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 / *15841 (-10)
  Re: Urantia?
 
(...) I've only ever heard of it in passing. The official site is www.urantia.org and features an overview of the doctrines and history of that belief system, as well as an extensive discussion of "The Urantia Book," an anthology of teachings (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: VP of lego direct Q&A Transcript
 
(...) I honestly don't know. You'd have to ask someone who works for LEGO. I *think* they are, but I have no proof, no data, no substance to back up that thought.... it's just a feeling I have. Do you think this is what they're doing? (...) I (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: VP of lego direct Q&A Transcript
 
(...) So do you think that is what they're doing? (...) I think there are seperate issues here: 1. That eBay sales can be useful for determining what sets and pieces to rerelease. 2. That eBay sales are insignificant in terms of total LEGO sales And (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: VP of lego direct Q&A Transcript
 
(...) If this is what they're doing, then I believe they're doing a good thing. The original thread of this discussion however had nothing to do with whether or not they are actually doing this. It was about them releasing products to try and (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Urantia?
 
Does anyone have essentially unbiased, yet informed, knowledge about a branch of Christianity called Urantia? I'd appreciate anything anyone cares to share on the subject. I am genuinely curious and I promise not to bite the hand that feeds me this (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: ? ... (Shooting the messenger)
 
(...) Semi-publicly. It's hard to find his personal email on the site, as was noted. He reminded me offline that webmaster@brickshelf.com works (as it does for MANY MANY websites) but I would reply that this convention is not necessarily known all (...) (23 years ago, 20-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: ?
 
Sorry for the double post but I would like to soften the tone of this entire thread by saying I'm glad Larry & Scott agree on something. (23 years ago, 20-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: ? ... Pot calling the kettle black.
 
Put up or shut up. Everyone that reposted the link and jumped down his throat needs to apologize to Richard for doing the same thing he did. Now there is some common sense. (23 years ago, 20-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: ?
 
(...) Excellent! May I suggest that if he's willing, a group to discuss Brickshelf(tm) might be a good idea too. Not sure where to slot it in the hierarchy though. Discussion about Brickshelf seems to happen in various places now (.publish, (...) (23 years ago, 20-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Q Re: ?
 
"Benjamin Medinets" <bmedinets@excite.com> wrote in message news:GruEy2.EHG@lugnet.com... (...) Yeah. The whole thing is a tricky situation, lets let that part of it die and work to come to an agreement on how to effectively deal with situations (...) (23 years ago, 20-Feb-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