 | | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
|
Mostly haven't been in this thread, short on time earlier this week. Here's my take overall. Anthony: go ahead and feel that Guarded Inn wasn't the best first release item. Not everyone agrees, I think it *WAS* a great first release but you gave (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet has a problem
|
|
(...) I honestly thought it was the other way around! During the last months, everything done by the LEGO Company has been bashed on LUGNET. The Guarded Inn and the Sopwith Camel are probably the exceptions. Should someone take the other view and (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet has a problem
|
|
Anthony ,Anthony, Just wait one second it's understandable that you feel like this but I think that sometimes alot of us here do, can and would spent all our time with lego and if we had the time some of us would start a resistance group(Black (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
|
(...) Tim, I think the term "sour grapes" doesn't actually work in this context -- or at least I'm not sure how you mean it. (...) Others can always do as they please. But there are several REALLY good reasons why Lego doesn't fit into the (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Worth the wait? (NO!)
|
|
(...) I certainly did read it, which prompted my reply. (...) Well cry me a river. Sorry but I don't buy your idea of 'fairness.' LEGO has no obligation to treat a theme with favored or non favored status on the basis that they have 'beaten it down' (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet has a problem
|
|
(...) Anthony, do PLEASE get a thicker skin! Everybody is thinking that TLC could have picked something else, something better. That's why there are all these posts about what sets should come next -- those are the very sets that a lot of people (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet has a problem
|
|
Anthony (et al.), I followed these posts-ALL OF THEM-and there was some really good talk on all three sides of the fence (if you count those sittin' on the pickets-ouch!). From a fresh perspective, I would like to say that no one in the thread typed (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet has a problem
|
|
(...) Well said Anthony, to each his/her own! -Harvey (23 years ago, 9-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: I'm speechless...
|
|
(...) Were you neglected as a child? You sure seem to need the attention. Piss off... I'm tired of seeing you here. -Duane (23 years ago, 8-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) And you're welcome to that title! You got the chops, you earned it! You rock at digging stuff up, man... thanks! ++Lar (23 years ago, 8-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm speechless...
|
|
Xpost and followup set to .debate, where this belongs. (...) Why of course. Mladen, you just don't get it, do you? We do know you as well as we can know you. You've been a part of this community for about a year now, if my memory serves me right. (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jun-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) A little further legal note: As Rick was in fact commenting on Mladen's statements, the reproduction of his entire email would most likely be construed as "fair use" by a court in the US. The idea is that in order to have a free (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) *Arachnomechatronitroid* Isn't that the instrument Lucy played at the Tropicana for that clown guy? I love that episode! Matt (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
Thank you for posting those links, I was getting curious enough to look it up and I probably would have been browsing law for hours. Now I'll go whip together that Arachnomechatronitroid. (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
Whoops! Guess I should have finished that last post BEFORE posting it (that's how it's SUPPOSED to work, isn't it?)! Larry's the more corrrect in this instance. E-mail confidentiality is mostly a politeness issue. Assume that "anything you say can (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Will I do? Here are a couple: From: (URL) recipient of e-mail is generally free to share the information in the e-mail with anyone..." "Unless the recipient has some duty of confidentiality (e.g., physician-patient, attorney-client, trade (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Really? Wow. Do you have any cites? I thought letters were more like phone calls than like authored works. (only one party to a call needs to consent to it being recorded and disseminated) I had always assumed (1) that when I sent words to (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) That's quite interesting to me--I had no prior knowledge of that. Thanks! Dave! (I just noticed that that came off as a bit sarcastic, but I didn't mean it that way!) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) I think case law supports copyright protection for the author of a letter (and by extension e-mail). (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Sorry. Everyone is right except Dave! Better? Note how I once again got his name to be at the end of the sentence, although one could argue that the exclamation point is not appropriate in this usage. The reason why is left as an exercise. :-) (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) There he goes, fanning the flames again... 8^) Dave! (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
Snip snip... everyone is right. (...) Agreed. While I do understand Rick's motivation in doing what he did to try to handle the situation, it might have been better if he could have done so without directly quoting mails. (...) "keep your words (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Good point. "Fair use" probably has a much broader than usual definition when applied to interpersonal correspondence. Snail-mail letters are made public all the time, often via media "leaks," but they're released nonetheless. I'm not sure how (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
