United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (U.K.) : 2075


Local / United Kingdom / 2075

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I did this (10 8480's). But I often do buy multiple copies of sets - sometimes for parts, sometimes for trade. So I do not really see it as a problem... although my wife would argue the opposite. Scott A (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Richard thinks its wrong for some people to have more than others, presumably whether we're talking about money, Lego sets, or whatever. He's been fairly outspoken about it before. If you didn't catch it, he was making a reference to the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ya, this really gets up my nose, as they say in the UK. Let's review, one more time, the blue hopper thing, because, after all, it's me that Richard is talking about. Paul made the knowledge available to a few people, including Simon Denscombe (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I must have missed the "Hey everybody, BB is getting BH way cheap" message? (...) So you bought 96 not knowing was a "gold mine"? (...) What were the risks involved on the BH thing? (...) How many 3rd world economies have been turned over to (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

FUT off-topic.debate (...) So did everyone else, there wasn't one. I don't know if you've run the numbers, but phone calls cost money to Paul. Every call means time he has to spend on the phone, and that's time that he isn't waiting on customers. He (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I think Lego is for making constructions... not making money. As a lot of people know, my aim is to keep it self sufficient. Which is harder for me, as a lot of people are put off by the fact I live in Scotland. (...) A long waffling diatribe (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Frank Filz

(...) Everyone seems to ignore the efforts and costs of the phone calling. I didn't get any hoppers because I didn't force myself to get up early enough in the morning to call from home since I've never bothered to get a phone card so I could call (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Peter Callaway

(...) Oooooooohhhhhh! If only I hadn't blown my LEGO budget!! I'd love to get my hands on a couple of these for a good price!! Bugger!! Pete Callaway (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

So has BB now sold out of these (8880's)? (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Peter Callaway

(...) Who's this Peter Hallway???? Is he new???? Pete Callaway (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Yeah, he signed up at about the same time as Scott Understairs-Cupboard. Ahh... subtle British humour... (1) Richard (1) WHERE HAS IT GONE???!?!?!??!?! (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Peter Callaway

(...) A little too subtle, even for me. I've been called "Caltex", "Kelloggs", "Crawlaway" and a few un-postables, but never "Hallway". One minor fault I have is that I can be a bit precious about the spelling of my surname, as very few people get (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Nah, it's not a fault - stick with it! It's a common courtesy to get someones name right. Just now the web seems to be filled with affluent 'westerners', but when it becomes a more truely global medium, we'll be grateful for all the practice (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Peter Callaway

(...) True, but one doesn't want to appear like a prude, although I do have long time friends who insist on sending Christmas cards addressed to "Peter Calloway". Arggggg!!! (...) I think there is a very real distinction. Whilst British humour tends (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) Every new customer Paul gets, is one that might come back again. I'm sure he'd be happy if he sold a few of these sets to new customers. (...) Lego is for making constructions, not making money. I sell on ebay/trl/lugnet to get money to buy (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) So if Larry were selling coffee beans or stock (as he does - the stock, not the coffee beans (or does he?)) then it would be ok with you if he sells them for "money" or would it only be ok if he sold them in order to be able to buy more of (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I'm not "presenting" an argument, I'm just answering the question. That is what I do, you, or anyone else, are free to do what ever they want, or at least I hope you are. (...) Did I say that? (...) As you did with this post? (...) What are (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) The same thing Larry did. And of the same thing I'm doing right now - not bothering to actually respond to anything else you say at all, ignoring an opportunity to actually further discussion, but simply coming back with an almost smartass (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) It was hardly worth saying it then? (...) Now I'm not sure if I like _your_ tone. If I ask questions you don't like, just ignore them. Scott A (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Other than to let you know that not just one, but two people perceive your posts that way. I don't know about you, but when 1 person tells me I'm doing something annoying I might just think it's their problem. When two people (or more) tell (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I'm really tempted to tell you what _I_ think. But I do not think that is anyone's interest, including my own I suppose. All I'll say is people in class houses should throw stones. Scott A (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

OK, OK, let's drop this. Scott, you do snipe at people and you're not the only one from the UK (or the US for that matter) that does. It annoys me to no end to carefully craft a response and have most of it ignored so the responder can score some (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

