 | | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
Moz (Chris Moseley) wrote in message ... (...) That's basically the best argument for MW, because it's fairly accurate. There are times in the economic cycle (such as in the Depression) when there are way too few jobs, and market forces would push (...) (26 years ago, 7-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote (...) One minor point Larry: this presumes that the employer will pay what the job is worth, rather that the minimum required to attract staff. I would object to that practice were I a shareholder. The minimum wage is similar (...) (26 years ago, 6-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
(...) I happen to know someone who seems to hold these beliefs. I once had to hear him whine and complain about how our employer had to pay him more because he was behind in his bills and would never catch up and be able to buy a house if they (...) (26 years ago, 6-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
<366A0E48.901D7C85@c...OSPAM.com> <F3J7pC.EGt@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) OK, briefly. This is purely an economic analysis. Anyone who wishes to prattle about how people have rights (...) (26 years ago, 6-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
(...) One of the arguments against the introduction of a minimum wage in the UK. The practise of some firms to pay near slave-labour wages in this country provide numerous examples of how *not* working can pay more, through unemployment and other (...) (26 years ago, 6-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw cannon
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <366A0E48.901D7C85@c...AM.com>... (...) You could at least explain that if you're going to toss it out. Lots of people don't believe it. Apparently people think employers will just fork out more moeny and not cut any (...) (26 years ago, 6-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: coffee & ice cream (brand) (was Re: English phrase)
|
|
The best coffee in the world are brazilian of course... But wich ice-cream is better Ben & Jerry's or Movenpick... Paulo (26 years ago, 18-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: [LDAO] Editor Feedback requested
|
|
Sounds intresting but, I just shelled out a ton of money for Visual Studio 6.0, not in the mood to buy anything else right now(1). Plus I have a strong disagreement with Borland, I just plain out don't like them, I prefer MS products(2) myself. Plus (...) (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: coffee & ice cream (was Re: English phrase)
|
|
(...) Sorry to have missed that one.. (...) Maybe the "coffee" breaks around the B&J plant were a bit too exciting... -Tom McD. (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: coffee & ice cream (was Re: English phrase)
|
|
(...) No, Black Forest Ice Cream from BeeJams was better, we don't get any good standard 2 litre Ice Cream Flavours anymore, just Vanilla, Raspberry ripple and chocolate really to speak of. Carbon 60 (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) I know, it was the buzz-word of the early 90's with computers like the Atari Falcon 030. Another one was 'multitasking' The latest one is 'digital' due to the release of Digital TV here. Carbon 60 (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: [LDAO] Editor Feedback requested
|
|
Try Borland C++ Builder 3. Version 1 does have some quirks, but v3 is much better. C++ in a RAD environment. Very VB-like in you place everything on forms, and create the UI extremely fast. The Standard version should be available for $99 which (...) (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: [LDAO] Editor Feedback requested
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <365050B8.986B64AC@c...AM.com>... (...) Only if you don't bother to take the time to do it right, my programs, when I finish them(1) are very elegant, true there are some wierd things about the structure but hey, I (...) (26 years ago, 17-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | coffee & ice cream (was Re: English phrase)
|
|
(...) Nah. Now, Ben & Jerry's White Russian - best ice cream there ever was. End of story. (Sadly, "was", at least at the grocery. I suspect those 50-gallon drums of Kahlua just got too expensive.) -Tim (26 years ago, 13-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) In the spirit of debate: Hmmm... yuk. If it ain't Vanilla or Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough, it ain't worth eating. ;) Also, coffee is nasty. ;) Jeff P.S. Give me a nice juicy rare steak and a tall glass of 2% milk anyday. ;) (26 years ago, 12-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) Of course that's a morning coffee and not a before-bedtime coffee. ;-) --Todd (26 years ago, 12-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) Yeah, I think it means "no frills" or "no extras added yet." Like an undecorated 9"x13" pan cake instead of a wedding cake. Or a 2x4 brick instead of a BURP. Simple but not necessarily bad. (...) Mmmm, great example. Saw, how about that Ben & (...) (26 years ago, 12-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) I don't think it has to have positive or negative connotations to most people. It's just plain. Normal. Maybe boring, maybe just nothing "special" about it. Like vanilla ice cream. Yeah, it's good, but it isn't fudge ripple. (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) <ramble> Well, I do like vanilla so don't get me wrong. It means no fancy features. It's an ice cream metaphor comparing plain vanilla to some other more complicated flavor like jamocha almond fudge or rocky road. Yet a computer that is plain (...) (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) It comes from ice cream, where 'vanilla' is the default flavor. Minus all the chocolate goodies, etc. A plain vanilla computer would just be your basic normal computer, with no fancy "multimedia" features. ("Multimedia" in quotes because (...) (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: English phrase
