This year, only on Sunday. I spent Friday and Saturday at/near the Grand Pavilion.

AFAIK Access is a Database Manager, not a Database itself. According to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_access ) it will work with MySQL and PostgreSQL, both of which are available free for both Windows and Linux. OpenOffice.org "Base" is the equivalent to Access, and is also a DB manager.
The better questions are: what Database engine are you using now? Is it available for both *Nix and Windows? If no, can the data be exported then imported into an OS-independant engine? (ex: output from MSSql then input to either PostgreSQL or MySQL is fairly easy)

Depends on what you're doing with them. Are you viewing, or manipulating them? How intensive manipulations/editing do you need to do? Photoshop is overkill for >90% of people using it, GIMP will suffice in most cases. (this is what Taliesin said above, but he didn't say it outright) Heck, even a program like XNView ( http://xnview.com/ ) does most basic editing and viewing tasks.

Of course, sticking to a tradition started several years back, I return here *late* and didn't get to hook up with you.

IIRC, they mentioned CR.net at least twice during the Saturday show.

Not necessarily correct, I've seen a few cases where both the attacking and defending generals gained bonuses.
I think it's more of a case where they get better just by leading a battle.

I have been in holiday mode for several days, since before this announcement.
However feel free to draw whatever conclusions you wish.

LoA, you're missing the entire point of all this: apparently it was only the MacInnes who participated in that war.

In my previous post, I quoted you three times where you said the people on that list were involved in the attack.
I see no point in doing it again.

Analyzing? You were very clear, it was simply stated "I know that you think that only MacInnes was involved but here is the targets list to the other clan members that were involved in this war against EIO."
There's no need to analyze anything, you stated it as a fact that the people on that list were involved- when we were not. In subsequent posts, you still maintained that we were involved.

Why are you directing all this at me? Both Shenaniganz and Olorin have said the same as myself: that you made an incorrect assumption that we attacked our "assigned targets" in that war.

That apology you made, in my opinion, was empty. It came less than three hours after, in another thread, you referred to "predatory behavior" and "sharks." Rather than starting another argument- which seems to have happened here anyway- I was letting the matter drop.
I would be perfectly happy if we didn't need to have these flame wars every few weeks; however when someone is spreading falsehoods about me I will respond.

Why did this come up? Where did I ever say anything about what I may or may not think of you? Could we please stick to the topic at hand instead of occluding it with a smokescreen?

I did no such thing; the definition of a liar is one who spreads lies. Lies are defined as intentional falsehoods. I never said you did this intentionally.
( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/liar and http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lie )
All I asked in the very beginning was that you verify facts before telling tales. Period. I never said that you intentionally misled anyone or intentionally mis-stated facts. Until this paragraph, I did not use the word "lie" or "liar" either. Even now, it's being used to clarify the definition of the word since you say your English is not very good; a reference to a dictionary should help clarify any possible misunderstandings.
The key is intent; if you knew we didn't participate in the attacks yet were trying to mislead people into thinking we did, then you lied. If you yourself thought we participated, then you had no intent to mislead but did it because- as I stated previously- you failed to verify facts first.
In your original post, I think you made an honest mistake by assuming we participated when we didn't. However, if you continue to incorrectly label us (to clarify, in this case "us" means Olorin, Shenaniganz and myself) as participants in the EIO-MacInnes war, then yes- at that point I will call you a liar.

LoA, once again you're confusing other people with yourself. You are the one who said that we weren't acting like allies and you made the veiled threats about our alliance, not the others here. I also have to point out that you're the one who keeps calling this a personal attack.
To me, it was a simple matter of attempting to correct what I perceived to be an incorrect assumption on your part.
Why did this have to get blown up into this huge debate?

You keep saying I over-analyze posts, however IMO you're reading way too much into them. I'm not getting personal here, nor am I interpreting what you say as a personal attack- yet you seem to think I am. I haven't called you a liar, yet you're saying I have.

Do me a favor, in the future when you read my posts don't assume there's meanings other than what I stated. What I say is pretty much exactly what I mean.
Very few people are gifted with the ability to carry tone and inflection over in text; it's not easy to see when someone is joking or being sarcastic- so it's best to just plainly state whatever it is you're trying to say.

All I requested is that you get facts straight before spreading misinformation. It's a fairly simple request for most people, however you seem to have difficulty with it.

Ok, again- those lists were of people who were requested to join in the attacks; so far everyone on that list has said they did not participate.
Now you've stated again that we were involved.

AGAIN, I was not involved in this war. Apparently others on that lists also were not involved in this war as well.

Allow me to refer to the original post:

In this, you clearly state that I (and others) were involved in this war. If you meant to present it as a list of potential targets, then you should have presented it that way instead of incorrectly stating that myself (and others) were involved.

Umm, yes you did... several times in fact. Several of them were quoted above.

You apparently have me confused with yourself. You keep stating one thing, then claiming you meant something else.
Maybe there's some confusion with the meaning of "involved in the war." When I see that phrase, it means that the party in question participated in one or more battles. Apparently you think it means something else entirely, in this case "received a message."

If a person repeatedly kept spreading false information about you, wouldn't you eventually get offended by it as well?

Your assumption is that we participated in those attacks. Shenaniganz said the same in his post "Again it is all in assumption that these attacks were made" are his exact words.

Did you see the message he sent me? It most definitely was a request, not an invitation. It told me who to attack, when to attack them, and how to allocate my forces between my armies. That is a lot more than a simple "feel free to join in" invitation you imply I received. Here's an excerpt from that message:
"On Saturday, December 6, 2008 and the early hours of Sunday, December 8, 2008, a day that will live in infamy, launch against your assigned target at will." With how that's worded, it's either an order to attack or a request to do so- not an invitation to join in.
So now we've found another false assumption on your part; the assumption that were were invited to join in instead of requested to do so.

The problem here is that you are spreading falsehoods. Olorin, Shananiganz and myself were all listed by you as being involved in the EIO-MacInnes war when we weren't.

We need someone to keep track of the betting as well.