Of course, considering the temper tantrum threat Mladen made, posting it to Lugnet probably eliminated any chance at all of Mladen getting any sympathy whatsoever. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | Netscape Communications (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) While as a general rule I agree with this, I think there also is a time for asking what others think of a communication one has received. In this case, perhaps Rick didn't have to share the whole e-mail, but I understand his desire for (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Also interesting. I suppose I was working from an attitude of "I sent it to him; now it's his to do with as he chooses." Caveat Sender. (...) It's easy, if you're shameless! Dave! (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) I'm with Richard and James on this, one should NEVER share someone's private email without permission (I mean unless it contains a serious death threat or something). I do agree that it is safer to assume that what one says could end up in a (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) AFAIK, E-mail is generally considered private. Much like other personal correspondance. Obviously it's not a very enforcable convention, but there ya go. I don't get too steamed about it, although when it happens to me (and I find out), I make (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) That's interesting. I generally assume that anything I send might end up in such a forum, whether I wish it or not, so I usually try to comport myself in a way I wouldn't be embarrassed to own up to later (though my correspondents may beg to (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Actually, I hear its bad form to publish private email content to a public forum without the permission of the author. I did that once or twice and people got very steamed about it. -- Hop-Frog (Venom is green and so am I!) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) Shameful. Still, that's a pretty close margin of support. Let's hope the voter support for the "Grind" keeps going down. Dan (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
What's sick is that 51% of voters say it should continue simply because it's a tradition! (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | Netscape Communications Corp | A division of AOL Time Warner | iPlanet Support - (URL) Please do (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) Given that their are only so many brick combination possabillities, from time to time two people are going to come up with the same solution to the same problem. As a Technic builder I feel I'd be possesive of my designs as well. Steve (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) Yeah, it makes me wonder how much of the support of these very important environmental and ethical issues comes from genuine interest, and how much is just trendy, something-to-do fadism that comes and goes. In my opinion, all support is (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) Having spent 10 years in the Penn State environment, wherein people leap to protest the slightest perceived injustice, I'm stunned that no one ever mentioned this, even at the ridiculous annual Earth Day merchandising bonanzas. Thank you for (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
Here's some online info I found about that pilot whale massacre I mentioned: (URL) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) Heart disease (arteriosclerosis) is characterized by the blockage and hardening of arteries in the body by cholesterol. Therefore, red meat IS the main culprit because of it's rich cholesterol content. Red meat was not a big part of the (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) But you must admit that you're reasoning from anecdotal evidence. Is recycling bad just because some communities (like mine, until recently) drop the ball? From previous exchanges I gather that you have no objection to recycling, in itself; (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) I think this is a pretty one-sided analysis. All of those are cofactors and I think it would be pretty much an exercise in futility to try to say that one is the main culprit and the others are merely exacerbations. Something that an analysis (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mladen Pejic... Cool down.
|
|
(...) That's my feeling. It's a mark of courtesy to point out everyone to whom you owe some sort of inspiration, but darned if I can remember the first person who ever used minifig legs as mecha hands (an eminently spiffy idea!), and I don't expect (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) That's a good idea! I remember a segment on "20/20" regarding the modern Japanese lifestyle, particularly Tokyo businessmen. Yeah, I do believe they mentioned more cigarette smoking, LONG ass-kicking hours at stressful jobs (away from family), (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) I'd be a fool to deny that there's a connection, but I wonder if other newly-acquired habits have likewise contributed to this rise. For instance (and I ask both rhetorically and because I don't know), how has the incidence of cigarette (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(...) Hmmm, yeah I see what you mean but I sense the people of these countries share a deeper connection with the land (they do tend to be farmers) so they're is that respect for nature. (...) Precisely, like in Japan and look at their alarming rise (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about English: use of non and not.
|
|
(...) I good course of action. If I were at home, I would check to see if Fowlers has any comments too. (...) I agree with this analysis, but even if you didn't want to use the hyphen, I would suggest NON_SCHEDULED_PRODUCT if there is any chance (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Question about English: use of non and not.
|
|
(...) In all cases like this I turn to the Oxford Dictionary and Usage Guide to the English language and it says: Non- (prefix) not. Therefore 'Non' is not a word in itself and must be prefixed with a hyphen so if you prefer 'non' you should name (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Question about English: use of non and not.
|
|
Hi, I'm a brazilian and I'm working in a project of despatch scheduling of vehicles ( rail or road ) of plant industries. We have made some data base tables and when we created one about the products not scheduled we called it (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Wow, sounds good but definitely not cheap. (...) I bet the other Christopher meant fast food places and pizza joints. When I lived in Michigan, there were hardly any good places to get decent vegetarian meals, and only one true vegan (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Perhaps other problems are bigger? Son of Star Wars perhaps? (...) I do not know enough about the situation to say that. (...) Britain (...) I do not think anyone promotes what happened in the USSR as true "communism". To see how little the (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Virtues of Veganism?