|
|
(...) I *love* vanilla. The stonger the better. The way I understand it, the term just means just "plain", and whether it's boring or not is derived from its context. For example, for most males a "plain vanilla Hugh Grant movie" would probably be a (...) (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | English phrase
|
|
Here's a *really* off-topic question for native English speakers: What does the buzz phrase 'plain vanilla computer' exactly mean? A very good (everybody *likes* vanilla) computer or a very boring (*everybody* likes vanilla) computer? Eric (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) Probably the easiest and sure-fire method would be for all sides to agree to detonate their weapons in-situ. No need to worry about launch failures, etc. (26 years ago, 7-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Question for anyone in the UK
|
|
The article only mentioned Universities, so maybe it doesn't include (...) (26 years ago, 7-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Question for anyone in the UK
|
|
Same here. However, and maybe there is confusion on that side...... There is pending European legislation with regards to software sales, and privacy issues......... Huw Millington wrote in message ... (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Moz (Chris Moseley) wrote in message ... (...) Just War Games, AFAIK. Although I do know that they ran test firings a lot to make sure that people would actually turn the keys when they needed to. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Actually thee design if I recall cost lest to run than our does. I'm willing to bet that china(scary thought) could do it, or Japan but I think that it was more of safety thing because they auctioned off around the time those capsules didn't slow (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Well the actual figures aren't available but I'd guess somewhere to 80% 90% would launch. I mean these guys had several backups in case one did decide to cop out right? Also if it's not authorized to launch fairly quickly isn't there a call to the (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) I think that's because theirs was built after America's. US shuttle design was firmed up using mid-70's technology, as well as some stuff left over from the 60's. I'm not saying theirs isn't good, but it takes quite a bit of cash to finance (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote (...) Was it just "war games" or didn't they have a sub 50% launch rate from manned sites in trials? Like, half the time the boys would choose not to set the thing off? So there was some incentive to have (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Question for anyone in the UK
|
|
Its the first I have heard of it... Jeff Stembel wrote in message ... (...) CNET's (...) it (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <363efd9e.2257101@lu...et.com>... (...) To the best of my knowledge they decommissioned the auto-launch missile right before they declassified it (about five years ago), so it's not in use anymore. As for the rest of the (...) (26 years ago, 3-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Question for anyone in the UK
|
|
Hi, I'm having a debate with a classmate about a news article I read on CNET's News.com website. The article was about a new policy that charges for trans-atlantic data flow. The article didn't mention comercial ISPs, just Universities. Were ISPs (...) (26 years ago, 3-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure if this makes me feel better or worse about America's nuclear capabilities. Technically, it sounds 'cool', assuming it would actually work right under field conditions. But any discussion of making it easier to launch nukes gives (...) (26 years ago, 3-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Jeff Stembel wrote in message <363E8913.DB8CDBE4@aol.com>... (...) Soyuz. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! (URL) in Deja News! (URL) (26 years ago, 3-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
But the first launch of the shuttle Buran (Blizzard) launched during a blizzard! Jeff p.s. - What Capsule do they use? Soyuz? Or a new one I haven't heard of? (...) (26 years ago, 3-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
