| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I thought you weren't going to debate this?
I either lied or changed my mind. You decide.
> In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > Todd is, and
> > he weighed in and agreed that it seemed to be a flog.
>
> And Todd never changes his mind? Seemed to be != is, necessarily.
Todd has been known to chance his mind, yes. Until he does, let's agree that
by his definition, this was a flog. He said so in
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=8950:
Todd Lehman wrote:
> But it's also a flog, IMHO.
Since Todd's definition is pretty much the law on Lugnet, until he changes his
mind, your post was a flog, and I will continue to refer to it as such. I know
you aren't real big on following "rules" and "laws"- maybe this is a good time
for you to work on that.
> > and probably shouldn't have been made
> > in the form and group it was made in.
>
> Doesn't yet follow.
Does indeed follow, please see Todd's post again. Todd ID'ed it as a flog, and
further cite Todd's post at:
http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=2907
as evidence that such a flog does not belong in a themed group.
> > Besides, let's take apart what you posted, shall we?
> >
> > From: http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=10097
> >
> > In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > In lugnet.trains, Steven Barile writes:
> >
> > > > Thanks, and now can we discuss something else like... who built a killer
> > > > train out of all these bulk packs we've been begging for for the last 3
> > > > years!
> > >
> > > Well, since you asked. Twice, no less...
> > >
> > > I did. (1) Here you go:
> > >
> > > http://www.miltontrainworks.com/item_info.html#MTW-3002-bu
> > >
> > > How do I know it's killer? I'm almost out of my first production run
> > > already... But then what else would you expect from Milton Train Works,
> > > *the* premier custom train kit purveyor?? Other people may have released
> > > models before I did (2), other people may have released models that cost
> > > less(3), but no one has a better or broader train product range. Not even
> > > LEGO(r). At least not yet anyway.
> >
> > Can you explain how the following bits:
> >
> > > But then what else would you expect from Milton Train Works,
> > > *the* premier custom train kit purveyor??
>
> One definition of a killer model is that it comes from a killer source. This
> brag is defending in advance the possible assertion that the source isn't
> killer.
>
> > and
> >
> > > Other people may have released
> > > models before I did (2), other people may have released models that cost
> > > less(3), but no one has a better or broader train product range. Not even
> > > LEGO(r). At least not yet anyway.
>
> Ditto. Further, this is an attempt to support the assertion that the TLC
> model range isn't that great at this point and the custom builders as a
> group, and me specifically, are hitting the target market better than TLC
> does. And that supports the assertion that the doodlebug is a killer model
> worthy of, dare I say it, adulation.
>
> > are an answer, in any way, to a question about "killer models" rather than a
> > flog for your items for sale?
>
> See above.
Jesus. As a friend of mine used to say: "Man is not a rational animal, man is
a *rationalising* animal."
That makes no sense at all. The source of a model has no bearing on how good
it actually is. Stephen Spielberg is a "killer director". Hook was not a
"killer movie".
Your grasping, desperate argument holds no water. Sorry.
> As I said in a part you snipped, I consider this point the most important
> one in this debate. Mentioning something is NOT flogging it, in and of
> itself.
No, it's not. But there comes a point when you have to question the motivation
of the post. This one reached that point and exceeded it.
> > Wasn't this "I don't have enough time" defense thouroughly shot down the last
> > time someone complained about your flogging habits?
>
> No. Because I don't flog, so you need to say "alleged flogging habits", and
> because it wasn't shot down.
Once again, your powers of denial are incredible. I think you may find that
you are the only one who feels that was the outcome of your last flogging
event.
> Hope that helps. If this is getting you worked up, you may want to just
> ignore it till it comes to some resolution.
Your concern for my status is both noted and appreciated, but you don't need to
worry about me. I find myself, unexpectedly, with time to devote to it, since
the rest of the office stayed home today. That's all.
eric
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) agreeing that it was, in addition to being a flog, a brag. IMHO. IOW, brag + flog != flog Not that that makes it any better or worse. Just clarifying what I meant. ^^Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes: <snip> I said what I had to say about this. I did not intend this to be a flog. It may be perceived by some as that, but it was intended as boasting, nothing more. I tried to explain in more detail why it (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| I thought you weren't going to debate this? (...) Granted, but I do get to question the definition and point out where I think it's awry. Which is what I'm doing. (...) And Todd never changes his mind? Seemed to be != is, necessarily. (...) So (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
