 | | Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is
|
|
(...) I can't say I agree-- by saying that, you're absolutely forcing LUGNET into a position of choosing a religion by arguing that something that's *unreligious* is a religion in and of itself. Hence, you could argue that nothing ever was (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) [SNIP] (...) [SNIP] (...) That right Dave, only one group us getting attention - nobody asked people their opinions or requested the other seven. 'Leave it alone/Life goes on/get over it.' - you libs (ie your West Wing marathon clues me in on (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Todd Lehman wrote: SNIP (...) SNIP As these new groups now exist, I feel no need to continue the debate about them. I do want to point out the fallacy that Todd espouses here about being religious-neutral and religious beliefs (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
A big public thank-you to you, Todd, and the LUGNET Transition Team. I have subscribed to people.lgbt as a mailing list--my first! [LDrawPart 3004:373] -Teddy p.s. I guess I have a Yellow Brick Road to build now! (22 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why these news groups were created
|
|
(...) Well said Todd. (...) May peace be unto you as well. Ray (22 years ago, 20-Sep-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, FTX)
|
