[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.remoting

Re: WAN remoting application hanging

retoro

8/30/2004 4:33:00 PM

Check out this article by Allen Anderson about issues you can encounter (and
their solutions) in a WAN envrionment:

http://www.glacialcomponents.com/ArticleDetail/...

Ken


"Roland" <Roland@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A4DB0DB6-A27C-461F-A56A-DB0A55612CBA@microsoft.com...
> I built a small test application: the clients instantiates a MarshalByRef
> Object on the remote computer (client activated). The only statement in
the
> constructor of the class is a logWriteline. I can monitor that this
> logWriteline command is performed - but then the system hangs. After
> roundabout one hour the client gets a timeout exception. I'm using VS.net
> 2003.
> The server sits behind a couple of firewalls. The applications works well
in
> a LAN environment. Thanks for any idea!
> Roland.
18 Answers

Amit Puri

9/2/2004 6:19:00 AM

0

Hi, Roland,

Ask you network guys, to allow the TCP or Http port on the firewall, which
your remoting component is using.

This should solve the problem of ''underlying connection is closed''.

Moreover, if you're doing some DNS names query from your application, for
e.g www.xyz.com, you need to specify the IP instead, as probably DNS query is
also restricted on your firewall, which is port 53....

BEST OF LUCK

"Roland" wrote:

> Thanks Ken,
> sounds reasonable to me, but I can't test it. From my test computer I don't
> get any connection to the server at all. Our network professional swears it
> would be the same configuration as the people have where it's working as
> described below.
> Unfortunately I cannot get one of them before next week.
> The message I get is "underlying connection has been closed ..."
> I created a new discussion thread regarding a "checklist" what has to be
> done to get a connection.
> Roland.
>
>
> "Ken Kolda" wrote:
>
> > Check out this article by Allen Anderson about issues you can encounter (and
> > their solutions) in a WAN envrionment:
> >
> > http://www.glacialcomponents.com/ArticleDetail/...
> >
> > Ken
> >
> >
> > "Roland" <Roland@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:A4DB0DB6-A27C-461F-A56A-DB0A55612CBA@microsoft.com...
> > > I built a small test application: the clients instantiates a MarshalByRef
> > > Object on the remote computer (client activated). The only statement in
> > the
> > > constructor of the class is a logWriteline. I can monitor that this
> > > logWriteline command is performed - but then the system hangs. After
> > > roundabout one hour the client gets a timeout exception. I'm using VS.net
> > > 2003.
> > > The server sits behind a couple of firewalls. The applications works well
> > in
> > > a LAN environment. Thanks for any idea!
> > > Roland.
> >
> >
> >

Bill Smith

3/8/2009 7:46:00 PM

0


>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>
>> Bill Smith
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Who says they didn't use common sense?
>
>Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed carry on
>campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who thought whatever
>he said made him worth checking out.
>
>If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point of
>view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech issue.. but
>that is not what the article leads me to automatically assume like the town
>fool does.
>
>Chad
>

He made no threats and had no weapons with him. The cops let him go
concluding that he wasn't a threat. The Prof over-reacted, pure and
simple. If she'd kept her wits about her and simply made inquiries as
to what was actually said in class, this whole dust-up could have been
avoided. There was no indication that anyone was in any danger at all.
far too many people, these days, confuse being afraid with being in
real danger.

Bill Smith

grey_ghost471-newsgroups

3/8/2009 8:19:00 PM

0

"Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in
news:49b35b3f$0$3253$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