|
|
(URL) couldn't bear to stick this on the end of rolling blackouts, that thread is out of control sizewise) ++Lar (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) And the taxes, which do not capture the true market cost of overgrazing, are then spent on whatever programs the government feels like, rather than on alleviating the problem. Surely you're not seriously arguing that this is efficient, or (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) The cheap grazing leads to higher profits. These profits are then taxed. (...) My question betrays our cultural differences. There are may in my country (not myself) who feel that we should remain self sufficient in food encase we come under (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Yes. But as long as they could pay the "bill" I expect they will be welcome. The alternative, would mean imposing morals on others - and I know you are not a fan of that. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I'll tell you something that would make it easier for me to move to a vegan diet. I'm in California right now, and spent the day in San Francisco. We ate a most incredible dinner at a Vegan restaurant called Millenniun. It was indescribably (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) No worms, I dig what you're saying here. I think America has an aversion to the word "communism" and is stuck on the Cold War model of an oppressive "big brother", totalitarian state. Let's pretend there was never a Stalin or Mao and address (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Most of the time, people seem to associate me with the commies, socialists, and/or anarchists(1). Probably because of my involvement in 'punk rock scene'. I don't like to categorize myself with any of them- not because I don't believe in parts (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Yes, stay away from pig meat. The Jews and Moslems had the right idea centuries ago. (...) Exactly, why be cruel? (...) God, Zeus, Budda, Shiva... fill in the blank. <snipped some stuff> (...) Well, I find that odd. Why is it morally wrong (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Remember Libertopia isn't a "utopia" so isn't perfect. But ya, that's the idea. The thought is that strict liability with no dodging responsibility behind corporate shells would lead to a better assessment of costs. (...) Which parties are you (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I don't know... nuclear weapons, rogue asteriods, monsanto corporation, Planet Lunch(tm), the juniorasation of LEGO. ;) (...) you forgot the *more* :) I take the train pretty often. I wish it was cheaper and faster as well. A few years back... (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) there's an interesting project being run by PETA looking at these very issues ( (URL) ). I first looked at the site last year and found it pretty interesting. Probabaly the only thing PETA has ever done that I almost like. (...) Larry, I think (...) (23 years ago, 4-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I agree. My "stupid" comment was meant more to distinguish between cows and, say, dolphins, which I don't want to eat *because* they're too smart. (potentially... sentient!) Cows, Turkeys, Chickens, even Pigs I am fine with. (although I'm a (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I agree that eating meat is a natural thing and not morally wrong itself. However, I strongly feel that it is morally WRONG to eat the flesh of any animal that was raised in filth and suffering and killed inhumanely. Animals deserve a healthy (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Indeed. I think our country needs to shift from the old paradigm of "a steak a day" kind of attitude. We overdose on meat! One of the most startling figures is the drastic jump in heart disease cases with the Japanese (who acquired a post war (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) And the lifespan of the individual is fleeting in comparison to the lifespan of the genes. I was imprecise in saying "crime," but I was being more metaphorical than litigious. Replace "it's more of a crime" with "the longer-lasting wrong (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) We're differing on a definition (as always seems to be the case between us!) If a creature passes down its own genes directly to its offspring, I see that as fundamentally different from allowing the passage of genes in which that creature (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) It's only marginally helpful (although I thank you for the datapoint) because I don't feel eating meat (of animals bred to be stupid meat animals) morally wrong in and of itself, and I don't find doing things that are self destructive (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I think there are some points worth making here. (...) Well...I would say that it is due to poor agrarian practices. It is certainly true that most of the US is used to grow feed crops for chicken, pigs and cows, but that in and of itself, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Well...I'm not sure I'd say it that way. Certainly the picture over time is more relevant to the issue of population control, but you originally stated something like "it's more of a crime if you look at it genetically." The criminality of (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) <snip> Thanks for those (pretty scary) factoids! They argue that the true cost of meat is a LOT higher than we are actually paying because the producers are - using subsidised grazing - using subsidized feed - not paying for the pollution they (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) I certainly agree with your larger point -- that your ability to reproduce is is more important than your sight to your ability to propogate your genetic line. However, I disagree with your "infinitely greater" comment. When you reproduce, (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
I found a few cool pieces of information that seemed relevant to grazing, beef cattle, etc. These facts also point out the environmental benefits of being vegetarian: - About 85% of topsoil erosion is directly attributable to raising animals for (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Once again, though--since we're speaking of how we might address the population/resource crisis of the present and near future world, I don't think it's inappropriate refer to something that's been within the realm of possibility (ie: (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) We don't know. The true cost of subsidized beef is unknown. The true cost of eating more meat and less vegetables (health costs, economic benefits of people living longer) is unknown. The true cost of overgrazing is unknown. There are too many (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Ah, but if you're going to take the tack of genetics alone, losing your site virtually guarantees that you die quickly and don't pass your genetics on anyways. If you lose repro