|
|
 | | Re: It's All Over...
|
| (...) Dave.L, don't tell them about the phonecard or travel rorts or the 'tripod' incident. Anyway with the TRU 25% off sale, the 3409's are AU$37.37, which is equivalent to US$19. I bought six to go with the two I already had. I am creating a huge (...) (25 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | (canceled)
|
| | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database))
|
| (...) It's normal language behavior. People call Netscape Navigator "netscape". I even know people who (not so much now, but a few years ago) call Microsoft Word "microsoft". No one says "may I have a kleenex facial tissue". It's natural to treat (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Close Encounters
|
| (...) Brunswick, VIC. My LEGO re-birthing is based around wargaming: GO BRIKWARS! (...) Woah, slow down Prof. Low, I was just making pretty pictures with MY number-box, YOU seem to know what those OTHER buttons do! (...) Yeah, that's what I just (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.org.au, lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | Re: Close Encounters
|
| (...) Brunswick, Vic. I'm mostly approaching my LEGO re-birthing from a wargaming angle: GO BRIKWARS! (...) Umm, I was just making pretty pictures with MY number-box, you seem to have some knowledge of what the OTHER buttons do! (...) Yeah, that's (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.org.au, lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) I don't really think so, no. Because to have a total competition vacuum assumes that you're talking about a company that makes boxes full of elements and hands them to kids in a round grey room with absolutely nothing else to do. I guess a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) Huh? The argument is circular whether viewed from a cultural relativist standpoint or not. (...) I understand that you're working on very little sleep, but to proclaim someone's lexicon as "illiterate garble" just because it doesn't adhere to (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: It's All Over...
|
| (...) But you can't order them from S@H until 2004! 8^) Dave! (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | Re: It's All Over...
|
| (...) You'd be surprised to know that since all our politicians are honest, respectable and genuine it's worth paying US$25 for <set:3409 a soccer field>. --DaveL (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) I am so _not_ going to get in a cultural relativism argument over grammar and aesthetics. I'm a liberal in principle and a conservative in practice (except for anything from the seventies). (...) Yeah, it's not really a disagreement. I know (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database))
|
| (...) Thank you Matthew. And because I've had two hours sleep in about forty I'll just point out that 1. fast and red are in fact adjectives, hence the first example, and 2. Coke is a trademark and a proper noun (like LEGO) hence the second example. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) Fair enough, but you must agree that because of that circular reasoning the argument won't convince anyone who doesn't already agree with it. (...) I understand and accept that, but many people identify LEGO as a singular noun in that usage, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database))
|
| (...) It's wrong, but not for that reason. It's wrong because it's an adjective, and adjectives don't really have plurals. But in popular usuage, it's a noun, and there's no reason for it to not have a regular plural. And people do say "I drank a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) (assuming it's an open question...) Could you ever have a total, _total_ competition vacuum? Because if there's a market, there's kids, and if there's kids there's no vacuum since they can always make up their own games. And if they couldn't (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) My take is that LEGO's trend toward Juniorization would continue with or without market competition, since we have evidence of its roots long before any serious competitor hit the market. LEGO can't blame (not that they do) their own reduced (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) Absolutely, which why it's In My Humble Opinion. (...) I would argue (and again, this is entirely the way it works in my fat head)that you, as a LEGO user, would be as wrong (or right) to identify a single brick as "a Lego" as you would be if (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) Are they the only thing keeping LEGO from complacency, or are they driving LEGO to juniorise the heck out of everything? If they didn't have to contend with competition, would they be dumbing down their sets, or would they be producing (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads
|
| (...) Parts one and three of this argument only hold true if you decide in advance that they're true. If, as a LEGO user, I identify a single brick as "a Lego," why is it grammatically incorrect to refer to several bricks as "Legos?" Forget about (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Where are the Dark Sharks
|
| Peter White wrote in message ... (...) HA!!! I wish some LUGNET members thought like that a bit more often, instead of whinging incessantly about the aesthetic limitations of a commercial product that has had a global corporation's worth of effort (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au)
| | | | | Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database))
|
| (...) Warning: exactly the kind of post that should go to .o-t.vent follows. So I've o-t.d'ed, but since this <treacley juggernaut> of a thread is still in .au, I'm not holding back. And I should say that I'm more than a bit <treacley>'d off with a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