> "Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9BC7A0E9F5E1FWereofftoseethewizrd@216.196.97.142...
>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in
>> news:49b2b8d8$0$32007$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:
>>
>>> "Bill Smith" <quandary@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rmc5r4db79f5l2nlpjtje31s4uc2s7fiki@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 03:43:35 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:5dGdnTE2XIPoGy_UnZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@posted.cpinternet...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:49b20c08$0$19326$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>>>> "Nicholas" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:77280c8c-e775-43b2-9d12-a9f71570c92a@r36g2000vbp.googlegroups.c
>>>>>>> om ... On Mar 6, 3:54 am, waldo88 <hp...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 7:59 pm, grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com (Gray Ghost)
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > What happens when you call the cops and thier busy on diversity
>>>>>>>> > patrol.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > BWAhahahahah.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Freee speeech for lefties, none for righties. Admit it, greedom
>>>>>>>> > is a scary thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article
>>>>>>>> > which follows. To view this item online,
>>>>>>>> > visithttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/... pageId=90740
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Thursday, March 05, 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > -- --------?-- --- WEAPONS OF CHOICE
>>>>>>>> > WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>> > Prof calls cops when student mentions guns in speech
>>>>>>>> > 'If you can't talk about the 2nd Amendment, what happened to the
>>>>>>>> > 1st Amendment?'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > -- --------?-- --- Posted: March 04, 2009
>>>>>>>> > 11:40 pm Eastern
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > -- --------?-- --- WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > A professor at a Connecticut school has sparked controversy by
>>>>>>>> > calling police when a student talked about the Second Amendment
>>>>>>>> > during a class speech.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prof. is a New England Starbucks-sipping, Ben and Jerry's nibbling
>>>>>>>> bull dyke!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mitch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.... V-Dare
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > *Most* of the murder victims I'm familiar with, directly or
>>>>>>>> > indirectly, would be alive if they had been armed with a gun and
>>>>>>>> > weren't afraid to USE it.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I guess some people would rather DIE. And they do, in droves.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Nick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the murder victims at Virginia Tech might be alive too if
>>>>>>> teachers at that institution had been as 'vigilant' in reporting
>>>>>>> their suspicions as this professor was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can we know from that story the speech was so innocent? The
>>>>>>> prof said he 'scared' other students... it makes a LOT more sense
>>>>>>> that it wasn't totally innocent if a professor, her faculty head
>>>>>>> and campus police all thought it was worth following up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But don't let logic stand in your way of accusing anyone left of
>>>>>>> the far right of being a dyke or having a death wish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you a survivor of Florida 2000 ?
>>>>>> You sure sound about as intelligent as one of those "chads"
>>>>>> Did you even READ the article ?
>>>>>> let me cite you some relevant passages
>>>>>> "The student was fulfilling an assignment for his Communications
>>>>>> 140 class that required him to discuss a "relevant issue in the
>>>>>> media" when he and two other students on a team chose to talk
>>>>>> about school violence, including recent events such as the 2007
>>>>>> shootings that left nearly three dozen people dead at Virginia
>>>>>> Tech" "Wahlberg made the point during his Oct. 3, 2008, class
>>>>>> presentation that if students were allowed to carry concealed
>>>>>> weapons on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier.
>>>>>> He discussed the concept of college campus gun-free zones. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently such discussions made the prof pee her pants
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And here's the town fool to prove the point.
>>>>>
>>>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>>>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>>>
>>>> Bill Smith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who says they didn't use common sense?
>>>
>>> Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed
>>> carry on campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who
>>> thought whatever he said made him worth checking out.
>>>
>>> If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point of
>>> view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech issue..
>>> but that is not what the article leads me to automatically assume like
>>> the town fool does.
>>>
>>> Chad
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> People who wet themselves at the mere mention of guns probably aren't
>> the most objective.
>>
>
> Agree, but you still seem to be assuming the professor is anti-gun and
> that was her sole motivation.
>
>
>
>

Since her reaction was a typically hoplophobic to a rational discussion I can
pretty safely say the good professor has never held a gun and never will out
of fear of it turing her into a mass murderer.

--
Always remember:

Bull Connor was a Democrat!

