How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

[golinux]

systemd (Score:5, Insightful)
by rl117 (110595) <rleigh.codelibre@net> on Sunday April 26, 2015 @05:17AM (#49554047) Homepage
Is anyone familiar with this ex-developer?

He is an op on the #devuan channel. I have only seen him participate occasionally.

You might find this interesting.

[mor]

Sorry if i offended you.

Offended me? No, come on, did I say that?
No, we're cool my friend, I never felt disrespected or anything, I hope the same it true for you.

Actually I have had you in my good book for a long time and it is mostly because of this that I was surprised you missed those things.

You're a scrapper. I like that but you really shouldn't tell people what they have/not read.

I understand how it may have come across the wrong way and I'm sorry for it.
The reason why I emphasized you needed to read it, is because you missed (at least that's how I perceived it, but I think confuseling too did) the point of that thread, of its title and why I don't mean that "people should love metapackages".
When you said I should have removed the link from my signature, you made me think that, beside not having read the next two lines, you were focusing on the literary meaning of the title, and not on the content of the guide, which is simply aimed at teaching users how to deal with metapackages.

By the way, in this thread where it seems like one can only love or hate something...I don't love or hate metapackages (just like I don't hate or love systemd).

The systemd argument will remain bipolar as it's a fundamental shift in the operations of Linuxland, not some trivial new software. It will pretty much make it impossible to run Debian without systemd libraries Jessie forward, as you should know based on the many previous posts on this exact subject.

I agree it'll always divide opinions, but can you honestly say you don't believe I'm not partial after all I've said and will say?

But yes, I understand the concern about system making it impossible to run a system without some libraries.
The reason why I think it is over exaggerated is that in my particular point of view, as long as the libraries do not do harm (which is often implied but untrue) and as long as all things systemd can remain inactive allowing one to run sysvinit or any other init (as it is currently possible, am I wrong on this?), I don't see a huge problem, from a philosophical standpoint.
Sure, technically it may be annoying, a redundancy to have inactive unused libs (although, honestly, how much space we're talking about here?) and inelegant, but practically, until it will be mandatory to run systemd, and not just to have a few interfacing libs, I can't accept the "there's no choice" and "the world is going to crap" arguments.

I can and do take seriously the concerns about possible future development that could force users to run only systemd, and that scares me because even though I don't really care for me, I am a freedom supporter first and I wouldn't agree with that for one second.

But right now I don't see any violation and as a user I have no reason to distrust Debian or even systemd.

Maybe naively, I trust in the good faith of those who do the development and in the fact that especially those who oppose systemd can look at the code for shenanigans. In fact I believe that in the context of free software people will fork stuff before a totalitarian turn of events.
If I'm gonna be a fool on this so be it, I will regret not seeing it coming and pull up my sleeves to help fixing the mess.

But right now, nobody can back up with facts and serious reasoning any such outcome and I think it is fair to ask to stick to what's real and be objective and rational about it.

I've been an adult for a long time and would never use the language you just utilized.

What language did I use?

I am not one who refrains from the occasional "bad word", on this board there is a fair tolerance for a moderate amount of foul mouth expression and I have never received a message from either the staff or regular users about me abusing this freedom (actually if anything, the opposite).
Besides, what I'm referring to is not the language in itself, but the attitude behind the language.

I have called out such users, or better yet I have called out the typology of users. Indeed I care about the final language only to a certain extent, like for instance writing Microshit or Micro$oft doesn't make any difference in my book, it is just as foolish.

So yes, I have definitely took my liberties and I have been harsh with them, deservedly so, but I ask you to tell me where and when I have been on the same level, if that is what you meant.

Anyway, what's the point of you saying you don't do it?
Even if I was accusing you directly, which I'm not, would proving that you don't do it make the issue vanish?

Does a multitude, the majority indeed, of anti-systemd detractors resort to childish, nonproductive behavior?
Can we agree it is a bad thing?

That's all.

You are correct about the rants and childish behaviours. It will die down as detractors migrate away.

No, it won't.
Detractors are both those who are constructive and those who are not. But even if you meant fanatic detractors as opposed to legitimate detractors, the latter will get lost among the former and the whole anti-systemd crowd will easily end up being remembered for the antics and the fud instead of the serious, legitimate and competent claims of those who know what they are complaining about.
I wonder how much did dasein weigh this issue in when he wrote the revisionist essay. I fear not enough.

