Subject:
|
Re: Oh no, what have I done!?!?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Apr 2001 10:21:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
514 times
|
| |
|
|
Dave Low <stinglessbee@hotSPAMFREEmail.com> wrote in message
news:GBIAsE.2n0@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, David Simmons writes:
> > IMHO, this discussion has always resembled the silly bickering among Star
> > Trek fans about being called "Trekkers" as opposed to "Trekkies." • People,
> > it's a hobby. Let's try not to take it too seriously. It takes the fun • out
> > of it, and that's what we're here for, right?
>
> I'm not convinced it's a silly conversation. Lego vs Legos is interesting • to
> me because it combines my hobby, linguistics and intellectual property in
> one neat bundle. The discussion isn't as important as appreciating Lego
> itself, but that doesn't make the discussion unimportant. I have to take
> some of the blame for the Godzillan thread, since as a linguistic argument • I
> foolishly compared LEGO/legos with God/gods, giving rise to a religious
> brawl, with bonus trolling. Now _that_ took the fun out of it.
Warning: Santa-bashing follows...
I actually did go around calling them "Lego bricks" or "Lego toys" when I
read that, at least until I realized that Susan Williams isn't real (I took
learning about Santa better than I did Susan Williams). Of course, I was
about seven at the time. And as much as I'd love to jump into a flame-war
over in debate, I no longer have the time. Don't you people have jobs?
Jesse
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Oh no, what have I done!?!?
|
| (...) On the other hand, here in Australia I have never heard Lego, or Lego bricks or a Lego set, referred to as "Legos". That's because we still speak English :^) [j/k, j/k]. My pet theory is that it's because Aussies learn a large number of (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.general)
|
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