RD (The Sandman)

3/8/2009 8:39:00 PM

0

Bill Smith <squandary@comcast.net> wrote in
news:jq78r4129fttq538mmfncvsqgot93oenod@4ax.com:

>
>>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>>
>>> Bill Smith
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Who says they didn't use common sense?
>>
>>Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed
>>carry on campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who
>>thought whatever he said made him worth checking out.
>>
>>If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point
>>of view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech
>>issue.. but that is not what the article leads me to automatically
>>assume like the town fool does.
>>
>>Chad
>>
>
> He made no threats and had no weapons with him. The cops let him go
> concluding that he wasn't a threat. The Prof over-reacted, pure and
> simple. If she'd kept her wits about her and simply made inquiries as
> to what was actually said in class, this whole dust-up could have been
> avoided. There was no indication that anyone was in any danger at all.
> far too many people, these days, confuse being afraid with being in
> real danger.

Agreed but both Chad and I were stating that from the news article one
could not really tell where the fault lie. Was it from overreaction (I
think it was, but I really don't know), was it from some of the
statements made by the student (I don't know and neither does anyone else
in this discussion unless they have access to other stuff than what has
been presented). What we have is a news article that everyone is acting
on based on their own prejudices and biases as to what really happened.
The same thing some are accusing the professor of doing.

--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

If you can read this......thank a teacher and your school system.
If it is in English.......thank a vet and the Border Patrol.

SaPeIsMa

3/8/2009 9:37:00 PM

0


"Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
news:49b35b3f$0$3253$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Gray Ghost" <grey_ghost471-newsgroups@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9BC7A0E9F5E1FWereofftoseethewizrd@216.196.97.142...
>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in
>> news:49b2b8d8$0$32007$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:
>>
>>> "Bill Smith" <quandary@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rmc5r4db79f5l2nlpjtje31s4uc2s7fiki@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 03:43:35 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:5dGdnTE2XIPoGy_UnZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@posted.cpinternet...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:49b20c08$0$19326$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>>>> "Nicholas" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:77280c8c-e775-43b2-9d12-a9f71570c92a@r36g2000vbp.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>> ... On Mar 6, 3:54 am, waldo88 <hp...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 7:59 pm, grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com (Gray Ghost)
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > What happens when you call the cops and thier busy on diversity
>>>>>>>> > patrol.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > BWAhahahahah.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Freee speeech for lefties, none for righties. Admit it, greedom
>>>>>>>> > is
>>>>>>>> > a scary thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article
>>>>>>>> > which follows. To view this item online,
>>>>>>>> > visithttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/... pageId=90740
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Thursday, March 05, 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > --------?-- --- WEAPONS OF CHOICE
>>>>>>>> > WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>> > Prof calls cops when student mentions guns in speech
>>>>>>>> > 'If you can't talk about the 2nd Amendment, what happened to the
>>>>>>>> > 1st Amendment?'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > --------?-- --- Posted: March 04, 2009
>>>>>>>> > 11:40 pm Eastern
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> > --------?-- --- WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > A professor at a Connecticut school has sparked controversy by
>>>>>>>> > calling police when a student talked about the Second Amendment
>>>>>>>> > during a class speech.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prof. is a New England Starbucks-sipping, Ben and Jerry's nibbling
>>>>>>>> bull dyke!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mitch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.... V-Dare
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > *Most* of the murder victims I'm familiar with, directly or
>>>>>>>> > indirectly, would be alive if they had been armed with a gun and
>>>>>>>> > weren't afraid to USE it.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I guess some people would rather DIE. And they do, in droves.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Nick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the murder victims at Virginia Tech might be alive too if
>>>>>>> teachers at that institution had been as 'vigilant' in reporting
>>>>>>> their suspicions as this professor was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can we know from that story the speech was so innocent? The prof
>>>>>>> said he 'scared' other students... it makes a LOT more sense that it
>>>>>>> wasn't totally innocent if a professor, her faculty head and campus
>>>>>>> police all thought it was worth following up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But don't let logic stand in your way of accusing anyone left of the
>>>>>>> far right of being a dyke or having a death wish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you a survivor of Florida 2000 ?
>>>>>> You sure sound about as intelligent as one of those "chads"
>>>>>> Did you even READ the article ?
>>>>>> let me cite you some relevant passages
>>>>>> "The student was fulfilling an assignment for his Communications
>>>>>> 140 class that required him to discuss a "relevant issue in the
>>>>>> media" when he and two other students on a team chose to talk
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> school violence, including recent events such as the 2007
>>>>>> shootings
>>>>>> that left nearly three dozen people dead at Virginia Tech"
>>>>>> "Wahlberg made the point during his Oct. 3, 2008, class
>>>>>> presentation that if students were allowed to carry concealed
>>>>>> weapons on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier.
>>>>>> He discussed the concept of college campus gun-free zones. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently such discussions made the prof pee her pants
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And here's the town fool to prove the point.
>>>>>
>>>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>>>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>>>
>>>> Bill Smith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who says they didn't use common sense?
>>>
>>> Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed
>>> carry
>>> on campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who thought
>>> whatever he said made him worth checking out.
>>>
>>> If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point of
>>> view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech issue..
>>> but
>>> that is not what the article leads me to automatically assume like the
>>> town fool does.
>>>
>>> Chad
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> People who wet themselves at the mere mention of guns probably aren't the
>> most objective.
>>
>
> Agree, but you still seem to be assuming the professor is anti-gun and
> that was her sole motivation.
>