The last to migrate (if they ever will) will be the ones who chant Poettering's name or speak of the Redhat apocalypse, not the competent ones who I bet feel frustrated and disheartened by having to fight this battle with such counterproductive co-supporters.

If I were just a little bit more capable of understanding the technical aspects of the issue...

You've claimed ignorance for some time. With all your Debian experience, running testing for years, you are still not capable of making a judgement or understanding the technical merits?

No, I'm not.
And thank you for asking directly so I can also respond to buntunub who could have done the same.

First of all, I may be naturally inclined to understate the extent of my expertise in general (quite a few of my closest friends and acquaintances have told me that) which often makes me disqualify myself from "jury duties" on account of being not competent enough. I still believe that my standard is not too high and that everybody else's is waaay too low, but hey, you gotta go with a median right?

In this case however, I don't think I'm understating my true competence and knowledge and I don't think it is a big sin since I never argued technical stuff.
If you are at least as competent as me, you know that running Testing/Unstable for more than a decade at best accounts for being careful in reading apt-listbugs when upgrading.
I may know a few things here and there, but ultimately I'm just an average user who, by the way, in the last five years or so has gradually lost most of his "sex drive" towards becoming more knowledgeable about computer related stuff (this means motivation to go the extra mile are far lower than they once were).

When I say I don't have the necessary understanding, and I also imply that the vast majority of those who claim they do also don't, I refer to the fact that for me truly understanding the issue means being close to a programmer, not to a user who runs scripts and loads/unloads services.

Most of the claims, the serious ones, against systemd are very technical and only people who can look at the code can say they have at least a basic skillset to make an informed evaluation. Sometimes even that may not be enough.

The rest of people simply judges based on guts, hearsay or on the trust (which can on occasions be ok) they have on other people they think know better.
This sadly, is true for everything, run your mind through how most people form opinions.

In this situation, I could make my mind and become a systemd supporter or detractor simply based on what someone who I think is knowledgeable enough thinks, but I can't do it for two reasons: it is hard for me to decide this way without even personally knowing my trusted people, and anyway the ones I know and somewhat trust are divided as well.

Also, there is the divide within Debian. If they are so divided, then it can't be any easier for me to just pick a side.

I went with systemd simply because it was the most convenient option for me.
As a Gnome user, who happens to be very comfortable with the new desktop paradigm despite how much some of you despise it (and I don't think you are old farts for not liking the shell), accepting systemd was not a problem, considering I didn't have any prejudice.
I always wondered if I didn't like the shell and I would have moved to xfce (I think that's where I would have moved from gnome 2.x), I would have most likely stayed with sysvinit, but remained neutral just the same.

Now, I certainly am guilty of not making any effort to understand more of the technical side of it, so there you have it buntunub, you nailed me.
I'll tell you more, I don't think I'll ever fancy studying to understand it.

But have I ever discussed technical matters about systemd?
Have I ever said anything, positive or negative about technical aspects of systemd or sysvinit?

The only things I have said concern the need to have people discussing it seriously, without childish attitudes and other non constructive behaviors.
This can be said about pretty much any issue.

Also, I may have spent a few words about some "philosophical" aspects like freedom of choice and software freedom in general, but those subjects hardly require much technical knowledge of this issue and, anyway, I have never gone too far if some knowledge was required.

I challenge you to find something I wrote in the past that contradicts what I just said.

Also, I would like you to argue about how my honest position is not desirable instead of that of most, who claim to have the knowledge, when it is statistically difficult to believe that in such a technical issue an overwhelming majority understands enough to make an informed decision while I'm the only one who confesses not to be up to the task.
C'mon!

You just read PAP's experience and there are currently at least two other active threads from long time Debian users reluctantly leaving. Do some research and decide for yourself.

I think you read enough of my posts and by now you should have noticed how I tend to speak of general cases and make analogies to depict potential scenarios.
Anecdotal evidence will always be just that.

Users have been leaving and embracing distros long before systemd came along.
Now you are noticing those who do so because of it, but this is a very easy to detect cognitive bias (systemd is the big headline), don't get fooled by it.

Sure systemd made its victims, but then again, people come and go all the time and systemd is just in the mix with much more stuff.

