How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition) Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000) Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)

User talk:Tarquin/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

< User talk:Tarquin

Back to User talk:Tarquin

It is obviously contested or we wouldn't be having an edit war over it. Vera Cruz

Ok. So what do YOU think is his most famous story? And who agrees with you? -- Tarquin

I am not going to get into a pov argument about which story is most famous. Vera Cruz

Good. don't then. stop damaging the Asimov article -- Tarquin 17:41 Jan 17, 2003 (UTC)

I get us mixed up too, Tarquin! When I first signed up I had already noticed your handle and felt that it was a little rude of me to chose one so similar, but I've been "Tannin" in a lot of places for quite a few years now, and don't have much imagination, so I just shrugged and went ahead anyway. Sorry for any confusion. (And just as well that you and I don't seem to get into conflicts much - I should imagine that the thought of following Recent Changes through an edit war between "Tannin" and "Tarquin" is not one that many readers would relish.) Tannin

Like that newscast I saw once describing a meeting between Ronald Reagan and Secretary of the Treasury Donald Regan.... Yeesh. Koyaanis Qatsi

Dare I mention the famous sporting occasion on which Australian fast bowler Dennis Lillee was batting and got out caught? On the opposing side was English fast bowler Dillie, and spin bowler Willey (I forget their first names). The result on the scorecard had a certain inevitability about it: Lille, caught Willey, bowled Dillee. Still more famous was the time when that same English spin bowler was batting against the West Indies, with their fearsome pace attack led by Michael Holding. Some poor unfortunate radio commentator uttered the immortal words: "It's 6 for 214 as play resumes; the bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey". (Sorry, I'm messing up your talk page. Read, laugh if it takes you that way, then revert me out of here.) Tannin

Or the fellow drowsing in a Karachi hotel near a stadium, hearing the scores announced in a field hockey game, Singh, Singh, Singh, Singh, thinking Singh must be a heck of a player, then finding that all players on both sides were named Singh. Ortolan88 Hey, wait a minute, how do we know you aren't both the same person?

I didn't find the similarity rude -- amusing, yes. :-) -- Tarquin 10:21 Jan 18, 2003 (UTC)

Your refusal to discuss things makes it hard to understand what it is that you are upset about. Vera Cruz

You, Vera. YOU. (sorry Isis for chatter on your talk page). We're annoyed at the way you don't give straight answers, dodge matters, and behave in a way that makes us think you're doing it on purpose to annoy us -- Tarquin 01:20 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)

I am not dodging matters. I have repeatedly stated that I believe a discussion on the origins and varied historical meanings of the word "imperialism" are best suited at the page on the word "imperialism" rather than at New Imperialism where there is a specific discussion of one imperialist era. I can't really stating that is dodging matters and as far as I know it is the only edit war I am involved with.

As for behaving in a way that annoys you...I am sorry I did something that bothered you but I do not remember you ever leaving a message on my talk page pertaining to some action which you found bothersome and I apoligize although I believe the situation would improve if you would try communication instead of "trolling about trolls". Vera Cruz

Thanks for the replies to my three questions on the Village Pump. I'm off to bed now (11.25 UK time) so I'll look properly at your answers tomorrow.

Best Wishes, Adrian Arpingstone 23:21 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)

Hello Tarq - Lir II

User "tannin" has gone silent. So I'm not sure what the appropriate next step is see talk:airship for details. Regards. User blimpguy

--- Thanks for the pointer on signing talk pages. However, I'm still not clear on how to add the data automatically.