One only has to see the knee-jerk reaction justified with the claim that
some students were made uncomfortable.
That is a TYPICAL knee-jerk pee-in-the-pants reaction from hoplophobes
After a while, for those who have seen it over and over, it's like watching
someone turn green and expecting them to throw up.

SaPeIsMa

3/8/2009 10:23:00 PM

0


"Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
news:49b36ac3$0$2602$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
> news:-Midna65NvNXlS7UnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@posted.cpinternet...
>>
>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:49b2b8d8$0$32007$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> "Bill Smith" <quandary@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rmc5r4db79f5l2nlpjtje31s4uc2s7fiki@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 03:43:35 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:5dGdnTE2XIPoGy_UnZ2dnUVZ_s3inZ2d@posted.cpinternet...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:49b20c08$0$19326$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>>>> "Nicholas" <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:77280c8c-e775-43b2-9d12-a9f71570c92a@r36g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>> On Mar 6, 3:54 am, waldo88 <hp...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 7:59 pm, grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com (Gray Ghost)
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > What happens when you call the cops and thier busy on diversity
>>>>>>>> > patrol.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > BWAhahahahah.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Freee speeech for lefties, none for righties. Admit it, greedom
>>>>>>>> > is a
>>>>>>>> > scary
>>>>>>>> > thing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article
>>>>>>>> > which
>>>>>>>> > follows.
>>>>>>>> > To view this item online,
>>>>>>>> > visithttp://www.worldnetdaily.com/...
>>>>>>>> > pageId=90740
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > Thursday, March 05, 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------?--
>>>>>>>> > ---
>>>>>>>> > WEAPONS OF CHOICE
>>>>>>>> > WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>> > Prof calls cops when student mentions guns in speech
>>>>>>>> > 'If you can't talk about the 2nd Amendment, what happened to the
>>>>>>>> > 1st
>>>>>>>> > Amendment?'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------?--
>>>>>>>> > ---
>>>>>>>> > Posted: March 04, 2009
>>>>>>>> > 11:40 pm Eastern
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------?--
>>>>>>>> > ---
>>>>>>>> > WorldNetDaily
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > A professor at a Connecticut school has sparked controversy by
>>>>>>>> > calling
>>>>>>>> > police
>>>>>>>> > when a student talked about the Second Amendment during a class
>>>>>>>> > speech.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Prof. is a New England Starbucks-sipping, Ben and Jerry's nibbling
>>>>>>>> bull dyke!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mitch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.... V-Dare
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > *Most* of the murder victims I'm familiar with, directly or
>>>>>>>> > indirectly, would be alive if they had been armed with a gun and
>>>>>>>> > weren't afraid to USE it.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I guess some people would rather DIE. And they do, in droves.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Nick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the murder victims at Virginia Tech might be alive too if
>>>>>>> teachers at that institution had been as 'vigilant' in reporting
>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>> suspicions as this professor was.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can we know from that story the speech was so innocent? The prof
>>>>>>> said
>>>>>>> he 'scared' other students... it makes a LOT more sense that it
>>>>>>> wasn't
>>>>>>> totally innocent if a professor, her faculty head and campus police
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> thought it was worth following up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But don't let logic stand in your way of accusing anyone left of the
>>>>>>> far
>>>>>>> right of being a dyke or having a death wish.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chad
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you a survivor of Florida 2000 ?
>>>>>> You sure sound about as intelligent as one of those "chads"
>>>>>> Did you even READ the article ?
>>>>>> let me cite you some relevant passages
>>>>>> "The student was fulfilling an assignment for his Communications
>>>>>> 140
>>>>>> class that required him to discuss a "relevant issue in the media"
>>>>>> when he and two other students on a team chose to talk about
>>>>>> school violence, including recent events such as the 2007
>>>>>> shootings
>>>>>> that left nearly three dozen people dead at Virginia Tech"
>>>>>> "Wahlberg made the point during his Oct. 3, 2008, class
>>>>>> presentation
>>>>>> that if students were allowed to carry concealed weapons on
>>>>>> campus,
>>>>>> the violence could have been stopped earlier.
>>>>>> He discussed the concept of college campus gun-free zones. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently such discussions made the prof pee her pants
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And here's the town fool to prove the point.
>>>>>
>>>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>>>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>>>
>>>> Bill Smith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who says they didn't use common sense?
>>>
>>> Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed
>>> carry on campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who
>>> thought whatever he said made him worth checking out.
>>>
>>
>> So explain to us the following
>> Since ONLY the Prof (1 staff) heard his presentation, on what basis did
>> the other 2 staff decide, that "whatever he said made him worth checking
>> out." ?
>>
>>
>>> If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point of
>>> view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech issue..
>>> but that is not what the article leads me to automatically assume like
>>> the town fool does.
>>>
>>
>> What do you think the odds are that this "professor" was in fact
>> anti-gun.
>> Could it be that her reaction was COMPLETELY "hoplophbic" and that she
>> got 2 other dolts to go along with her
>> Why don't you go back and read again her reasons for calling the F-troop
>> out ?
>> And that way, you will stop projecting your high qualifications as a
>> fool on me
>> (It's very flattering of you to try to include me in your group,
>> but I decline the invitation)
>>
>>
>
> You come across as mentally deficient or ill. Take a breath and engage
> your brain before typing!
>


