 | | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) No, it leaves him talking to himself unless he can learn to play in a more friendly way. And it needs pointing out that I don't mind ALL of Scott's contributions, just some of them...esp. when you two start to go at it. (...) Larry, this is (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | test
|
|
i will try my lugnet. hello all (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) The problem with that line of reasoning is that it still leaves him starting wars and casting slime elsewhere. He's trouble of the MM sort. Not the same degree, but the same kind. It's not just me he starts trouble with, I'm just a lightning (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) You know how this line of reasoning ends, right? Some sort of discussion may well ensue to ban you both. Not one or the other, both. I wouldn't support anything else (or less) -- this is a "it takes two to tango" kinda thing. I will admit to (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) There's really nothing to debate. Scott's the twit who starts trouble whereever he goes. Go see lego.direct, for example, where his hateful slime caused a great deal of hurt within LD. My only chargable offense is that I let him get to me too (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:GnCxDG.JGr@lugnet.com... (...) No. I agree. Asked pretty much the same the other day (URL) no surprise that ignored it and carried on arguing. What is most annoying is that it seems (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
(...) <snip> Hear hear. It was soooo nice to read debates. There were actually intellectual topics being discussed. Midwest or not, Chris, you're dead-on in this case. Somebody's got to put an end to this silliness that keeps ensuing between these (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | It's brawl night in the kiddie pool
|
|
Howdy, I'd like to state that I'm really disgusted with the thread du jour and the two key participants. It was very nice here for about a month after the last big blowup. Why did you have to go and mess it up? Without going through the last month (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Apology.
|
|
(...) Possibly. It's a very grey area. (OBDisclaimer: I'm only really arguing this to refine my understanding of what the ToU might mean in a fairly grey area.) (...) It is unreasonable to hold Lugnet's ToU to any authority beyond Lugnet, so the (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Apology.
|
|
(...) I believe you are incorrect. First, if it's against the spirit of the ToU for a spammer to harvest email addresses against the will of the participants, it's against the spirit of the ToU for an UNspammer to harvest a single email address (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