It's uhh frozen, literally. They keep it in Siberia I think. Personally I think the Russian who decided that had a wee bit too much vodka(1). They did have it up for sale once and it is technically superior to our own shuttle. Jesse Long wrote in (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <363e0fa2.9016510@lu...et.com>... (...) Local is a very relative term. Local can be a hundred miles away, in terms of what the Air Force was capable of doing. Actually, they had a lot of redundant systems, and could (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) My understanding (consider me the opposite of an expert) is that the silos require local human initiation of launches. So an attack doesn't have to destroy the missile in the silo, it just has to cook the operators in the bunker. Seems like if (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Jeff Stembel wrote in message <363CEBED.B9E133F9@aol.com>... (...) A ground impact would destroy it, if it landed close enough. Not all atomic weapons are programmed to be air bursts. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Jeff Stembel wrote in message <363CECBB.671140E8@aol.com>... (...) If you mean the Russians, they use their heavy launch rocket with a capsule, or they bum a ride on the US Space Shuttle. They don't use theirs anymore. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The (...) (26 years ago, 2-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
They weren't the first to have a Space Shuttle, though. Do they still use it? I assume, if they do, that's how they get to the Mir Space Station. Am I right? Jeff (...) (26 years ago, 1-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Aren't missile silos underground to protect them from attack? So an ICBM might not even do much damage to the underground compound, right? Jeff (...) (26 years ago, 1-Nov-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) You should have said, "dead and buried in your 'special boxes.'" ___...___ -- ___...___ richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot Web Site: (URL) Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071 ___...___ For the best Lego news, visit: (URL) (...) (26 years ago, 26-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) I noticed and I figured. But had to ask anyway. Sarah (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) Well, duh! Points are always mute whether they are moot or not. You may not be mute if you happen to step on one, but that's beside the point. (...) I'm afraid to ask. OK, I'm not. ++Lar ======== Posted via the LUGNET discussion group web (...) (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) Nope. I worded that to my advantage. I'll pay up when I have *absolute* proof that you'll never post it on RTL again... So, when we're all dead and gone... you can claim your prize... (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) Nope. I worded that to my advantage. I'll pay up when I have *absolute* proof that you'll never post it on RTL again... So, when we're all dead and gone... you can claim your prize... (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
Matthew Miller wrote in message ... (...) group. (...) making (...) Hey, someone who doesn't say "the point is mute." Cool. (And you thought you knew all of my pet peeves.) Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the (...) (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) No. Because such a debate would completely belong in this group, thus making the point moot. (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) I have an issue with this thread, it doesn't seem like an off-topic.debate topic. Strikes me as *on-topic*, and therefore not eligible for this group. Anyone want to debate that point? ++Lar ======== Posted via the LUGNET discussion group web (...) (26 years ago, 24-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spam from Andreas Stabno
|
|
Could we possibly move this topic back to another NG? I feel that it is a rather non-Lego subject and could be put into the off-topic.debate NG. (...) ======== Posted via the LUGNET discussion group web interface ======== (URL) Search, Read, Post, (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spam from Andreas Stabno
|
|
(...) I used to hate this. But, after taking several years of German, I feel a lot better. Why? I realized that German 'recycles' a lot of pronouns for various uses. For example, "sie" is "she", "they", and the formal "you". So I figure, why not (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spam from Andreas Stabno
|
|
Thank you, Jesse! Incorrect (but politically correct) understanding of pronoun usage with respect to gender is one of my favorite pet peeves. I remember seeing my father's "Alumni/Alumnae Directory" obviously written by someone who understands Latin (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-98, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) Well, that was how I understood his article. I had the impression that he wanted more light grey space stuff (wings and so on, I suppose), to complement his space collection. Fredrik (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) Aren't they the same dark gray as dark gray always has been for years? Or maybe Donny just meant that dark gray was becoming too abundant for his tastes, and prefers regular gray...? --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) I'm assuming he's talking about the new Insectiod Space series? Personally, I was kinda surprised that the grey in the Insectoid theme was dark grey, since they did look quite light in my catalogue. Fredrik (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
(...) What set number did you see these new dark gray bricks in? --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Dark Grey bricks ARGGHHH
|
|
Hi All, Well Lego has done it again a new color "Dark Grey" bricks. I relied on for many years the release of newer sets to get parts for my Classic Space collection, and now I wonder will Lego phase out Light Grey? Thanks Donald Durham (Donny D) (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spam from Andreas Stabno