Ah
When not able to respond intelligently to the points made, you make
defamatory accusations of mental illness
Maybe YOU should engage your brain, if you can find it, before typing
Apparently, you're not mature enough to deal with having your inane,
ignorant and prejudiced comments ripped apart for what they are.
It should also be noted that I asked you some questions that you ignored in
favor of insults
Why do you think that is ?




> My main point was that several people posted making big _assumptions_
> about the professor being a dyke, anti-gun and obviously unjustified in
> saying anything about a student speech.
>
'
You moron
The issue was NOT about her being "
"obviously unjustified in saying anything about a student speech."
As a professor in charge of a class discussion, she had not only every right
to comment, she even had the authority to grade
The real issue, you idiot is whether
a) the prof had justification to call the cops on her student
b) the cops had the justification to call on the student
c) the school should have prevaricated and covered up for a) and b)

In response to the above
1) NO the prof had NO reason to call the cops
Her action was TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED, since there was no apparent
statements made that in ANY WAY indicated that the student was in ANY way
breaking or planning on breaking the law
2) Ditto for the campus cops
IN both cases this is pretty clearly an attempt to punish the student for
his politically INcorrect opinion about guns, and carry.





> Then you come along, do the same thing, and now want to extend that into
> more assumptions about the campus reporting system.
>

You seem to be confused as to who has made ANY assumptions
Maybe you should review YOUR comments and YOUR responses before you go
projecting on others



> That's why you _are_ the fool that proved my point... and you keep doing
> it over and again! Think man, think!
>

Look in the mirror, boy.
Because you're right
I'm the man here.
You're not there yet.



