To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *14596 (-10)
  More scary stuff
 
(URL) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) to (...) When I lose mine, I generally find them a couple of months later, all mashed up down the back of the couch 8?) (...) And buildings exist for the convenience of companies to house their workers. They're not necessary, but they're (...) (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) Those who don't get their news from entertainment channels know better. You said this not all that long ago: "My beef with them [sanctions] is that they're not impoverishing the *right things* (...) *enough*, and that they give foamers like (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wanted
 
(...) That is not the point. The point is that the community is not 100% with the way you contribute. Nobody doubts your intend, only the manner. Read Eric's words again: "Please understand that while you may have sufficient logic and a decent head (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wanted
 
Best to ignore them, or else they see the smallest portion of attention and then break into epics of bad teenage angst poetry. Santosh (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Can you be more specific? If passengers didn't want to travel by air there would be no problem, would there? There'd be no airlines! Why shouldn't airlines shoulder the whole cost? (note that in a free market there is no difference between (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: More on Moral Relativism
 
(...) Under duress? Not great. Voluntarily? Really bad. (insofar as a system of morals can have feelings... :-) ) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Why shouldn't we? Why should someone who rarely or never flies pay so that folks like Larry can fly once a week or more (not sure how often Larry flies, but he's a good example of a very frequent flyer here)? If aircraft are truly that (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: All important (was: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation)
 
(...) Sorry if this is a repost. I lost my cookies somewhere. Anywho... I don't think we got to closure on this (or much of anything else, lately) so don't be sorry. I am not sure I follow this argument. You are going to have to elaborate. I will (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Amtrak Told to Plan Liquidation
 
(...) Just as our government would not allow the demise of Ansett airlines - especially just before a federal election! Be interesting to see what our PM does now he's been re-elected... (URL) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, 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