The other day there was a new Jessie user who did not yet install wireless firmware. He had to gut /var because the partition filled. By the time he rebooted and installed the firmware, the system reportedly generated something like 50MB of repetitive logs within a few seconds. There are many other Jessie stories on this forum. Of course, you could argue every new release has issues.

Quick research indicates traditional init is based on ~75 files and ~15,000 lines of code vs systemd's >900 files and >125,000 lines. Traditional init has been around and debugged forever and rarely causes problems. systemd is still in active development and is now being used by Debian, once regarded as the most conservative and stable Linux distribution around. Which init system will likely be more problematic? That's just the tip of the iceberg for technical arguments.

Honestly I don't care discussing about technical points like this one,as I said, I don't have the knowledge to do so.
I do care about reading people talk about technical stuff however, but rationally and objectively, and if every other post I have to go through the rants and the antics, it makes my indirect informing less enjoyable and less productive.

Most of the exerienced users on this forum have left in the last few months. I suspect it's much more than paranoia or an unwillingness to change.

No, most of them have left a long time ago, slowly bleeding out from this community.
As I said before some have certainly felt like systemd was the last straw, but to say that most have left in the last few months is wrong and unfair.

Wow, you made it this far, kudos!

Bye

[confuseling]

...
Quick research indicates traditional init is based on ~75 files and ~15,000 lines of code vs systemd's >900 files and >125,000 lines. Traditional init has been around and debugged forever and rarely causes problems. systemd is still in active development and is now being used by Debian, once regarded as the most conservative and stable Linux distribution around. Which init system will likely be more problematic? That's just the tip of the iceberg for technical arguments.
...

I really don't see that as a valid comparison, both because the systemd project isn't just an init system, it incorporates lots of other plumbing (for good or ill), and since SysV means that every service has to ship with (sometimes complex) init scripts, which are pretty near universally acknowledged to be hard to debug.

Making things more coherent may well reduce overall complexity, and eliminating the boilerplate is certainly in line with Debian's 'no convenience copies' philosophy.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

Just for the record, I installed Linux From Scratch with systemd last weekend and the `./configure --help` list was extensive -- pretty much all the features can be disabled at compile-time...

If you don't like compiling stuff, you can always use:

Code: Select all

# systemctl mask <thing you don't like>

This can even be done without booting the system by symlinking the .service, .socket or .target to /dev/null

[Linadian]

TL;DR was created for a particular poster in this thread, wow is it *windy* (oral flatulence) in here, somebody open a window (not a Lenndows window, a real one).

[confuseling]

Mor's posts may often be long, but they're well thought out, written and structured.

Yours are definitely short - and that's the best thing that can be said about them.

[mardybear]

mor....Thanks for your response - i read through to the end

Don't want to clutter up the thread. Primarily want to say no hard feelings - everything is good.

My language comment was simply in response to this, nothing more. Even though you are simply repeating the sentiment of others, it sounded to me like you were getting quite worked up. I realize it's a dictionary word and all, but i like to keep things really clean.

mor wrote:
...like Redhat wanting world domination or Poettering wanting to **** everybody in the ass?

Yes we are all experts, as well as above average drivers! So it's easy to become arrogant or over estimate abilities with a few years experience. In that sense i applaud your viewpoint. On the flipside, everyone has to make a judgement sometime, we can't all be renowned experts or top notch programmers. In the retail world consumers vote with their wallets and in the world of OS geeks, the vote is made by which software gets installed. After all, if you can't have control over the software you run, may as well just install Windows right?

Must admit i'm a little confused but don't want to get into a discussion. You want rational discussion, but nothing technical. What then are we talking about when every anti-systemd non-technical argument appears to get categorized as paranoid and irrational and the OS geeks on the forum are not competent to make a technical judgement.

In the end, everyone needs to make up their own mind, whether they are in/competent or care/don't care. There's really not much more to discuss, since everyone's already picked sides and made a decision. As already mentioned, installing the software involves making a decision.

confuseling wrote:
I really don't see that as a valid comparison, both because the systemd project isn't just an init system, it incorporates lots of other plumbing (for good or ill)

You don't see it as a valid comparison because the Linux world has never yet been enveloped by such an all encompassing software suite. That's really the problem, systemd is no longer just init. If a user wants to stick more closely with Unix ideals, systemd is blasphemy. Your last comment to Linadian is nothing more than stirring the pot, really just trolling and from a staff member nonetheless

[Linadian]

Mor's posts may often be long, but they're well thought out, written and structured.