capability, at least you can help OTHERS survive. Only in the (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Well, in terms of this discussion, the individual is irrelevant compared to the larger, longitudinal issue we're addressing. Dave! (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) In my mind, and in the "mind" of 3.5+ billion years of evolution so far. Which do you think provides objectively a greater chance that your genetics will live on--your ability to see, or your ability to reproduce? Dave! (23 years ago, 2-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) not (...) I suppose. But so what? The individuals are the ones who'll feel the pain in either case, and I think most people would rather have their eyes than their eggs. (...) kids (...) and I (...) So far, I think I'm winning. I've spent more (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I think that if it were real, it would be technologically nifty...but I guess I agree that it's not really attractive. I would hope to see them do better if they actually got something off the ground...err, shore. (...) Well, yeah. (...) I (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) In your mind maybe. To me and my wife, we'd MUCH rather have our sight than kids ;-) I spent $4K for laser surgery just to correct my badly nearsight vision, and I haven't regretted it for a second. -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Yes, we are WAY better off producing food in our own country rather than contributing to foolish exploitation and environmentally unsound agricultural practices in other nations. Though we may benefit econimically, we are helping to destroy (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Like I said, it was knee-jerk, rather than rationally considered, and stemmed most likely from the usual perception of the male deciding what's best by seizing control of the female's reproductive process. Upon reflection I realized what you (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I understand your point. But does the average beef eating man not benift from the cheap grazing in the longer term? Does the US not impose tax on the owners of the cattle? Does your country not gain from sourcing beef from inside the USA (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I agree with that. I am bound by my own inner morals, not the letter of the law, and feel some things that are legal are wrong, and some things that are illeage are not wrong. (...) But that begs the question of how much change is needed. (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) The complex. (...) In your opinion. I expect it would be full of the elderly nouveaux riche hoping to avoid paying tax. I expect there would be others their too hoping to exploit “freedoms” which are thankfully illegal in most other civilised (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I think you have just highlighted one of the biggest problems with modern society. By that, I mean the increasingly common belief that just because an action is within the written law it must be ~OK~. I think this is quite wrong. Loopholes do (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) that I think about it I sure may have been wrong.) What's not pretty about that? The web page, the Ociania complex, or the idea of people building sovreignty on the seas? The only problem with that is that the Ociania project went belly up (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I was. :-) Put it this way, if you have a system in which government influence can have more economic impact than competing in the market, and in which large companies can effectively change what it is that government influences (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Uh! It is appropriate for organizations to lobby for the government to do the things that that organization thinks are good. It is inappropriate for the government to do bad things with our mutual resources. I think all the blame for anything (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Here is a start. It is not pretty, but it is a start: (URL) A (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Which is what we've been seeing in most developed nations for the past forty years. Everyone gets their chance at the genetic lottery, with lower odds. My spin on a couple of other points: -- Environmental impact is affected by consumption and (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) That's what I thought. (...) Aren't there corporate lobbies that want grazing (continuing with your example) prices that low? I'm not sure you can place all the blame on the goverment. (...) I'm still not sure why they should be owned. I've of (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) Which won't happen anytime in the near future. One of the biggest impediments to 'universal' public transportation is that our current model of suburban development does not lend itself to fast and convienent transit options. (...) While I (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) A suprisingly effective way to curtail population growth (at least in iteroparous organisms) is to delay the age of first production. It's also a lot nicer than forced sterilization. -chris (23 years ago, 1-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) As Tom pointed out, I was the one who tossed that out originally. You did the math right and understand the reason. If you are controlling a population (of mamals, at least), the way to do so is to control the female reproduction. Good and bad (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
Well, Chris mentioned the 90% number. As to what the percentage would really be in order to curtail our population explosion, who knows? I'm sure it could be calculated using the averages for twins, etc. But yeah, it's obviously only a thought (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Tom, let me see if I understand your reasoning for suggesting the 90% female infertility rate. What you're suggesting seems to be: Given 100 fertile women and 100 fertile men, the effective maximum (barring twins and/or technological (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) I haven't managed to total any hotel rooms yet (though other members of my college SF club did discover that silly string doesn't just wipe off the walls one time at a convention... fortunately they took the responsibility and didn't pass it (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: what do you think of editorals regarding the environment?
|
|
(...) Gotcha...soon enough for you to have to deal with it. (...) Amending that to be more in line with what I said later, I mean that we _won't_ do anything, not that we couldn't. (...) Sure, but what can you do? (...) Sure. Anyone who you could (...) (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
|
(...) As long as you can't do that with a hotel room, I should be OK. This year, maybe I'll drive us out to The Store... Chris (23 years ago, 31-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
