Subject:
|
Re: lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Dec 1998 21:24:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
949 times
|
| |
|
|
Mike Stanley writes:
> Tom McDonald <rocketman@familySPAMTHIS,PALradio.com> wrote:
> > Todd, maybe you should rename that group to lugnet.off-topic.devisive or lugnet.off-topic.crematory.
>
> Hrmmm? I know this is probably a joke, but one of the main reasons
> that group was made, afaik, was to provide a place where people could
> take the somewhat inflamatory discussion that naturally evolve from
> time to time.
>
> I'm having a good time watching the MW etc discussion right now.
Yeah, a bit of a joke. I make my observations with an attempted bit of humor
however small or non-existent. I know you like good heady discussion Mike,
and you're good at it, especially keeping it to the point and bringing it back to
lego when you can. Sometimes though the "discussion" seems to divide us
even when unintentional as "things get said" that don't need to be. It is difficult
to read "The Ghost of Special Boxes Past". Myself, I'm more of a "classic
smiley" in that regard.
I'm not trying to debate here, for indeed such an activity itself belongs to
.debate. I'm just commenting on how things sometimes get. Though it is
off-topic, I'd rather it be flames over some lego-related post, such as "Scala
Rules!" than someone's paradigm.
BTW, Scala doesn't rule. :) But TLG sure could put the Scala turkey in a new
town restaurant and it would be fine with me! My knights used to sit around the
table with empy plates wondering when they'd eat. But of course they would
be smiling.
From Tom McDonald
Anti-spam block in place.
http://mbr-hobby.neotown.com/radiotitan/lego/lego.html
radiotitan@SpamThisjuno.com
--
Do what you can, but behave yourself.
We'll have more, right after this.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
| (...) Well, hrmm. I see what can go on in .debate as being fundamentally different from even the same discussion going on here or in RTL. People who have no interest in controversial subjects need not see them fill up their general discussion group. (...) (26 years ago, 9-Dec-98, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
| (...) Hrmmm? I know this is probably a joke, but one of the main reasons that group was made, afaik, was to provide a place where people could take the somewhat inflamatory discussion that naturally evolve from time to time. I'm having a good time (...) (26 years ago, 8-Dec-98, to lugnet.general)
|
5 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
|
|
|
|