>
> But as you are so persistent I guess it's only fair to play your game a
> little.
>

You're not even in our league, sonny


>
> "What do you think the odds are the prof was anti-gun?"
>
> There isn't much there to give a clue, she could be president of the local
> gunclub for all we know. If you want to assume the majority of university
> professors are liberal thinkers, then the odds are slightly higher she is
> anti-gun rather than pro-gun but there is nothing to make it _obvious_
> either way... certainly nothing to support claims she is a pants wetting
> dyke hoplophobic!!
>


1) Here response was an EXCELLENT clue to her being a hoplophobe
Why do we know that ?
Because unlike you, most of us who carry have at one time or another
run into such persons
2) To address your nonsense about the prof being "the president of the
local gunclub(sic)"
Any person who is a shooter would have agreed with the student's
presentation about gun-free zones
They would not have gotten upset and have their panties in a knot
for it
Ditto about any students reactions to the subject matter
3) As to your fixation about her being called a dyke
Don't project that on me
Address the person who made that comment



> think the most logical ones would be that the professor explained her
> concerns to a faculty head who agreed they were valid enough to report to
> campus security, who in turn thought they were valid enough to follow up
> on. The article also says some students reported being fearful of the guy
> based on the speech... there is some chance the professor has no choice
> but to report to her faculty head in that case too. (if you are happy to
> make even more assumptions)
>

So tell us about the "possible concerns" of the prof ?
What exactly should have been her concerns about 3 students making a
presentation where the stated that
a) gun-free zones don't work
b) Look at Virginia Tech as an example of that failure
c) Instead persons who have permits to carry should be allowed to carry
on campus and increase the overall safety on campus ?
What exactly is there in such opinions to justify calling the cops ?
Take as many screens as you need
But I'm pretty sure that instead of addressing these issues, you will
instead resort to name-calling, defamatory comments, and general stupidity


> Unlike you I don't think it's logical to assume that a faculty head must
> be a "dolt"... the opposite in fact. I've got no real opinion about the
> normal quality of campus security versus F-Troop, but I guess it's also
> logical to assume they have university mandated guidelines to follow about
> what constitutes evidence of a dangerous student and maybe even some
> experience with dealing with the issue.
>

1) The over-reaction shown by the prof, the faculty head, and the cops is
CLEARLY the behavior of dolts
2) Since you claim to have no real opinion, why are you flapping your
lips making opinion statements ?
If you have no opinion, shut the fuck up and don't waste air
3) Most campuses are in actual fact populated by wanna-be cops who can't
make the grade for the local police department
In many cases, they are trained less and paid less than the local PD
On far too many some campuses, they are nothing but glorified
security guards who are there for show

>
> So, to put it in a nutshell... I think you are The Town Fool for proving
> my point, you are also a fool for making so many assumptions, and I think
> the assumptions you _are_ making are also patently foolish.
>

What you're really saying is that since you can't address the points I made,
you are reduced to name-calling and defamation
Unlike you, I back up my position with logic
Too bad you can't make the same claim
You only have name-calling and defamation
Who do you think the REAL Town Fool" really is here
(Hint: Look in your mirror)


> Is any of this getting past that red mist yet?.
>

What red mist is that ?
The one that prevents your brain from actually working ?

If you want to trade insults with me, sonny, be ready to have some red mist
in your life just before I hand you your head
And having been a prof for over 10 years, I can guarantee you that I can
hand you your head with too much effort
Been there, done that with dolts like you

Bill Smith

3/8/2009 11:15:00 PM

0

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 15:39:18 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:

