 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) <tummy tuck> (...) Chris, The paranoid part of me makes me think that Larrys text above is, at least in part, aimed at me. The irony is, off course, that Larrys well chosen words are nothing but contradictory subjective prattle themselves. (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I see the potential value in .debate, but the way it has started to go recently, I find I am getting frustrated and angry more and more frequently, to the point that I'm not getting anything out of it. One problem is that potentially each time (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Not sure of the answers to either of those, at least not in an idealised society. (...) I think my threshold is somewhere around large tanks and fighter jets. Any sort of nukes just sort of "feel wrong" to me. It's a fuzzy argument. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Debate's current problem (was Re: Uselessness of .debate)
|
|
Frank Filz wrote in message <3A3F972C.2F1C@minds...ng.com>... (...) Having followed a great many debates here, on Usenet and in my workplace SPAM forum[1], I have watched some of the greats[2] at work such as the legendary Derek Smart, and our own (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
Yes, if you post to .lsahs, it requires a followup when sent via NNTP. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Agreed. (...) Out of curiosity, how does one show that and to whom does one make such an appeal? Use the example of strategic nuclear holdings. (And as an aside, do you feel differently about tactical nuclear weapons?) (...) I think that this (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I think this is a specific instance of a more general principle, one we've stumbled over repeatedly on vastly different topics. A says "I tolerate/enjoy X" B says "I don't tolerate/enjoy X" So far so good. As long as X doesn't intrude on B, B (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
Thanks!!!! Rose Rob Doucette wrote in message ... (...) would (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I agree with you to an extent, but surely if one wanted discuss, say, God should one not have a more fruitful discussion at alt.god? All lot of the posts in .debate really belong in a .opinion. (...) Fustrated - yes. Mad - No. Scott A (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that you're actually wanting an answer to this, since you go on to sarcastically point out things that we all consider negatives, not positives, but I think it's worth exploring. The value to _me_ of .debate is a place to civilly (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
"r2" <lego@r2eng.com> wrote in message news:G5vI3n.J1v@lugnet.com... (...) You should have an option in your newsreader to View all Headers which would give you the Followup-To:, Reply-To:, etc., fields. -- -Rob. ===...=== New sets and parts for (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
Frank Filz wrote in message <3A3D4858.1F036B0C@m...ng.com>... (...) We almost always post through our newsreader. If I cross post something I can not specify where follow-ups are posted. Is there someway to do this? Rose (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Castle set rating curiosity
|
|
(Momentarily x-posted to ".admin", but re-dorected back to ".castle"... You'll see why below. ;-) (...) A single ZERO rating? Or a single "50(%)" rating? IIRC, Todd has programmed the ratings to automatically have a "balancing" initial/default (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) now (...) that (...) What is the added value of having it? People getting mad at each other? People insulting each other? People ridiculing ones faith / politics etc.? I think it is useless. If you want to debate, go somewhere else. That's my (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Ask Suz why -- she was the one who put them there. --Todd (25 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
You forgot one moderating method: Use the password checker, and only accept messages which passes a certain limit of security (or a modified version of the checker, with a specialized dictionary). Seriously, if you have a group with 'free speech', (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I think there is some overflow from .debate into other groups. I can't absolutely put my finger on it (in part because I realize that in part the Larry vs. Scott shouting match may have started outside of .debate, but I certainly see linkage (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) What is the added value to those of you who want .debate gone? I can completely understand not valuing the presense of debate, even I duck out now and then when I'm busy. But I don't get the motive behind the suggestion that it should be gone. (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
To all, I might as well thorw a comment into the fray here..... (...) I gave up on debate about a year ago now, simply because Icould not stand it anymore. There is a lot of hostile people around, that seem to thrive in debate, and not anywhere else (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Larry, you really are a conceited. I'm happy for you to refer to me however you want - as I am pretty thick skinned. The positions I adopt are, often, more about educating myself than spamming this group with my philosophy on life, the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|