<384689C9.2BC09E99@hw.ac.uk> <38468B94.73FC33EC@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I won't respond to this. (...) Just take it that I agree or have no opinion on the points I do not respond (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) This is a major misperception from what I have read in numerous e-mail posts from people in Great Britain, do you have examples of "limited access" to health care, etc. or is this just a random statement? You can go to any employer here and (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) In the UK, you do not have to have employed to have access to, arguably, one of the best health services in the world (NHS). Everyone here enjoys a health service which is "free at the point of delivery" - ie it is paid for via income tax. If (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Well, it isn't free, someone is paying for it, whether it be you be the income tax or someone else footing the bill, but this point has been debated ad infinitum in off.topic.debate for a long time (March-September or something?) if you care (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) Thanks for the chuckle, Scott. I promise I won't try to perpetuate a common misconception of America. ;-) However...the first job I was ever offered health care in is my current one as a software developer. No other job I've had -- college lab (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeremy, (...) Misconception? I thought I typed misperception, oh I did. I am glad I can get you to laugh, however! (...) Hmm...I had health insurance from my mom and dad through high school and some college, I didn't have it for three months when I (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) I say conecption, you say perception, let's just order a pizza. (...) Scott, I may be opening a huge can-o-worms here, but... You got off pretty easy in terms of health insurance, esp. being covered by your parents after high school. (My dad's (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —James Brown

(...) Really? Shoot. I'm gonna have to stop reading Lugnet, then - I barely have enough responsiblility to cover my work and real life commitments, none to spare for my hobbies. Or can I be irresponsible by removing the responsibility requirement (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Umm.... Pizza! :) (...) Not really, most companies do this nowadays. (...) Not really, especially considering if that is one of the things you look for. I can find 20-30 positions in Ann Arbor right now that have health benefits with the job. (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jasper Janssen

(...) In the best time-honoured manner of Usenet debate. Jasper (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Maybe. But his costs to do a one off are pretty steep and he told me (again, I remind you, I've had some rather lengthy conversations about this topic with him, something you don't yet seem to have internalised) he was glad to have sold a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) That would explain why after that he started up his one per customer rule. A rule which I think he has since set aside... or at least for me :-). What is pertinent about the length of your conversation with paul? I have spoken to Paul 4 or 5 (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) No, it wouldn't. (1) I can't offer an explanation for it either. But I can stick to what I told you he told me about it. That's the truth. (...) Well, we weren't talking about the weather, we were talking about substantive issues directly (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Frank Filz

(...) I should stay out of pissing matches, but hey, I've got a full bladder so... Another little point in this issue. Is it ok for Paul, or TLC for that matter to make money on LEGO sets? If not, how do you expect to get them? If so, why is it ok (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) Frank, if this is aimed at me, I'd just like to say that I have no problem with anyone making money... even those guys making money on the "S@H only" items on ebay does not bother me all that much (I know this goes against the knapp - no (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Dewsbery

(...) I've replied to this elsewhere. (...) Am I? I ruddy well am not! I had no part in the whole blue hopper thread. And I was not referring to you, but anyone ordering unfeasably large numbers of (usually) very expensive sets. (...) I'll avoid the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Who says you're the Richard that I was talking about when I said "it's me that Richard is talking about". :-) I was talking about the Richard that Mike was talking about. :-) I knew which Richard he meant even if, at the time, he misattributed (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Ah, but to which Rich was your comment pitched? I'm pretty sure that the only contribution I made to the Blue Hopper thread was to try and get it off loc.uk once it became a discussion of how to get cheap DVDs! I may be wrong, but I searched (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) I don't want to speak for Richard, but the BH is a totally different issue. On that occasion, "several Americans" bought _ALL_ the sets. (...) That is a very weak argument. (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I have it on good authority that you are wrong about that. ANd even if you aren't, so what? Your beef is that enterprising Americans bought up stuff that you had a chance to but didn't? (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) Explain... (...) What do you mean? Scott A (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I asked Paul. I think he would know who he sold to. (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Tony Priestman

On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Larry Pieniazek (<38454882.3045A081@...ager.net>) wrote at 16:10:42 (...) I have to back Larry up on this one. I got a few more than several :-) All for personal use, I hasten to add. (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Oh well. You snooze you lose, I guess. And the fact remains - they were THERE in the European marketplace to be bought before BB got hold of them. I don't care if Martians bought them all - if they called first and had the money to pay for (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Tony Priestman

On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Mike Stanley (<slrn84as2r.2ds.cjc....utk.edu>) wrote at 17:45:30 (...) While I agree with you that Larry appears to have had a pivotal role in making the hoppers immediately available to this community, for which he should be (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Ray Sanders

