 | | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Sorry, gotta nitpick: Canada and Australia had no violent rebellions against British rule, yet both became de facto independent by roughly 1900. [1] A failure to revolt against British rule would not have kept us under anyone's thumb, it (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Thanks for the suggestion. But if you're not interested in what happens in other countries, why should you worry about the laws in other US states? Maybe you don't? If you do, why should they worry about your opinion? They have their own laws. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I don't happen to care what happens in Australia. Is there some reason I should? Y'all should do as pleases Australians best. -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes: [massive snip] (...) Probably wouldn't exist as they currently are, no. Who's to say what society would be like without firearms (or the fists, rocks, and swords which preceded them). Doesn't (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Well given that these particular reporters lean toward supporting gun control I would tend to assume the did their job (of being objective) by coming to the opposite conclusion. (...) anyway? (...) The SIRS are release yearly. 1 year ago is (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Well I will admit that my statement was a bit "boneheaded" :-) What I was intending to convey was not what I typed. (Narf!) The US armed forces, the treasury, EPA, CIA, and FBI are some of the major organizations that are vital to the country. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Well, getting back to the main issue of this subthread... ...check out: (URL) looks like the government printing office to me, and should be reasonably authoritative. In "Miller" the court seems to be dancing around questions of what kinds of (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Why not indeed? Beats the heck out of butting in on a technicality while skirting the main issue, which is what I'm doing! (...) Many who live elsewhere do regard ours as an amazingly libertine society (isn't that one of the reasons they hate (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I agree. You guys are heaps better off than us Aussies, just look at cheap LEGO availability 8?) ROSCO FUT .fun (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Y2K beat-up
|
|
(...) You were lucky if that was the only problem you had to contend with. I was involved with the upgrade of a mainframe PIMS application, customised by the client from an OTS package, which needed major changes regarding data entry, reports, and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?
|
|
"John Grubber" <jgrubber2000@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:GqCuAF.n30@lugnet.com... snip (...) Several of them are British. Hardly as you describe. Though many in the UK would say 'serve them right' lawrence (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) While Y2K deserved much of the concern raised, it really was overblown. I don't remember how many times I had to re-explain exactly what the Y2K exposure of our product was, and it was a minor problem in that the next time the machine booted (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I've read (and I'll try to find out where) that a gun in the home is X number of times more statistically likely to kill or injure a member of the household than it is likely to kill or injure an intruder. I'll try to find a web reference. (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I've read (and I'll try to find out where) that a gun in the home is X number of times more statistically likely to kill or injure a member of the household than an intruder. I'll try to find a web reference. Dave! (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Well, not according to the 2nd Amendment, The Constitution in general, or in any litigation thus far brought before the Supreme Court. More specifically, the government's authority to regulate the ownership of arms by private citizens has (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Where would I find that stat? Chris (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) So? Everyone has the right to own a jumbojet loaded with fuel, or surface to air missles (depending on your point) too. Chris (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Sort of. It (coupled with an assumption about the eating habits of other bad men(tm) ) demonstrates that the big bad men in the world are less likely to be vegetarian. Vote vegetarian! Chris (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
I'm sorta me-tooing, but hey, why not? (...) And our borders aren't 100% secure--and see what problems that wreaks? Imagine if we were fully balkanized--just look at the operation of the US under the Articles of Confederation if you want to see the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?
|
|
(...) hasn't come up in this forum before. (...) treated fairly? (...) Dubya conveniently avoided having to worry about that distinction by not actually declaring war. The 'war on terror' is a colloquialism, a title for a foreign policy inititive (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: So are they prisoners of war or what?
|
|
(...) They are human beings first. As far as I can see the whole issue is being undertaken for the benefit of US domestic opinion - which *appears* to largely support what is happening (the power of governing by focus group). I'm sure OBL is very (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | So are they prisoners of war or what?