>Bill Smith <squandary@comcast.net> wrote in
>news:jq78r4129fttq538mmfncvsqgot93oenod@4ax.com:
>
>>
>>>> So, apparently, a little common sense from the Prof and the campus
>>>> cops is too much to ask for?
>>>>
>>>> Bill Smith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Who says they didn't use common sense?
>>>
>>>Sure the article infers all he did was present a case for concealed
>>>carry on campus but it also mentions at least 3 university staff who
>>>thought whatever he said made him worth checking out.
>>>
>>>If all this was is some anti-gun professor trying to silence a point
>>>of view, then I'd agree it unreasonable, and a freedom of speech
>>>issue.. but that is not what the article leads me to automatically
>>>assume like the town fool does.
>>>
>>>Chad
>>>
>>
>> He made no threats and had no weapons with him. The cops let him go
>> concluding that he wasn't a threat. The Prof over-reacted, pure and
>> simple. If she'd kept her wits about her and simply made inquiries as
>> to what was actually said in class, this whole dust-up could have been
>> avoided. There was no indication that anyone was in any danger at all.
>> far too many people, these days, confuse being afraid with being in
>> real danger.
>
>Agreed but both Chad and I were stating that from the news article one
>could not really tell where the fault lie. Was it from overreaction (I
>think it was, but I really don't know), was it from some of the
>statements made by the student (I don't know and neither does anyone else
>in this discussion unless they have access to other stuff than what has
>been presented). What we have is a news article that everyone is acting
>on based on their own prejudices and biases as to what really happened.
>The same thing some are accusing the professor of doing.

You have a point, but, presumably, the cops talked to those who
witnessed the presentation, as well as the "perp" who gave it. When
they found nothing, they let him go. I think there is good reason to
assume the Prof panicked for no reason.

Bill Smith

tankfixer

3/9/2009 2:07:00 AM

0

In article <49b3ef0d$0$19326$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
cbstun@safemail.com says...
> "Gunner Asch" <gunner@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote in message
> news:pqo7r4du4lfa52m6e239d69o39ss7ep1ep@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 17:57:48 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So after checking the other articles on the subject...you still feel
> >>> this way?
> >>>
> >>> Or did you simply knee jerk and go by the one article and pee your
> >>> pants as well?
> >>>
> >>> Gunner Asch
> >>>
> >>
> >>I haven't seen any other articles Gunner, and my first response was,
> >>ironically, criticising several people's knee jerk responses to the
> >>original
> >>one. :)
> >
> > With your own knee jerk based on a single article.
>
> Huh? Which word above didn't you comprehend?
>
>
> >>
> >>I'm only reading this thread from the nascar group.. sounds like there may
> >>be other side threads in the other groups I haven't seen.
> >>
> >>I stick to what I said though.. if she is just anti-gun and stifling
> >>speech.. I'm as against that as everyone else and agree it should not be
> >>tolerated.
> >>
> >>Chad
> >>
> >
> > Should she be fired, along with her 2 cronies?
> >
> > Gunner
>
> Thanks for again showing how quickly some of you gun rights extremists rush
> to make assumptions and baseless judgements. Why do you want to do it so
> badly? I don't see enough evidence in that article to decide who is right or
> wrong. Tell me why you think they should be fired if you like and I'll
> happily say if I agree or not... but once again for the slow kids... I
> posted objecting to some baseless assumptions, so I am not about to start
> making my own up!
>
> Does it feel more comfortable re-inforcing your intractable beliefs with
> guesses and assumptions? Or is it just too hard to imagine that anyone who
> stands up for the 2nd ammendment might also be a dangerous person worthy of
> campus security checking out?
>
> You're very quick to try and group anyone who questions your beliefs as
> liberal, scared, stupid etc... maybe you think the rest of the world might
> do that to you if someone "on your side" turns out to be a lunatic.
> Newsflash: the rest of the world aren't all extemists like you are...
> especially the liberal thinkers... thankfully.

You owe me a new keyboard...


--
Meddle ye not in the Affairs of Dragons, for Thou art Crunchy and taste
Goode with Ketchup.

Chad

3/9/2009 5:28:00 AM

0

You're funny... as a university professor yourself (roflmfao) surely you do
know what an assumption is?