In general, how does one learn about such tricks? I've looked around and haven't found the page(s) that show the syntax for anything. All of the knowledge of meta-characters and such I've picked up from looking at existing text. So I'd love a pointer. Blimpguy - Fri Jan 24 16:00:35 GMT 2003

You must be a Republican. Most people would be content to have him put a bit more thought into his contributions. Koyaanis Qatsi

you mean the wikipedia-L and all that? Depends... the archives are available, you can try scanning them to see what sort of stuff goes on. Lately, it's been "vera cruz must be banned", "what to do with the www. URL" and "we should all meet up for beer". join for the beer alone ;-) -- Tarquin 23:19 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)

Skip it; you can get the beer at meta. ;) --Brion 23:25 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)

bah. I did the same thing just the other day :-) . Thought it best to let you know before you put any more work into the duplicate. merge your text into the old one, it looked to me like you'd written things which aren't in the odler one -- Tarquin 00:51 Jan 28, 2003 (UTC)

• As most royals do not have surnames, using surnames is not an option;
• Correct titles should be used; if they don't have one, the form [Prince/Princess . . . of (country)] was the consensus.
• Children of the Prince of Wales are known as Prince/ss 'x' of Wales. (I checked it with Buckingham Palace for the discussion).
• Also, their surname (they do have one) are Mountbatten-Windsor, not Windsor (contrary to widespread myth. (Source: Buckingham Palace and Prince of Wales' office.

That is why William is down as 'Prince William of Wales', Harry is 'Prince Harry of Wales' whereas other British royals without titles are or are being changed to 'Prince/ss x of the United Kingdom' JTD 00:24 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

I've not really been in on this discussion; I appreciate the note but I'm a tad confused why ... are you sure you don't mean to tell this to Tannin? -- Tarquin 13:31 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

Not me. I confess to a total lack of interest in the royals. Tannin

According to the talk page, you suggested that the supposed surname of Prince William be used. I was explaining why I think this is not correct. As I said there was a major discussion over a number of weeks involving quite a few Wiki contributors, on various pages. I then posted a suggestion on the Wiki list. I have now posted the consensus agreement, incorporating all the suggested changes on how to deal with royal titles on the naming convention page. I also asked those involved in the discussion to look over it to see if it covers all the points of agreement and suggestion. That was the reason behind the message. JTD 20:32 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

Ah. I remember now... it was a few weeks ago, and I didn't take part in the rest of the debate. But thank you for letting me know :-) -- t

Dear Tarquin, Just thought I'd say hello. As a new user, I am much intrigued by your username - is it because you are known for being 'Superbus'? We seem to have quite a lot in common, judging by your user page; I quite agree with your 'raves and rants'. Anyway, I'd better be off for now. Goodbye! Olivia Curtis

welcome to the wikipedia! Always nice to see new users settling in. Hope you don't find it all too confusing, if you have any questions there's the village pump page somewhere... about the name: sadly, no, there's no connection with Romans. -- t

You think if you plead not guilty, she will file an additional defamation suit against your insinuation that she had filed a bogus charge? You know yer goin to jail when I'm supporting you. Vera Cruz

Housekeeping is what she did when I tried to talk to her too about the grevious injuries I have done to her. I'm sure you can now understand how frustrating that was. Vera Cruz

Yes, don't go. --Camembert

Tarquin, please do not leave Wikipedia! Your work is much appreciated and will live on for years to come. I and, I am sure, other Wikipedians will try to help you in case of a real legal threat. Sadly, the risk of such actions can hardly be eliminated, but we're all on your side here. Unfortunately, Jimbo tends to be a bit overtaxed with the administration and Brion keeps out of conflicts on the English Wikipedia, so we have a bit of a power vacuum. But I am sure this will change, and threats like this will not be tolerated. Feel free to contact me by email if you think I can be of any help. --Eloquence 12:28 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)

Could someone exlplain to me what this is about? All this illegal,legal.court case things,Isis, Tarquin is all about?? -fonzy

My vote probably doesn't count for much, but I think you should stay, too! If Isis gets the idea that she can drive off anyone who says something she doesn't like, simply by threatening them with legal action, then none of us will be safe... And of course we need all the British people we can get, to prevent the Wikipedia from being too mangled by all those pesky Americans. ;) -- Oliver P. 13:41 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)

Argh! Another fine contributer gone. You work was much appreciated, Tarquin, and I hope you'll decide to return at some point. Nil illegitimi carborundum.-- DrBob 16:22 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Bummer! Whose reputation is most harmed by whose actions? The page User_talk:Eloquence seems to have the best summaries of this, including the assertions of the offended party. As my aunt once said on a similar occasion: Ugh! Ugh! Ugh! Ortolan88 17:01 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Come back!