|
|
Given the amount of debate here following Sept 11th, I am surprised this hasn't come up in this forum before. Are the al-Qaida suspects detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base being treated fairly? And if the US is at war with terrorists, are they (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) He was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg, despite the relative majority vote, because other options were voided (other parties were unable to form stable coalitions or fronts against NSDAP). So, in a way he WAS elected. There isn't an (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) In fact, they do need the Federal government, and so do you. How secure would the commercial shipping infrastructure be if our borders were not secure? How secure would US commerce be without the backing of the full-faith-and-credit of the US (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) If I remember correctly from my school days, the 1932 vote in question earned the NSDAP around 37% of the votes, and Hitler was nominated chancellor with the help of some conservative politicians. I think there was also a later vote in 1933 (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) So why are you here moaning about gun control when "totalitarian factions in the US" are denying trial by jury to people? Is it because is not you or you family who is being held without charge? Scott A (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Interestingly, there was an article on BBC Radio 4 last night about crime control methods in Europe. Some facts about Switzerland: + Their crime rate is half the EU average (Switzerland is not part of the EU) + Their police force is around the (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Hitler was never elected chancellor. He never had more than ~35% of the vote. Scott A (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) And we can always trust reporters to get the whole story 8?) (...) policy (...) fire (...) I'd be interested in more information about this. How did they ensure that non-law-abiding citizens didn't carry guns? Over what period did the change (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
[snip] (...) ownership (...) Well ABC news had a 20/20 report about a county in the USA. (I forget exactly where) That county had one of the highest crime rates in the country. A policy was enacted that required all able bodied, law abiding citizens (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) is (...) a (...) Not all crimes involve firearms. (...) Or people without enough information to decide whether there is a need or not. If Joe Six-pack sees a shop-lifter, and pulls out his legal firearm to stop them, when not required, does (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Most of the "major news stories" have been geared to distract the average mindless American into thinking they need the federal Government. The Y2K farce was a good example of that. Personally I really hope that some government faction did not (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) Interesting. It does seem to include a good definition of "scalper" even though it uses it as a perjorative. I do have some comments on it though. - They are making a value judgement about Ben's collection (he's the one who bought 3 C-3POs, 2 (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) social (...) In the SIRS from the local Library. Skip the NRA surveys and the Hangun Control Inc. surveys. Propaganda from either side is irrelivent. The Gallup Poll surveys and studies are the ones Congress uses (or at least is supposed to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Cite, please. I'd like to read evidence of the "all economic and social classes" bit. (...) Cite, please. I would say that of all family members shot by other family members, 100% are shot by guns (well, the people who wield them). Before (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Before some of the sillier rhetoric goes much further -- the historical reason for the 2nd Amendment in the U.S. is exactly as Mike states in the above. Yes, we have a system of checks and balances. Yes, we are supposed to have separate (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) Speaking of scalpers... I came across this page on the Rebelscum website: (URL) their definition of Collector apply to LEGO in the context of this thread? -Rob. (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) No, I assumed you said something to the effect of "document A is similar to document B issued by Hitler, therefore document A is bad". Fredrik (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) This is more or less identical to the old "we've discovered 2/3 of all the oil in the world" argument. What qualifies as a "crime," in your example? What qualifies as "preventing" a "crime" in your example? If my possession of a handgun (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Well, let's rephrase the question, since you seem to be invoking the "chances are he'll never use the gun at all" escape clause. Assuming the gun is at some point fired (other than for hunting or target practice) who is statistically the most (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Let's take the Hitler example, then. Hitler was not only democratically elected (although I doubt the soundness of the process), but he also enjoyed massive, sincere support from the population. Still, I feel confident that there were heaps of (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) using (...) Not very many. They would tend to get shot for trying. (...) Only criminals use guns as a threat when there is no need. That is why they are criminals. (...) All things being equal otherwise, in areas where it is eaiser to legally (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Flawed Logic. You have assumed I stated something along the lines of "[Hitler was an Elected offical therefore elected officals are bad]" What I stated, or at least was trying to convey, was that Hitler was an elected offical therefore (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) You can ask a rhetorical question and you can ask someone a question but you cannot ask someone a rhetorical question for when you ask a rhetorical question you don't want and/or expect an answer, as in, "What's up with that?" You can ask a (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Can I ask you a rhetorical question, while still staying with the Hitler subject? Hitler was a vegetarian. Does that prove anything about vegetarians? Fredrik (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) As Stalin so eloquently put it; "Those who cast the votes decide nothing, those who count the votes decide everything." Just remember Hittler was an elected offical. Also note that the United States Gun Control act of 1968 is virtually word (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Exactly. Gun control is completely about control, but both sides of this issue fail to see the bigger picture--why do people obey the law, and those that break the law, why do they do that? When society gets to the point where everyone obeys (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) How many are prevented by unarmed citizens? How many times are guns used as a threat when there is no need? Does that count as a prevented crime? (...) That is because statistically legal gun owners are white middle income americans living in (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: constructive posts