Yours are definitely short - and that's the best thing that can be said about them.

At least I don't shill beta bloatware designed to rot the Linux eco-system from the inside out. Keep on keepin' on drinking that kool-aid and follow the rest of the lennings (that's not a typo) off the cliff. It astounds me how people involved with this distribution (computer/software engineers and geniuses) that has struggled to maintain freedom and openness for years are suddenly smitten by a piece of garbage software that *might* increase your boot time by a few seconds. If that's all you people do is boot your computers all day, over and over again, you've got a lot more to worry about than a few "detractors", lol. I don't need to go in to detail about systemd, that's been done to death, the fact remains it's an over-controlling buggy beta bloatware, there's no escaping that fact, that's what I don't understand, how could smart people fall for this $#1+, like some kind of bad Stepford Wives movie, or you've turned pod people or some $#1+, it's just bizarre, common sense has gone completely out the window.

Like I said before, Debian's insane decision to *embrace* systemd is not only the death of this distro, they killed off a pillar of GNU in the process. Linux is being pushed back to the fringes where it came from because of one punk's beta bloatware and his corporate employer. AAMOF confused one, I could care less what your purple @$$ thinks of my posts, no amount of propaganda from you or your long winded friend will change reality, Debian died April 25th, 2015, RIP. I can't wait for some pimply faced 12 year old whiz kids to bring down systemd, and oh, Debian, amongst others in the process, now THAT will be something to celebrate (in a "we told you so" kind of way).

https://systemdexploit.wordpress.com/

Let me ask you this oh wise one(s), if the Gnome DE requires a systemd upgrade to fix a problem mid Jessie release, is Debian going to open its mouth every time and be baby spoon fed whatever Lennart and Redhat churn out? That's a serious question, it might be a little embarassing for you but it's a definite possiblity and reality, albeit a very sad one.

[confuseling]

...You don't see it as a valid comparison because the Linux world has never yet been enveloped by such an all encompassing software suite. That's really the problem, systemd is no longer just init. If a user wants to stick more closely with Unix ideals, systemd is blasphemy...

systemd is a lot of separate binaries. The possibly valid thing that people object to is that it's all in the same tree.

BSD core systems are written in the same tree. Are they not UNIX?

The philosophy makes sense as far as it goes - things should be interchangeable *where it's useful*. Sometimes it isn't - the kernel, xorg and so on are (or were... not sure much is happening in xorg land any more) developed fairly monolithically.

So the question really is: is this a case where it's useful to develop something monolithically? I haven't a clue, I don't know enough about Linux plumbing. But I take it as a given that if most distros and several DEs embrace something fairly quickly, it looks good to people who know a hell of a lot more about it than I do.

I don't doubt that once systemd has stabilised (if it stabilises... it's also distinctly possible that something else will replace it, or fundamental design flaws will be uncovered, and it'll be abandoned) parts of it will be reimplemented (this is already happening insofar as logind is being separated out). They're not going to get away with deliberately obfuscating / changing the design to stop people doing this - there's too much invested in Linux's independence, and we have the source.

Debate the design or philosophy all you like. But if anyone insists on calling it a virus, or a corporate takeover of the tech committee, or calling Mr Poettering 'Lenfart' I reserve the right to laugh at them, they have it coming

[mor]

My language comment was simply in response to this, nothing more. Even though you are simply repeating the sentiment of others, it sounded to me like you were getting quite worked up. I realize it's a dictionary word and all, but i like to keep things really clean.

...like Redhat wanting world domination or Poettering wanting to **** everybody in the ass?

I suspected you meant something like that, but well, you said it yourself you got those weren't my words so I think it is fair to say it was misleading to suggest I was on the same level of certain people.
But thanks for explaining.

Yes we are all experts, as well as above average drivers! So it's easy to become arrogant or over estimate abilities with a few years experience. In that sense i applaud your viewpoint. On the flipside, everyone has to make a judgement sometime, we can't all be renowned experts or top notch programmers. In the retail world consumers vote with their wallets and in the world of OS geeks, the vote is made by which software gets installed. After all, if you can't have control over the software you run, may as well just install Windows right?