  13:42 Feb 4, 2003 Jimbo Wales deleted "User talk:Isis (archive)"
  13:42 Feb 4, 2003 Jimbo Wales deleted "User talk:Isis"
  13:41 Feb 4, 2003 Jimbo Wales deleted "User:Isis"
  13:39 Feb 4, 2003 Jimbo Wales deleted "K. Kay Shearin"

Yes, come back. One thing that we Brits don't have to worry about is silly threats of libel - since McLibel even large corporations are worried about bringing cases in Britain. -- Chris Q 17:32 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Look, I'm an American, but for what it's worth, I think it would be a damn shame if you left because of this. I think there's overwhelming support on your side, and as such I think you'll find that you will continue to be welcome here. At this point in time, the last thing we need is decent people jumping ship while the rats stay on board. Graft 17:39 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Amen to that. Tannin

Yes, please consider coming back after your much-needed Wikipedia holiday. IMO Isis' threat was overthetop and it was her, not you, that harmed the community by her extreme pettiness. It would be a great loss to the community if you never came back. --mav

Wait wait wait wait wait! What's going on here? Can someone please give some background about this matter, or a link to a discussion that I missed? Tarquin is one of the guys whom I am always glad to see online. For some reason we tend to be online at the same hours of the day quite often. I am always glad to see him editing my prose because I know that his changes will be very valuable. Tarquin has contributed massively to the feel of Wikipedia by bringing many articles to a higher level. I have followed his work in the English and French versions. I do not know him personally, but day after day, he has become a sort of a friend. Please someone tell me (and others) what is going on. In any case, I would be very disappointed to see him go. If his reasons are good enough and applicable to other Wikipedians, then some others might consider taking a break as well. olivier 19:07 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

erm its messed up, erm tarquin said something Isis miss-understood and nwo is using legal action agasint him, Isis is ignroing tarquion, tarquin is leaving. fonzy

thanks fonzy. sue me isis, i'm bankrupt. then i can like, countersue for defamation, god bless america. MarcusAurelius

where did that happen? on user pages or on the mailing list? (I am not a subscriber). Has anyone been banned in the process? olivier 19:16 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

It all began at Talk:Juliette Binoche. See also User talk:Jimbo Wales for more details of the whole sordid affair. As far as I know, no one's been banned.Tokerboy

Hope you decide to stay tarquin, who else am I going to chat to about compost around here???? quercus robur 19:23 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC) :)

Just curious,Would ppl miss me if i went? What would you miss? what haev you associated me with? -fonzy

Fonzy, I will say that I would miss you, so that you do not sue me for not missing you... olivier 19:35 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

In any case, that's too bad that we do not have a picture of the beautiful Juliette in her article... olivier 19:42 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

For those interested in the matter, more discussions can be read at User talk:Eloquence. olivier 19:58 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

I really hope it's not true that you are leaving, Tarquin. That would be playing into someone else's hands in a big way. I need people like you around, to tell me what to do when I get things wrong. Deb 21:22 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Please stay with us. Ericd 21:38 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Have a hol then come back. You know it makes sense! :) Nevilley 08:40 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Thank you all for your kind messages, both here and on email. You've restored my confidence in the way we all work together here. This sticky matter has not yet been resolved, but since Isis has voluntarily left and is no longer giving gory details of the Delaware legal system on every other page, there's no need for me to maintain my exile. So I'm on semi-holiday :-) -- Tarquin 10:47 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Great to see you back. I really mean that. I was worried you were going to stay away. Mintguy