|
|
(...) I would assert that I made that clear in my last post to you? (...) I would agree that it would not be constructive if I were to bait Larry. Read the thread again and think about who is doing the baiting. (...) These "remember to dot your eyes (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) In some countries, democratic elections are used for mostly the same effect. Fredrik (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) No one. Chris (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: constructive posts
|
|
(...) Written in .debate: "when I post outside this group I try to be 100% constructive. I have to be..." You didn't use the word always, you used 100%. And, to be fair, you said you try. So are you asserting that this was constructive or that you (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) /objective mode on Well ignoring the propaganda on both sides of the Gun Control issue, and using indepentant statistics from Gallup Polls. This is all applicable to the USA. Roughly 10,000 crimes a year are committed with legally obtained (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
snip (...) No, you have every right to speak your personal opinion, that is why this forum, and this country are so great. I won't say I agree with you but never feel you shouldn't have stated your opinion, it's what you believe and that should be (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) The system is not to my liking on a number of levels... but I am no fan of national service. I wonder if the Swiss navy uses the same system? ;) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I would suggest bringing a gun into his own home is no solution. Statistically, who is he most likely to shoot with the gun? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | constructive posts
|
|
(...) I doubt I said "always"? I would also suggest you read the context to my comment, where KW was able to show a little humility in his response: (URL) we agree that hypocrites chastising people for writing “Lego” rather than “LEGO(r)” would (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) This system is fairly similar to that in Norway. A fair amount of those men who undergo the compulsory military service are enrolled in "Heimevernet", probably fairly similar to the US National Guard. They keep an automatic rifle (AG3) at (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there is a market for your MOCs on eBay? Please discuss...
|
|
(...) Was this a constructive post Scott? I remember you once asserting that your posts outside of l.o-t.d were always constructive. Chris (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Running away from problems might not be his style. ;) Chris (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) way we can consider a system a success. Chris (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) It sounds like you need to move house. ;) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) It is covered in detail here: (URL) country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols. This is in a very large part (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) I'm not sure why a private University would be necessarily better? In the UK, as far a I know, there is only one university which is wholly privately owned and funded (most are nominally privately owned, but are largely funded by the taxpayer) (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) I don't know too much about Switzerland, but I tend to take the view of the nations as a very special place. They are kinda outsiders with respect to international politics, as they are not members of NATO nor the EU. So I'm not surprised to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) According to my (admittedly rather poor) knowledge of Switzerland, it is the perfect example of an armed society, with one of the highest gun-ownership levels in the world. It also has a massive national service program. According to my SBS (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Yes, I've heard about Switzerland, I even passed though it once. Their knifes and watches are famous and their bank system is a paradise for tax refugees. Also Americans always confuse Sweden and Switzerland, so I sure have about it. What (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) Oh, I never said it was a good thing for them to do. I'm not sure how I feel about a government university limiting this particular activity on their property. Obviously it would be better if the university were not government in the first (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | CIA at work again?
|
|
(URL) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) But you see NC State is wrong. Even those people are doing a service. My former employer got season ticks to the Pistons one year, and they were more hapless than usual, winning hardly any important games. So it got to where the firm was (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) Note also that in many sales, stores offer rain checks. I have also seen plenty of stores advertise limits on how many of an item they will sell to one customer. The existence and frequent use of both of these tactics suggest that the stores (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) There was recently a flap in the paper here about scalping. NC State has a new policy banning resale of tickets on their property which upset people like season ticket holders or just folks who showed up for a game and one person wasn't able (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) What do you mean "should have been"? The goal of a store is to sell things. Stores are within their rights to put quantity limits in place, if they so choose. They are also within their rights to sell as many as they like to the first person (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) Our definitions are clashing. I have not accused you of jacking up the prices. You fall under the definition of a new, "modern" scalper. One who clears shelves of items and sells them on a secondary market for a profit. It doesn't matter if (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) snip No, I don't sell them for higher than the face value, that is the definition of a scalper. I actually sell them for less than retail on ebay, so how does that fit into your definition of scum. If you have been following the shopping (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Eh? Where'd this come from? Are you trying to manufacture a political debate? Anyway, as a strictly amateur political scientist[1] I would never make such a blatant generalization. It depends on the culture, the state of mind of the society in (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) YES. In fact even the scalper of tickets performs a service. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to play games with Ticketmaster, waiting in line for armbands to determine where in a ticket line I end up in, which determines my shot at a block of (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: An armed society...