|
|
moz wrote in message ... (...) I'm moving this off-topic. So make sure you take the rest of the headers out if you reply. Proper English uses a masculine pronoun when there is an unknown person involved, or requires the longer "he or she." If the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-98, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FT Monorail Items
|
|
(...) No Bill Gates likes to give advanced users lots of of options. I get the most annoyed when, to "help" the novice user, Microsoft decides to REMOVE an option from their products. Sure, put good defaults on for people who do not want to learn (...) (26 years ago, 19-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FT Monorail Items
|
|
(...) For the record, I did not ask Nick to remove anything from his sig. Rather, I pointed out some information to Nick in an FYI. manner. This information was/is true, to the best of my knowledge, and was neither legal advice to nick nor a request (...) (26 years ago, 19-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FT Monorail Items
|
|
(...) I'm not flaming you. Pointing out that your huge signature file a) contains characters that Todd asked you to remove and b) is rather HUGE and not particularly funny anyway doesn't count as a flame in my book. If I were to call you a dumb (...) (26 years ago, 19-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FT Monorail Items
|
|
(...) Yes, you can keep Ickna in your From line. And you can keep 'nospam' in your email address. Note that there will be a new setup procedure coming soon today, which you will need to run (once) from a web page -- it will be where you declare your (...) (26 years ago, 19-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNet Chat
|
|
[Followup set to lugnet.off-topic.debate] (...) An address book is better than that. Win95 just remembers where you've been last. A real address book will let you specify which hosts to save, and lets you do things like specify different options (...) (26 years ago, 12-Oct-98, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Thanks Todd. Official permission to mix bricks has been granted in a general sort of way. That makes me feel a bit easier, knowing you aren't gonna be to uptight about that. ___...___ ___...___ (disclaimer: Nope, don't work for LEGO (TLG)/but want (...) (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Test
|
|
(...) The proper question is probably "Why isn't it a test?" (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Test
|
|
Matt Marshall wrote in message ... (...) Because we're rtl-ers (and now lugneters, I guess), and that's what we do. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! (URL) in Deja News! (URL) (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Test
|
|
Why???...??? Why are you replying to a test???...??? Matthew Miller wrote in message ... (...) (URL) Marshall $%#$% Vacuum Cleaners Always get my pieces!!! Matt's Lego Page (URL) (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
I heard that there is a college trying to get grant money to try it out in zero-g sorry don't remember much about it most of it was related to me from my cousin. Scary thing is that they might get it. Jesse Long wrote in message ... (...) 8-) (...) (...) (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Test
|
|
(...) No it's not. (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | TEST
|
|
This is just a test. (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Test
|
|
THIS IS JUST A TEST. (26 years ago, 10-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Ardjan Besse wrote in message <361e1892.24643415@l...et.com>... (...) Is that possible in zero-g? I've read that it's impossible in freefall, unless you get a head start before you jump out of the plane. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist (...) (26 years ago, 9-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) Failure of the spell checker, despite being set to British English......... ___...___ richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot Web Sight: (URL) Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071 ___...___ For the best Lego news, visit: (URL) (...) (26 years ago, 9-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) ago. Presumably you are referring to that silly Channel 4 documentary, "Search for the Lost Civilization?" Unfortunately, I missed the 3rd episode, went to see your favourite film, "Saving Private Ryan," instead! BTW it was a fantastic film, (...) (26 years ago, 9-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Op een zekere dag, te weten Thu, 8 Oct 1998 22:02:58 GMT, klom cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com (Mike Stanley) in het toetsenbord en schreef ons: (...) Well, as far as I know, they once tried to make a family in the Mir.... 8-) That can be a fun thing to do, (...) (26 years ago, 9-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) Maybe not stupid, but have you ever heard of the ABM treaty? I believe the gist of it is that it prohibits Anti-Ballistic Missile defenses. AFAIK, we respected that treaty, even thought the Soviets did not. -- Terry K -- -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