Cool! Welcome back. Tannin

Welcome back! Danny

Glad to see you didn't stay on holiday too long ;-) quercus robur 10:57 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Welcome back from me too -- Chris Q 11:25 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

wb - fonzy

Warmest welcome back, Tarquin! I believe that most of us here volunteer time to build something great, that will be useful for the largest possible public. It is sad to see that such things can happen, even sadder that it happened to you this time, but I guess that c'est la vie and we should move on and continue the good work. By the way, happy year of the goat! olivier 11:38 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

Glad you decided to stay. "The drones need you. They look up to you." --Eloquence 11:59 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)

What's that quote from? Mintguy

Alpha Centauri (a civilisation clone by Sid Meier) Martin

I usually play the Gaians :-) -- Tarquin

<falls out of chair laughing>Mega LOL</falls out of chair laughing> --mav

Blimey, that's a relief, you had me worried for a while there, thought you really had gone for good! It's good to see you back. --Camembert

Glad you're back too, Tarquin - I was beginning to think wikipedia was all about rows and threats of legal action. But I see it's not. --Olivia Curtis

BTW, I hope you don't mind my having corrected something on your User page - it was just changing 'both...are' to 'both...and' --Olivia Curtis

Welcome back Tarquin! I knew you couldn't stay away from those "soft curves of the integral sign!" -- DrBob

Yes - welcome back aboard. Wikipedia is a happier place now. :) --mav

The value of the future always, out weighes, the value of the past. Two16

Glad you are still with us, Tarquin. Wiki needs people like you. :) JTD 23:09 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)

Rollback link should be fixed now. --Brion 00:47 Feb 8, 2003 (UTC)

replied on Talk:Cave painting -- t

Tarquin,

Thanks for the informative and helpful comments. :)

best wishes,

Arthur 00:02 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

---

Tarquin

I'm glad you liked the Queneau. It's good to get feedback, best when it's positive.

Having said which, I now have to say I don't like what you have done to "pyrrhic". I tried to wiggle out of it by moving the page to "pyrrhic (verse metre)" but somehow we have ended up with two pages.

The point is, this is not a dictionary, so even if the word "pyrrhic" has other meanings, they are not relevant in this context. Grumble, grumble.

Actually, I think the whole poetry/literature section of Wp is getting very straggly. I'm about to set out a proposal for restructuring the whole thing.

Best wishes

BevRowe 10:07 Feb 24, 2003 (UTC)

This remark is probably redundant; but I make it anyhow: A few hours ago, I added my first page to the Wikipedia and it is already improved. It was a little change but it really (and rationally) makes me feel welcome.

Thanks a lot.

Yaakov

Wasn't me that put it there -- I found it at a duplicate page Entente Cordiale & merged. I'll remove -- Tarquin 08:46 Feb 27, 2003 (UTC)

infamous does sound like a somewhat pov term, was billy the kid famous or infamous? Susan Mason

I don't see a problem with it in certain contexts. Did you make those edits under that IP? -- Tarquin 21:15 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Is it so hard to believe that more than one person can disagree with you? I see a problem with it in all contexts because it seems to be an opinion... Susan Mason

The Dreyfuss affair I think can be described as infamous. -- Tarquin 21:19 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

That is a great opinion, and I value it. I would not object to the article stating, "Tarquin thinks the Dreyfuss Affair was infamous." Others disagree with your opinion however... Susan Mason

Many words decribe things in ways that can't be exactly quantified: famous and infamous are both examples of these. To remove these from Wikipedia would be removing important information from the article. Susan Mason, are you the same person as Vera Cruz, with whom I had a discussion about Asimov's famous short stories at the top of this page? -- Tarquin 21:24 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Tarquin: Hey! Stop censoring the word infamous from every article in the name of NPOV!

Tarquin, I'm not censoring it from *every* article, I'm only removing it where it appears that wikipedia itself is declaring something infamous. I haven't touched it where it is used in a direct quote or when it is used within a fictional context.