I understand what you say, but I can't force myself to agree.
I know it is probably utopian to think that a fairer and more accurate self assessment should be expected from anyone, but what can I say, that's how I think it should be.
I try to do that for me, if others don't I'll try to convince them, if they tell me to shut up I'll be sad, if one will follows my example I'll smile.

Must admit i'm a little confused but don't want to get into a discussion. You want rational discussion, but nothing technical.

No no, you are obviously confused, I'm sorry.

I do want the technical discussion!
I said *I* don't want to be part of it but only because, again, I don't belong to that discussion. But I want to read it, I want people to debate the pros and cons, the dangers and advantages of the matter, just rationally and objectively.
This is hardly ever happening, here and elsewhere and it makes it even harder for me to make my mind up.

What then are we talking about when every anti-systemd non-technical argument appears to get categorized as paranoid and irrational and the OS geeks on the forum are not competent to make a technical judgement.

Oh come on, you can't think I mean that.
There certainly can be non technical arguments about systemd, it is about how users conduct themselves in these discussions.
It is an attitude and a behavior problem. It is reasoning with guts against reasoning with brains.
This is something that can be applied to any topic of conversation, it doesn't relate strictly to systemd's discussions, technical or otherwise.

I really want the debate and I praise and encourage the anti-systemd people to go around and explain, educate and teach the nuances of the issue, but these things cannot be done by assuming that everybody who doesn't piss on Poettering's name is in cahoots with Redhat and NSA for the forceful enslavement of the few enlightened who know better than everybody else "just because they know it".

In the end, everyone needs to make up their own mind, whether they are in/competent or care/don't care. There's really not much more to discuss, since everyone's already picked sides and made a decision. As already mentioned, installing the software involves making a decision.

Of course we need to make up our minds, but I'd rather have a crowd of users aware of their limitations that end up undecided, than a crowd of users who are deluded into thinking they are absolutely and utterly right.

Take care my friend.

Bye

[mardybear]

confuseling wrote:
systemd is a lot of separate binaries.

Thanks for your response confuseling. In hindsight it's always easy to nitpick someone's response, just some impressions. No response required...i need to move on.

Most forum members are simple desktop/laptop OS enthusiasts. Does Debian or Linux really require more binaries and background daemons? Our OSs booted just fine the old school way. The more complex the software the more potential for problem.

The philosophy makes sense as far as it goes - things should be interchangeable *where it's useful*. Sometimes it isn't - the kernel, xorg and so on are (or were... not sure much is happening in xorg land any more) developed fairly monolithically...So the question really is: is this a case where it's useful to develop something monolithically?

Isn't it useful to keep init seperate, just as userspace is kept separate. Kernels are easily interchangeable. Users can still choose to run with TTY, framebuffer or Xvesa instead of Xorg. When Wayland is readily utilized, hopefully not everything else becomes obsolete.

In my opinion monolithic is not desirable, it's really just a shortcut to get everything installed in one fell swoop and i choose to build from the ground up. Hundreds of years later, that's still how houses get built.

But I take it as a given that if most distros and several DEs embrace something fairly quickly, it looks good to people who know a hell of a lot more about it than I do.

From many on this and other Linux forums, the change wasn't embraced willingly. Users who require newer software may eventually have no choice but to change. When leaded fuel was no longer processed, car owners had to switch to unleaded. The switch then also occurred quickly, the next time the tank was empty.

I don't doubt that once systemd has stabilised (if it stabilises...

Maybe you just made this statement to pacify - not sure. If systemd is not yet stable, what the heck is it doing in a stable Debian release? (sorry mor for the h-word )

...there's too much invested in Linux's independence, and we have the source.

To me this doesn't hold water, the systemd codebase is huge and complex, developed by a team over several years. Even an experienced and competent programmer would be hardpressed to make substantial changes to the code.

Debate the design or philosophy all you like. But if anyone insists on calling it a virus, or a corporate takeover of the tech committee, or calling Mr Poettering 'Lenfart' I reserve the right to laugh at them, they have it coming

As before i agree this is over the top. It's really just an OS but some have trouble getting over the anger...it takes time. Glad people vent their feelings, imagine if all this aggression and anger was pent up inside.

[Linadian]

Let me ask you this oh wise one(s), if the Gnome DE requires a systemd upgrade to fix a problem mid Jessie release, is Debian going to open its mouth every time and be baby spoon fed whatever Lennart and Redhat churn out? That's a serious question, it might be a little embarassing for you but it's a definite possiblity and reality, albeit a very sad one.