Which all begs the question: What else is stuck in some Lego warehouse somewhere ? *or* Just where did these blue hoppers come from ? Ray (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) I would agree with Tony, if it wasn't for Larry, I would never have a blue hopper, which I have now, for a decent price. thanks, Larry! Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn CAD Operator Affiliated Engineers, Inc. Work Page: (URL) Page: (URL) (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Do you mean me or Richard Dewsbery? I did a search for "Dewsbery" and it came up with 19 hits, none of which seemed that outspoken. But reading his message did remind me of some of my own posts a while ago in market.theory, so it would be easy (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Before I'm pounced upon, that statement isn't meant to be an all-encompassing answer for the worlds ails - I'm not quite glib enough to say that, but rather that it's a general rule that can apply to somethings and not others. I don't have a (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) This NEEDS to go to off-topic.debate, followups set there. Suffice it to say that I'd not care to live in a world where everything was "equal". To me, "equal" means taking away from those of ability and giving to the undeserving. (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Ooops - yep, thanks! (...) Agreed - equality doesn't have to be applied universally to make some things more "equal". I don't think that I implied that everything in the world should be "equal". (...) "Undeserving" is a very ambiguous term, do (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The former. Those who work hard make their own chances and get their own opportunities, therefore don't need help from some sort of scheme to make things "equal" as long as the government they're under isn't actively suppressing rights. There (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —John Neal

Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) Yeah, because for every hard working, self-made mi/bi/tri/etc.llionaire, there are 2.5 deadbeat, silverspooned offspring who have most likely been ignored and have no concepts of value or any other redeeming (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Yep. Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves in 3 generations, as they say... (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Wow, that sounds almost as optimistic as my view of the world ;) I agree that those who work can make opportunities for themselves, but also that those with opportunities have the dice loaded in their favour towards gaining new opportunities. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The latter, I suspect, at least at the basic theory level. I'm more interested in trying to get to the bottom of what I perceive as a "resentment" issue that surfaced again while discussing the Entertainer situation... Seems to me that there (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Doesn't just seem that way to you... (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Rob Hendrix

(...) "Can't we all just get along?" said Reginold Denning... (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Scott Arthur

(...) Yes I think we should. If nothing else, some of the posts above are startinging to get a little paranoid. Scott A (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Sounds good :) (...) My personal view is that it's nicer to give 20 people 1 thing, than give 1 person 20 things (related specifically to Lego deals in this example). That doesn't logically extend to saying that the one person who has the 20 (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) This might seem obtuse, but... Imagine a lunch room at a public school. You have 20 nickles. Do you give 20 hungry kids one nickle each, or give one of them all 20 so they can get lunch? I'm only pointing out exceptions to your 'rule.' Chris (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) It's not obtuse, just irrelevant, as I did state that the example was related "specifically to Lego deals" - as I predicted such a response with my amazing predicto-vision, and tried to avoid it :) It did also mention the flaw in trying to (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Why? In other words, why is my need for 20 any LESS valid than anyone elses need for 1? Usually, the market allows me to satisfy my need. IF I am willing to pay more for all 20 than those that want one are willing to, in other words, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) *sigh* I really wrote: -- My personal view is that it's nicer to give 20 people 1 thing, than give 1 person 20 things (related specifically to Lego deals in this example). That doesn't logically extend to saying that the one person who has the (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) ** sigh ** Well I didn't say you said it was bad. I'm just asking "why, exactly, is it nicer"? (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Bah, you've got the bigger sigh, you win. No more sighing for me then. *sulk* I was responding mostly to: (...) Which I read as you saying that I said it was wrong/bad whatever, but I've confused myself now, and it's probably not that (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) You know, while my basic response to this would be, "yeah, I know, some people, through no fault of their own and through no lack of hard work, will simply never make a fraction of the money Larry makes, but that's just reality, we deal with (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Thankyou for *considering* my points - sometimes it seems like an all too rare thing on usenet forums! (...) I'm trying to resist the pull of cynicism myself, I don't know how well I succeed sometimes! (...) Very true - if you can't be happy (...) (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Frank Filz

Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) computers (...) One problem here is that there are two mostly separate issues. The first issue is given people have money and good have prices, is the distribution of those goods fair. The second issue is (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

<FM5Cyw.4v7@lugnet.com> <slrn84eoh3.3kp.cjc@...s.utk.edu> <FM77oM.12J@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Right, it's with you for being a slacker and not earning enough to buy it! <grins, (...) (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Yes. Perhaps in an effort to be uncontroversial[1], you didn't mention the malleable priorities under 1.) above: 1a: Buying 1b: Sorting 1c: Trading 1d: Building 1e: Selling That's just my personal order; YMMV. It's also horribly idealized, (...) (25 years ago, 5-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jasper Janssen