With regards to POV, ask yourself whether you would consider the word "disgraceful" to be be POV if used in the same place. For example, the "disgraceful dreyfus affair". I maintain that is simply a POV usage. We can instead use the NPOV "well known" or "contriversial" or anything else that doesn't cause wikipedia to cast judgement.

I disagree, stating that somebody is famous can be attributed by stating that in a recent poll 95% of the world's population knew who they were. There is no need to decide what is infamous or not, it is not informative. No I am not Vera Cruz, and thank you for asking so often. Are you Zoe who also keeps asking me that? Susan Mason

So are you suggesting we carry out a poll of the entire world's population and say "do you consider the Dreyfuss affair famous, or infamous?" I'm not Zoe. You can tell, bbecause my writing style is ccompletely different. -- Tarquin 21:34 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Seems like Zoe to me. No I do not suggest we carry out a poll of the entire world, I think it is best not to have it in the article. However, if you are so intent on discovering what is and isn't famous or infamous, then you can conduct a poll and we can include your results within the article. Susan Mason

The poll idea is ridiculous. I simply don't think that wikipedia should declare things to be "infamous". The word is fine when it is used in a direct quotation, it is fine when it is used in a fictional context, and it is fine when we make it clear who we are attributing it to.

Did you mean to revert me at Roy Orbison, or were you trying to revert the anonymous user? I think it's a real song.Tuf-Kat

it was an orphan page, so I figured no need to redirect. sorry -- Tarquin 10:59 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

thanks for updating the margarine article - Anonymous56789

Tarquin, I'm saddened that you did this without first submitting this to Votes for deletion.

You write above that "there's already a list of all lists." Could you point this list out to me please? I've found a pretty nice list at List of reference tables, but it is by no means as comprehensive as the one I had posted at List of all lists which do not contain themselves before you deleted it.

If the only choice had been between deleting the list and leaving it as a redirect to Russell's paradox, then I agree that deleting it (after submission to Votes for deletion) would have been preferrable.

I can certainly see how a "list of *all* lists" on wikipedia may seem silly at first glance, but I've been in the act of editing a "list of ..." before and paused to wonder how many of these things there are. Perhaps, as a developer, you could produce an automatically updated page that lists all articles that begin with "List of" so we can keep track of them.

If the list matters to you so much I'll resotre it & rename it to List of lists. okay? -- t

Just navigate your way around from list of lists, etc, or do a wikipedia search for "list", and you'll find them all.

I still liked the redirect to Russel's paradox, though. Ahh well, I'll survive... :) Martin

You've got it back. I'll let you guys handle the move to a non-flippant title -- Tarquin 22:38 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

What's the problem? Apart from being yet another person to jump on the non-latin character bandwagon? -- Tarquin 23:39 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)

I noticed he put some Arabic islamic chant "Allah...etc" on a TALK page I had with someone, and his stuff was completely irrelevant, meaningless and obviously ill-intended. So I clicked on his ID and from his user page clicked on hist other "contributions" and noticed he has done the same thing on a number of pages. On that basis, I am assuming this is a trouble-maker or at least someone who doesn't haesitate to abuse an open system like Wiki if he finds something to his personal dislike.

Ah. I couldn't see what those characters were, and I wouldn't be able to read them even if I had the font. I'll keep an eye out. -- Tarquin 00:55 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)

I appreciate your criticism re the Fonts... there needs to be balance, see Wikipedians using foreign sigs, and help clean formalise something. -豎眩sv

Actually, from my point of view, you're a British chauvinist. The fact of the matter is that meter is a much more logical and phonetic spelling than metre. It's time you Brits or wherever you're from caught up with a bit of logic. I'm sure that we could revert to all kinds of ridiculous archaic spellings, but it seems to me that Wikipedia is about objectivity, and meter is the more objective spelling. Not to mention that we should use one standard spelling style, and the precedent was set with American spelling, not British.