Your obvious lack of answer(s) to a serious question is very telling, spoon fed it is, let me wipe the dribble with your bib for ya.



You're both sad sell-outs, you should be ashamed and renounce your loyalty to Linux and FOSS.

Edit: Oh come on, Lennfart is hysterical, it suits the little gas-bag, have you listened to his rants? Too funny.

[Roel63]

It's really just an OS but some have trouble getting over the anger...it takes time. Glad people vent their feelings, imagine if all this aggression and anger was pent up inside.

Indeed and comparable with the anger that came with Gnome 3 that was the Wheezy "default". And what do we see now? Mate and Cinnamon packed as DE options upon installing Jessie.

[mor]

… but some have trouble getting over the anger...it takes time. Glad people vent their feelings, imagine if all this aggression and anger was pent up inside.

Let me comment on this please.

These users are not venting their feelings in harmless ways, their behavior is the equivalent of those who get into bars and snap off to some poor guy who looks at them or hit on other people's girls to pick up fights.
That's not positive, not at all.
If this forum was the real life, there would have been countless brawls because of people that can't keep their anger and bad attitude in check, and regardless of how good or bad they would have fared, there's nothing to be glad about them venting.
Indeed even if this is not real life, so no real fight ever broke out, the anger they vent is anger absorbed by others, all in all the balance might as well be even.

As bad as it is when people push down anger and then release it in violent ways, this is not their personal fight club.
There's something called Anger Management, there are meetings even in small towns these days: them going to these meetings is something to be glad about.

Bye

[acewiza]

Hundreds of years later, that's still how houses get built.

When leaded fuel was no longer processed, car owners had to switch to unleaded.

I get upset, no even angry, when people compare software to houses and cars.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

Hundreds of years later, that's still how houses get built.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/v ... hina-video

(Sorry for the off-topic)

[mardybear]

Sure is easy to get embattled.

@mor: Thanks for calling me friend. I also consider you a friend...full of peace and wisdom. Anger management good, agree with all your points. Not sure what to say. A post that, in your opinion, goes too far should be reported. Unfortunately there is no sheriff in town. Most forums any member who willingly and repeatedly disrupts conversation or obviously crosses the line gets banned.

@Head_on_a_Stick: Joking right? There's no magic, one layer at a time. As you've built Linux from Scratch and toyed with TinyCore, you know better than most how a system gets built up.

Obviously you know this but for the benefit of others, a Debian minimal install is hardly minimal at all. Debian has already painstakingly set up the file system, init system, default configuration files, kernel, package manager and meticulously tested to ensure all software plays nice together. Ground up.

There are several types of 3D printers, but all involve the same basic approach for “printing” an object: transferring a substance in multiple layers onto a building surface, beginning with the bottom layer.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/how-e ... -1.1371800

Just to keep this post even a bit on topic (avoid systemd). It is obviously easiest to use an OS that does not utilize systemd or build a system from scratch, rather than install Jessie and jump through hoops to replace systemd and then hope the system still allows you to utilize the software you require. IMO metapackages are no different.

@Roel63: Well the anger or rebellion in the case of systemd is warranted. Yes Debian makes it very easy to change a DE or WM, but if you ever have the time try installing Jessie, switch from systemd to traditional init and then installing the DE and all the software you want without incorporating systemd or systemd libraries. Or easier, just review some of the many posts on this subject in the forum.

@acewiza: Thanks for the humour, my points are still valid.

peace out

[Linadian]

I'd like to clear something up, outspoken revolutionaries and dissidents are the ones you thank when great humanitarian tragedies are avoided, not the poison pill swallowing wimps that cave to every little thing that's foisted on them. Just because you have a "can't we all get along" approach or attitude, it doesn't make you right or better, all you're really doing is implying that if anybody doesn't agree with YOU and what YOU like, they're somehow red-eyed psychotic and crazy. Shrinks could actually deduce from this that you may be a passive aggressive sociopath. You can spin all the fluff you want, there's always counter-spin.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

@Head_on_a_Stick: Joking right?

Yes, sorry -- didn't mean to wind you up.

[mardybear]

Me wound up... ... ... ... ...........

Thanks, now i've gotta drink decaf for the rest of the day!