(...) No, no, no. Your need for 20 isn't less valid than someone else's need for 1. But 20 persons needing one getting satisfied _does_ make for a larger overall level of happiness. Jasper (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) How so? I am more than 20 times increased in happiness than the average increase in happiness of those 20 other fellas... so the larger overall level of happiness is on my side... :-) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jasper Janssen

(...) I'm inclined to believe otherwise - but since I can't prove, or even really tell, one way or the other, this is a spurious argument ;) Jasper (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Well of course it's spurious. But so's the original thesis. :-) (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —James Brown

(...) Not to mention the increase in happiness about being able to debate about it... <duck> James (URL) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Ah, but the law of diminishing returns states.... :) :) Richard (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Who said I didn't factor that in?? :-) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) But did you? :) Answers on the back of a 6277 to the usual address... Richard (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —John VanZwieten

Richard Franks <spontificus@__nospa...yahoo.com> wrote in message news:FMCELH.J2s@lugnet.com... (...) By the way, it's the law of diminishing _marginal_ returns, and all it states is that at _some_ point, additional units of a good will provide (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) I stand corrected! :) (...) True, but I'd compare 1 LEGO set to 1 packet of M&Ms, as opposed to 1 LEGO set to 1 M&M. In general of course, I'm not into trains so if I was maybe my perception would be different. Although, if LEGO Direct helps (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

<FMCELH.J2s@lugnet.com> <FMHr07.84s@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) :-) Although I AM an animal around my trains, and I do think they have a life of their own (unlike me... I have no (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —John VanZwieten

Richard Franks <spontificus@__nospa...yahoo.com> wrote in message news:FMI6p1.DrF@lugnet.com... (...) given (...) people (...) I'd say probably 20 times the average of 20 people with 20 each :-) I'm not sure I've ever seen a grown man look more (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Thanks! That's the nicest thing anyone's said about me all day! There are a lot of good rules to live by in the members pages but one of my favorites is "be childlike but not childish"... (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jasper Janssen

(...) God, I hope not. StarOffice is almost buggier and more bloated than MSOffice. Jasper (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Yep, StarOffice bites. (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Yeah? Bummer - I only ever played about with it for about half an hour before, and I found it miraculous to effortlessly load msword docs on my solaris box at work! Not that I needed to of course, as all the documentation I did was in (...) (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Jasper Janssen

(...) Well, noting that I'm speaking mostly as a channel for other people since I have little experience myself: It leaks memory worse than Netscape 4, it crashes more often than Win98, and the user interface sucks (according to those who're forced (...) (25 years ago, 7-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) In other words it combines the most widely discussed features of the most common software packages of our time. Those words being marketing-speak. (...) I wouldn't expect it to be better... yet! :) Richard (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) With enough memory (all my machines have at least 256, and that's enough) I'd rather run Linux and VMWare+NT and Office 2000 than Linux and StarOffice any day. Maybe if S.O. didn't suck I would feel differently, but I'll put up with the lags (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) The fact that it runs like crap is the biggest part of it. I also don't like the all-in-one interface. Its user interface feels like an old off-bran Works-type program. And I don't think it will qualify as an alternative to MS Office for a (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)

(canceled) —Jeremy Sproat

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Dewsbery

(...) copies (...) No I don't. And I rather resent you're assumption of the right to distribute your (erroneous) opinions of my views. The reference was in fact to people who knew that the prices were wrong, but were still "trying it on" to a great (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Wow, rather demanding, aren't we? I think someone else has already pointed out that I probably meant another Richard (there are so many of you). He was right. (...) Well, sorry if I can't keep my Richards straight, but I'm surprised that a) (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Was this me or someone else? If I did have an outspoken opinion on it, then I'd like to go back and make sure I still agree with was was written. But as I don't remember writing anything, and I can't find my name in the thread, that is a (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) <JOKE> Who knows? As a yank, all you brits sound/read a like to me. </JOKE> (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) This might actually be appropriate if I had used or endorsed the term "yank", or indeed participated in any anti-American feeling. If I started talking about a Mike somethingorother who said thisorthat, then a) You probably wouldn't care what (...) (25 years ago, 1-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Mike Stanley

(...) Well, of course I'm not _lying_. I might be misremembering, but I'm not LYING. If I were lying, Larry wouldn't have followed up on my post and flushed it out with some details. Maybe it was Simon, or Bill, of Juakim. If I weren't coming down (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.market.shopping)

Re: e-commerce (was Technic shuttle etc) —Richard Franks

(...) Sorry, I meant "making an untrue statement", rather than "intent to decieve" - I should have clairified though. (...) The power of suggestion? :) (...) Flu sucks.. or maybe that statement doesn't belong .debate (...) You'd be spot on if I had (...) (25 years ago, 2-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)