not 
>>>>>>>>> caused the  ineptitude of others.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When you are sick to death of my narcissism, you are sick to   
>>>>>>>>> death of how insignificant it makes you feel. You think you 
>>>>>>>>> are   entitled to feel better. I think I am also entitled to 
>>>>>>>>> feel better. But we don't, do we?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is the psychiatrist who put me on pension making a useful   
>>>>>>>>> contribution to society? If not, why should I?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 01-Jan-17 18:01, X Acto wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Tuk,
>>>>>>>>>> I guess everyone is being nice to you or ignoring you 
>>>>>>>>>> because   you're a "man-child" with out a job or purpose who 
>>>>>>>>>> lives in his   parents basement mentally masturbating to what 
>>>>>>>>>> he thinks is  his own genius. When in fact he is basing his 
>>>>>>>>>> entire argument  on a logical fallacy.
>>>>>>>>>> You may be a genius when it comes to logical functions but 
>>>>>>>>>> when   it comes to critical thinking skills you can't reason 
>>>>>>>>>> yourself   out of a wet paper bag.
>>>>>>>>>> Things aren't quiet because you are right and no one can 
>>>>>>>>>> stand   up to your towering intellect . It's that you're so 
>>>>>>>>>> wrong no  one  has the time or energy to prove it to you and 
>>>>>>>>>> your immense ego.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since I have made a New Years resolution not to get involved 
>>>>>>>>>> in   discussions here that I can't devote my full attention 
>>>>>>>>>> to,  this  tirade is basically cathartic. I'm sick to death 
>>>>>>>>>> of your narcissism.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Grow up, get a job and make yourself useful to society And 
>>>>>>>>>> have   a great new year in the process.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Ron
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 1, 2017, at 8:53 AM, Tuukka Virtaperko 
>>>>>>>>>>> <mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The brain is not a muscle, Dave. If you're wrong, that's it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 01-Jan-17 2:33, david wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Howdy, Adrie, MOQers all:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know about Chris Langan's CTMU but Tuukka's 
>>>>>>>>>>>> criticism   is not correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The MOQ does not include anything like Kant's noumenal  
>>>>>>>>>>>> reality  or "things-in-themselves" and the MOQ holds that  
>>>>>>>>>>>> phenomenal  reality is the only
>>>>>>>>>>>> reality we can know. The phenomenal reality is NOT 
>>>>>>>>>>>> romantic   quality. When Pirsig refers to Dynamic Quality 
>>>>>>>>>>>> as "direct everyday experience," "the primary empirical 
>>>>>>>>>>>> reality," or   quotes William James referring to "the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> immediate flux of reality," and "pure experience" he is 
>>>>>>>>>>>> talking about  phenomenal reality as such.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuukka's claims to have improved the MOQ are quite   
>>>>>>>>>>>> preposterous. Obviously, there's no way to "improve" the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> MOQ   or create an alternative without understanding it first.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Buyer beware.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Moq_Discuss <moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> on  behalf of Adrie Kintziger <parser666 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2016 6:43 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [MD] Rhetoric
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think its good to read these materials.But things on 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wiki's are not
>>>>>>>>>>>> always what they seem.Some are very deceptive.
>>>>>>>>>>>> In fact, what this author is presenting here is actually   
>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing more than a
>>>>>>>>>>>> collection of derivatives from Wittgensteins work on 
>>>>>>>>>>>> logic.It   is spiced and
>>>>>>>>>>>> salted with some previously known paradoxes in a new disguise.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The best way of putting it  ,in my opinion,is to regard it 
>>>>>>>>>>>> as   a new attempt
>>>>>>>>>>>> to launch the Tractatus-logico etc,....explained with the   
>>>>>>>>>>>> terminology of a
>>>>>>>>>>>> computerprogrammer, or a very strong logical thinker.And 
>>>>>>>>>>>> a   very intelligent
>>>>>>>>>>>> thinker,...clearly,this however does not prove him right in 
>>>>>>>>>>>> any way or
>>>>>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it will generate clarifications on reality   
>>>>>>>>>>>> itself,or add new
>>>>>>>>>>>> insights;
>>>>>>>>>>>> it is kinda developed to work as an upide down 
>>>>>>>>>>>> gearbox,not   shifting up, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> in fact , shifting down further, in a halted car.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I wished you would not take this as critisism, because it   
>>>>>>>>>>>> is'nt.You should
>>>>>>>>>>>> explore these things, they are less boring than 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein,and he was not
>>>>>>>>>>>> all that clever also.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> the only part of critics i have is about your statement,   
>>>>>>>>>>>> "competitor to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> moq and amoq", There is no competion,connection,or game to 
>>>>>>>>>>>> win.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2016-12-31 8:52 GMT+01:00 Tuukka Virtaperko 
>>>>>>>>>>>> <mail at tuukkavirtaperko.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris Langan, developer of the CTMU, which is a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> competitor  to  the MOQ and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> AMOQ, does not understand the MOQ.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Citing 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://ctmucommunity.org/wiki/Cognitive-Theoretic_Model_of_t
>>>>>>>>>>>>> he_Universe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, mind acts as a filter: that which does  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not  conform to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mental categories is irrelevant to perception, and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore  not real.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Langan here breaks with Kant, who posited a noumenal 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "things-in-themselves", independent of the phenomenal  
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality  we perceive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Discarding this "Kantian fallacy", Langan rejects noumena 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as   oxymoronic
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "inconceivable concepts"[21] and holds that phenomenal   
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality, as the only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality we can know, is the only reality there is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ***
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This means Langan's understanding of philosophy is at 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the   level of ZAMM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not at the level of LILA. The phenomenal reality 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is   romantic quality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Langan is oblivious to Dynamic Quality.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>>>>>> [https://static2.avast.com/11/web/min/i/mkt/share/avast-logo.png]<https://www.avast.com/antivirus> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Avast | Download Free Antivirus for PC, Mac & 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Android<https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>>>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> Protect your devices with the best free antivirus on the   
>>>>>>>>>>>> market. Download Avast antivirus and anti-spyware 
>>>>>>>>>>>> protection   for your PC, Mac and Android.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>>>> MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>> moq.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> The MOQ_Discuss mailing list has been moved to a new 
>>>>>>>>>>>> hosting   company and a new mailing list server. The old 
>>>>>>>>>>>> system was   becoming more unreliable by the day and the ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>>> parser
>>>>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>>>> MOQ Online - MOQ_Discuss<http://moq.org/md/archives.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>> moq.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> The MOQ_Discuss mailing list has been moved to a new 
>>>>>>>>>>>> hosting   company and a new mailing list server. The old 
>>>>>>>>>>>> system was   becoming more unreliable by the day and the ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
>>>>>>> software.
>>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>>>>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>>> Archives:
>>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>>> Archives:
>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>>> Archives:
>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list