|
|
(...) Where is this comming from? The guy is dead. Furthermore an unarmed society only works in Star Trek, where people actually have no apparent reason to fear their neighbors or their government. (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) That is exactly what the modern scalper does via E-Bay and other means. That is exactly what this man said he does. I'll use myself as an example of the "frustrated people who didn't find them inside" as I only go to E-Bay when I CAN'T find (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: scalpers
|
|
(...) Not really. If he was a scalper, he would be outside the store, selling the sets to frustrated people who didn't find them inside. Scalpers insert themselves as middlemen where there is no added value. Renard was reselling these to a different (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | An armed society...
|
|
... is a society with countless tragedies! Sorry Heinlein, your sci-fi books were all fantastic, but your ideas suck. (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: FOTY, at least for me.
|
|
(...) Doesn't sound like "veiled theft" to me. Target made a mistake, and Renard just happened to be there to benefit from it. It's not his responsibility to say "Hey, these are supposed to be $80, why are you selling them for $25? You really should (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
I seem to have done more harm than good. (...) All I meant was frequent participant of this particular news group. I guess that wasn't obvious, though I hadn't (and still haven't) come up with any other plausible meaning. (...) Just a user. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) I object to you labeling yourself an 'insider' in a multinational internet discussion group. I don't know who you are, or what your relationaship is to Lugnet (except as a poster) to Scott or Larry or to any other group. There are many groups (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
Apology accepted. (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) What resolution was that? I seriously don't see anything as resolved. (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) Alfred, I don't know how resolved this is in your understanding at this point. To those of us who are the insiders here, or at least to me, this is how it seemed: 1) There was this long-running fairly disruptive fight thing going on about, (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
Alfred: I apologize if I misunderstood your degree of knowledge on the subjects under discussion -- it seems to me that your last two posts contradict each other at least in part, but that doesn't matter, I'll just take your word for what you do and (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there is a market for your MOCs on eBay? Please discuss...
|
|
(...) Brian, I am appalled that your wrote: Bricksmiths Bricksmiths Bricksmiths Bricksmiths Bricksmiths Bricksmiths Bricksmiths in lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.auction, and lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade. It is almost like you are advertising (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) Well, you are plain wrong. I did read all of the thread (thoa I can't say that I have read every thread where Scott and Larry have squared off). I almost always read entire threads, because reading one message most of the time does not give (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) Right, nothing is off limits. At the same time, people are expected to post INFORMED statements showing that they have read most of the thread and at least understand the basic issue under discussion. You did neither, and in general that is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: For the Eyes of Alfred Speredelozzi
|
|
(...) Well, my reasoning is this: I don't read every part of Lugnet every day. In fact, I rarely read (or am even interested in) lugnet.general or lugnet.admin or off-topic debate. I am interested in Lego. So, what I read is usually lugnet.starwars, (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Words…
|
|
(...) I completely agree. I don't intend to let my children access the 'net unsupervised until I'm confident they're mature enough to choose & judge their own content. But I also don't wear blinders, and I'm well aware that I am not the only access (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Words…
|
|
Ah, well....I stayed away as long as I could, but you who what they say about opinions....everybody has one. (...) Interesting. So children use the internet unsupervised, I assume? Funny, but whenever my father let me touch any part of his gun (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Words…
|
|
(...) Children are curious. I know when I (as a child) found I word I didn't know, I looked it up. All sorts of things children (IMHO) shouldn't be casually exposed to show up in any 'net search engine by inserting one or two of the words Iain used. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Words…
|
|
(...) No fighting, I haven’t even donned my flame-suit! :) I believe that I put it quite eloquently, talking about “creative anagram” usage, and “relevant content.” (...) Hey, I too agree with Tim, but I just wanted to provide context to the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Don't like spammers? Sue them!
|
|
The problem with the kind if spam I get is that it mostly comes from one-man -shows selling me utter crap, get-rich-quick-schemes, or loans: "$80 Crystal Bear Now $4.95" "Our Loan Packages Have Never Been More Attractive!" "Full or Part Time (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Don't like spammers? Sue them!
|
|
(URL) course, you'll need to switch off your chosen SPAM filter first 8?) ROSCO (23 years ago, 13-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My top 10
|
|
Since listing one's personal favorites seems to elicit great anger, I thought I would make my own top ten list of my favorite Lego colors. 1. Green (because I like it) 2. Red (because I like it less than green) 3. Blue (because I like water) 4. (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: My top 10
|
|
Kirby, Relax. Of course you are right. I made an ass out of myself and got what I deserved. Friends? (At least until the next time I step in mecha poo poo...) Later, Bryce (23 years ago, 13-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