Simon Denscombe wrote in message ... (...) ago. (...) As a Brit how can you not spell civilization with a z? I thought you used z's all over the place. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! (URL) (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) But there is evidence to suggest that Civilisation started 13,000 years ago. ;-) Carbon 60 ======== Posted via the LUGNET discussion group web interface ======== (URL) Search, Read, Post, or Watch Traffic (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) ^^^^^ I was skimming this, paying more attention to trying to stay awake than fully read it. So I read that as "the first man in space, the first woman, the first dog, ..." and I thought, "wow, the Russians put a whole family in space. Add a (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Op een zekere dag, te weten Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:07:16 GMT, klom "Matt Marshall" <Matt@rapturesoft.hy...rmart.net> in het toetsenbord en schreef ons: (...) Don't underestimate the Russians! They where the first to take a sattelite into space, the (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) Imagine weather-based coded launch sequences...... Launch software searches the 'net for predicted, specific weather patterns in a designated target area, i.e. west coast USA....... When, say, 80% of the region expects easterly winds, and (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) It wouldn't be unimportant, sure the Ecological impacts would be horrible, but hey, most silos that I know of aren't exactly near town, and Nuclear weapons are only cumulative to a point, other than that they (...) (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) Yes. Joke. No smiley because I try not to laugh at my own jokes, as that's usually considered poor form. (26 years ago, 8-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) I trust this is what is called a Joke? Because I don't think this should be necessary at all. Sarah sarah@eskimo.com (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
(...) I do like option "c." Even better if it was timer set......... ___...___ richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam dot Web Sight: (URL) Instant Messenger: RJD88888 ICQ 13177071 ___...___ (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) So you're not saying that they couldn't have nailed us, you're just saying that they could have only nailed missile silos. I guess you'd consider any number of nuclear explosions over missile silos and the damage that would cause to the (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Matt Marshall wrote in message ... (...) Missile (...) caused (...) 1)The Russians first wave was targeted at the Silos not at the prez because he would be long gone and they knew that 2)They had to fly a really long way, except from the Siberian (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
They could have and if they got lucky it might have detonated over a Missile Silo(1). But there is now way that had we gone to war they would have caused us a whole lot of damage. There technology wasn't up to it. Not to mention they couldn't get (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) So are you the person that suggests the the USSR (rememeber that's what it was during the Cold War, or the CCCP if you prefer) couldn't have succeeded in launching an ICBM at us? (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) But you probably should start your subject with "WARNING EVIL CLONES!!!" every time. (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) probably lugnet.build is the most appropriate usually -- depending on if you're talking about properties of the bricks or about the companies themselves, you might want lugnet.build or lugnet.general... --Todd (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Perhaps a Princess.... wrote in message <3621e044.4881529@20...63.236>... (...) I'm telling you, I will convince everyone that the Russians could never have hurt us at any time during the Cold War even had they tried too.;-> There is no such thing (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
(...) I would say that lego-clone discussions are just as appropriate in the lego.* groups as they are on rec.toys.lego Certainly, I enjoy reading about them. Even if I am not sure I'd buy any. .debate is more for topics that lead to two highly (...) (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Non-"Leading Brand"s here?
|
|
Todd, if we want to discuss something other than Lego - the brand - do we have to do it in this section? I hope not. David Zorn (26 years ago, 7-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net wrote in message ... (...) Hehe, well it should be intresting to see what the US does, I'm willing to bet a minifig that they don't do anything, and that Bin Luadens nuke never appears, Probably he'll try to modify and (...) (26 years ago, 6-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
Matt Marshall wrote in message ... (...) a (...) I don't know about **any** detonation...... If they are so decrepit as previously suggested, they may well detonate whilst still in their bunkers! (...) The Ukrainians have apparently sold some (...) (26 years ago, 6-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Special Boxes
|
|
Ron Kittle wrote in message <3611B90F.699DDCA5@s...rr.com>... (...) I'm telling you the Russkies(1) wouldn't have been able to launch enough missiles to garuntee a detonation in any US city, much less a detonation at all. And now I don't have to (...) (26 years ago, 6-Oct-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