You're also a waste of time though... so I'll leave your words to stand
alone as my response to your 'logic'. ;-)

(PS. you might want to look up irony too, when you have that dictionary out
learning what assumption means)


"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:MO6dndYwQoum2CnUnZ2dnUVZ_rDinZ2d@posted.cpinternet...
>

> You moron

> the prof had NO reason to call the cops
> Her action was TOTALLY UNJUSTIFIED, since there was no apparent
> statements made that in ANY WAY indicated that the student was in ANY way
> breaking or planning on breaking the law

>
> You seem to be confused as to who has made ANY assumptions


> Any person who is a shooter would have agreed with the student's
> presentation about gun-free zones


> you will instead resort to name-calling, defamatory comments, and general
> stupidity
>

>
> 1) The over-reaction shown by the prof, the faculty head, and the cops
> is CLEARLY the behavior of dolts


> Most campuses are in actual fact populated by wanna-be cops who can't make
> the grade for the local police department

>
> What you're really saying is that since you can't address the points I
> made, you are reduced to name-calling and defamation


> Unlike you, I back up my position with logic
> Too bad you can't make the same claim


> You only have name-calling and defamation
> Who do you think the REAL Town Fool" really is here
> (Hint: Look in your mirror)
>

>
> What red mist is that ?
> The one that prevents your brain from actually working ?
>
> If you want to trade insults with me, sonny, be ready to have some red
> mist in your life just before I hand you your head
> And having been a prof for over 10 years, I can guarantee you that I
> can hand you your head with too much effort
> Been there, done that with dolts like you


Gunner Asch

3/9/2009 5:59:00 AM

0

On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:07:08 -0700, tankfixer <paul.carrier@gmail.com>
wrote:

>In article <49b3ef0d$0$19326$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
>cbstun@safemail.com says...
>> "Gunner Asch" <gunner@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote in message
>> news:pqo7r4du4lfa52m6e239d69o39ss7ep1ep@4ax.com...
>> > On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 17:57:48 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@safemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> So after checking the other articles on the subject...you still feel
>> >>> this way?
>> >>>
>> >>> Or did you simply knee jerk and go by the one article and pee your
>> >>> pants as well?
>> >>>
>> >>> Gunner Asch
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>I haven't seen any other articles Gunner, and my first response was,
>> >>ironically, criticising several people's knee jerk responses to the
>> >>original
>> >>one. :)
>> >
>> > With your own knee jerk based on a single article.
>>
>> Huh? Which word above didn't you comprehend?
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>I'm only reading this thread from the nascar group.. sounds like there may
>> >>be other side threads in the other groups I haven't seen.
>> >>
>> >>I stick to what I said though.. if she is just anti-gun and stifling
>> >>speech.. I'm as against that as everyone else and agree it should not be
>> >>tolerated.
>> >>
>> >>Chad
>> >>
>> >
>> > Should she be fired, along with her 2 cronies?
>> >
>> > Gunner
>>
>> Thanks for again showing how quickly some of you gun rights extremists rush
>> to make assumptions and baseless judgements. Why do you want to do it so
>> badly? I don't see enough evidence in that article to decide who is right or
>> wrong. Tell me why you think they should be fired if you like and I'll
>> happily say if I agree or not... but once again for the slow kids... I
>> posted objecting to some baseless assumptions, so I am not about to start
>> making my own up!
>>
>> Does it feel more comfortable re-inforcing your intractable beliefs with
>> guesses and assumptions? Or is it just too hard to imagine that anyone who
>> stands up for the 2nd ammendment might also be a dangerous person worthy of
>> campus security checking out?
>>
>> You're very quick to try and group anyone who questions your beliefs as
>> liberal, scared, stupid etc... maybe you think the rest of the world might
>> do that to you if someone "on your side" turns out to be a lunatic.
>> Newsflash: the rest of the world aren't all extemists like you are...
>> especially the liberal thinkers... thankfully.
>
>You owe me a new keyboard...
>
Damn I hate it when Mt. Dew comes out my nose.....

at yoyodyne they were all veterans of the psychic wars
exiled from the eighth dimension where the winds of limbo roar"
? ? ? ? ? ? ?mariposa rand mair theal