--jaknouse

Exactly - Brits think that they have rights to claim invention of English, and that their literature, culture, and otherwise Angled culture is superiour to that of the Colonies. Which is of course compensation for living on a cold bloody rock for years on end... Its like each of these brits becomes FormerUser:Lir, when it comes to automatically Anglifying terms and syntax. And to blooddy top it all off, talking to one for even a short length of time, eventually makes one begin speaking as if he. too, had been to a boarding school, imprisoned under house arrest on charges of sodomy, and takes their tea with dairy in it. It's bollocks, i say, in my Japanese way -豎眩sv

I am rather surprised, and disappointed, at how quickly this has become insulting. Jaknouse says Tarquin is a chauvinist, for which I see no evidence here, and Stevertigo seems to have tried to make the debate descend to the level of a transatlantic flame war in which each side picks out insulting stereotypes about the other ... I really hope this stops now: it is unnecessary and never benefits anyone. The Manual of Style says Spelling style - For the English Wikipedia, either American or English spelling is acceptable. It is in no way a requirement, but it probably reads better to use American spellings in articles on American subjects and English spelling in articles on English subjects. This would seem to cover "metre" as it was. If we all start to change spellings to meet our own prejudices - and if we enunciate those prejudices in an insulting way - then the wikipedia will lose out in the ensuing edit wars. I feel quite strongly about this. For us to get along some mutual tolerance and respect is needed, and it is not promoted by dragging out those tired stereotypes. Nevilley 07:12 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

For the sake of completeness I should add in case it is not clear above that I would be just as disapproving of someone who gratuitously changes "color" to "colour" on the grounds that it is "right" or "better" - we just don't do that. Nevilley

I think SV is kidding.... Jaknouse, check the policy Nevilley mentioned. As for "metre", since the French invented it, if we really want to be logical, we should let their spelling prevail. -- Tarquin 09:43 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

OK, if Steve was kidding then I will blush (rather prettily, actually) and apologise. Though if he was, the irony was perhaps a little deep for me - so maybe also for some other users unless I am actually the Most Naive Here (someone has to be I guess), and if it turns out he's actually British, maybe a bit too self-flagellating to actually be funny rather than just A Bit Worrying ... hmmm ... Nevilley 10:29 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

If anyone wants to argue that "we should use one standard spelling style", could they take the discussion to wikipedia:manual of style, which is the appropriate place? As Nevilley said, the current guidelines are that both sets of spellings are acceptable, but if this doesn't reflect the views of large numbers of wikipedians then perhaps we should discuss it further? Martin

I think we need to keep an eye on him. He states he doesnt want his articles edited, he does not seem to listen to other's comments (check all the times hes erased stuff on his talk page) and it seems, by what Ive read, that he doesnt get his facts right. We need to keep an eye on this guy. Maybe he needs a trip to the Slammer (one of many things I call the wikipedia bans).

Just wanted to ask what you think of him..

thank you and God Bless you.

Sincerely yours, Antonio Rock Star Martin

Do you know what it means? the comment either needs to be moved to the talk page, or rewritten -- Tarquin 17:18 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)

I'll delete it-the originator can clarify if they want to jimfbleak

How to Get on Radio Talk Shows All Across America w/o Leaving Home		This Broad's Life: The Raucous, Riveting Autobiography of the Most Outrageous Radio Talk-Show Host in America Today		You Can't Say That : Common Sense From America's Number One Gay Radio Talk Show Host		How to Get On Radio Talk Shows All Across America
Talk Show Selects 1999: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows		Talk Show Selects 1998: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (1998 Edition)		Talk Show Yearbook 2000: A Guide to the Nation's Most Influential Television and Radio Talk Shows (Talk Show Selects, 2000)		Conduct a National Radio Talk Show Tour Without Leaving Your Home or Office...Without Paying a Cent for Air Time (How to Make People Buy Whatever You)