To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
To LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / *37564 (-20)
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) TV (...) silly. (...) I agree. But also believing that what you see on a soap is litterally true...so much so that you write in to the fictional characters is pretty extreme. I'm sure that lots of (all?) people are successfully propagandized (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) Arguing the validity of the words of a (...) BTW, you didn't ask, but the main reason that I dont't post more to debate is that most of these debates end up spending most of their life argueing over the validity or quotes, sources, statements, (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) Exactly. (...) So what medium isn't spewing propaganda? (...) It would be interesting to see the ratio of those letters received to viewers. IS it 1%, 10%. I don;t think it would be very high at all. (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) "flyby." (...) Well, that's sort of technically true, but at the same time, the thread wouldn't have started without the context that leads to it. In that way, it is a continuation of more than one other thread in which TWW was cited. So I (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) Actually, if I may clarify--this was a new debate about TWW and the validity of using cites from the show--Larry pointed out that in his opinion, any cite from TWW will carry no water with him. That was this particular debate drew in issues (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) Again, I thought John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing" was a totally new debate topic on The West Wing and how the West Wing was not an accurate represenation of the workings of politics and the White House. (...) Probably about once or twice (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) The difference, Larry, and it is a huge one, is that I did not name call. Read what you have quoted - The first two words - "Your statement..." I responded that your statement "is blatant snobbery, self-serving, judgemental without proof, and (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Ed's opinion of Larry and other trivia (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) That's not exactly fair, Ed. Misconstrue isn't a name at all, it's Larry's assertion that you misunderstood his point (in this case possibly willfully). And if you consider how your note looked, I don't think "drive by" was really (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  debates (was: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing")
 
(...) Which debate, though? The one about West Wing, the one about quotations and their merit, or the one about the second amendment? I expect you could steer the threadlette in the direction you wanted it to go. But you would have to deal with the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) And later on in a different post... (...) You are absolutely correct. Start by looking in the mirror, Ed. I'll stick with my original assessment. Your first post to this thread was a driveby. (22 years ago, 6-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) Hmm, "misconstrued" and a "drive by". How quickly the name calling starts. If you had read my response down a few threads, you would have seen that I thought this was a fresh debate topic, not a follow-up post with a new heading to a previous (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) makes (...) Meaning I thought it was a fresh debate, rather than a carryover of another debate (which it seems to be). (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Stackers Review (Was Re: Stackers)
 
(...) I'm a sucker for stuff like this, so when I saw some today at Target on clearance I grabbed a couple. (URL) came two in a package with an Ertl Racing Champ car for $1.74. The clear front door swings up to open, and it doesn't stay shut if you (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snip> (...) I love purple--is my favourite colour--coincidental that my high school colours happened to be purple and white! :) If you want to get really confused, I am technically (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) I am one of the people that I think Dave is talking about. And I don't know how to correct it. My perception is that in threads on fairly disparate topics in which both he and I have been involved, he has advanced arguments that look like: (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: 40% off sale at Kohl's (M***bloks, NOT LEGO)
 
(...) Unfortunately, my Kohl's seems to sell only clothes. (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
 
  Re: 40% off sale at Kohl's (M***bloks, NOT LEGO)
 
(...) ...and you receive a $10 gift certificate for every $50 you spend. Gift cert good Oct 6-12. (My Kohls had 20% off Lego. I was pleasantly surprised since there was no sign indicating the sale.) Julie (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
(...) I totally agree with the above two paragraphs, whether they're applied to you, or to someone else, anyone doing these things is doing off-topic.debate a significant disservice in my view, and really ought not to do that. What I would question (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: John Leo's opinion of "The West Wing"
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> No argument with any of that (you'll never see ME arguing the case that a show "ought to be banned" rather than "just turn the channel on it" so the off button is the completely appropriate (...) (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: LEGO Star Wars 2003
 
(...) Probably so, but it's not really a debate. There's historical fact and then there's popular misconception. It's a weakness I have as a history major. (22 years ago, 5-Oct-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR