 | | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard W. Schamus writes: <mostly staying out> (...) I agree, and it's too bad. Names and who gets to use them and what assertions are made about them (trademarked or not, which org or group, etc.) are always a source of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Netspeak terms? (was: Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe)
|
|
(...) Hmmm, (too many "m"s?;-) I always took "hehe" to be a sort of netspeak for a low, chuckle under the breath. "Hee hee" looks *way* too undignified and I'd never do it, much less spell it that way. "Heh heh" looks to me like a pervert ogling, (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Next time you're thinking about flaming someone on-line
|
|
(...) That is what you would think... but I had heard that some of these legal beagles track down who the poster actually is by forcing the site to give info when registered (so much for anonymity, but the site ToS typically say they will bend over (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) There is such a thing? Sounds twisted, do you have a link to share??? (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
There is no doubt for me, that at this point it has turned into a mess. I can't say that I know Tim's methodology or motivations for doing anything. Nor do I believe that he is apt to "Bully" anyone. I do know that having contact with Tim over the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) rate. (...) Unless there's a reason that I'm missing, that's kind of my default thought. (...) Got that, but in a global economy it's a phantom concept. I could always trade across the border. Maybe it made more sense way back when before (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Who can't? What about those who can (~99.99% of the population) but choose not to? Should they not have that right? If not, I find the world that you want to live in creepy. I even accept on some philosophic level that I have a responsibility (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) If the rules are currently patently unfair, is it not patently unfair to leave them as is? (...) That's silly. People will do whatever kind of work is needed as determined by the market. If housing is needed the market will provide it. I would (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Actually, I think it was John's comments that begged the question. :) (...) O.K. No disagreement on the actual meaning. I was relying on the implied and commonly understood meaning. As wrong as it may be, it's used in everyday coversation for (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
(...) If you mean to say that Lego has no legal foothold agaisnt Lugnet and Ldraw, with all due respects, you are wrong. My intention is not to ridicule you or debate for the sake of debating, but here are a few actions Lego could take inmediately (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Next time you're thinking about flaming someone on-line
|
|
(...) real email address and your actual name (presuming one actually provides it, as I have)? I can't see how anybody can get the info. on people posting over at f*ckedcompany.com for example (not without more information than is readily available (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) You raise an interesting point -- I gather you think the true value is best determined through daily market forces. I am pretty sure the point of a ratio rather than certificates traded for daily value has to do with making the value static. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Which doesn't say they don't also sell them drugs, even while in prison. I don't know about the US, but here in Germany, it is said to be easier to get drugs in prisons than outside. Didn't try it yet, though ;-) Greetings Horst (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) And I'd HAVE to go back to work. :-( (...) I pretty much agree, although there is a danger of stereotyping-- many people who are not rich but have been playing by the rules for several years would be hurt. And if you suddenly change the rules (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
(...) And (...) No, I'm not (IMO). (...) No, they are names, one letter of which stands for LEGO. They do not contain the word LEGO. Why else do you think LEGO leaves them alone, while asking the developers to rename legOS? ROSCO FUT: .o-t.debate (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) I meant both. And it is our business as well, to take care of those who can't take care of themselves. (...) Depends on your level of tolerance; I lived in a smoke free environment and was shocked the first time I entered my college's bar (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Hey, no fair--you're not allowed to dig up archived diatribes; that's my trick. Dave! (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Heh. I'd be pleased as pie if Zeus could come off his mountain and zap my student loans with a thunderbolt. Since I'm not yet a homeowner, that hefty monkey on my back makes up very nearly the entirety of my debt. Not that I'm shirking my (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Well maybe you shouldn't have children then. ;-> Chris (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I'd quit my job. (...) Many wealthy people would lose their perpetual income streams. Many lower middle class people would lose their perpetual debt streams. I'd like to change your scenario a little. What would happen if the place where (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Ah, never mind--upon re-reading my post I realize I was sort of picking a fight (it's been too long since we saw a fierce knock down, drag out shouting match around here!) Anyway, I happily accept your apology if you accept mine for being a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Completely aside from the issue of how it's supposed to be, I've been wondering -- why the 20:1 ratio? It seems like a bad idea to have a ratio instead of just gold certificates and silver certificates and maybe a daily exchange rate. Do you (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) I sort of agree. I have a financial interest in the situation because I contribute to funding the remediation. And I may have all the empathy in the world for people who are hurting themselves. But I'm not sure that I have the right to stop (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
I think you have been making some oblique references to the Euro. As far as I am able to discover, there was some talk about two years ago in regards to linking the Euro with gold in some ratio -- but I am unable to find anything recent that asserts (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Yes, for instance. But in addition, there's the danger from needle one user to the next, whereas two pot-heads sharing a bong or a lighter are far less likely to transmit AIDS or Hepatitis. (...) While I recognize that your statement is (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) This may be a cultural thing, but I would be more likely give some help to the individual (direct or indirect). That said, I have never seen anyone “passed out on the stoop from their heroine use”. Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) You mean when I step on one at the beach? Or do you mean I'm supposed to care if junkies contract AIDS? I mean, hypothetically, I do care. But at the same time, that's a risk they are balancing as they make their decisions. It's not exactly (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) OTOH, there are many disadvantages to the use of hypodermic syringes (sp?): #1- There is a larger risk to contract diseases (AIDS, Hepatitis,...) from a needle than there is from a syringe; #2- It is possible to vent a room easily, but is is (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) lol. Do you feel that there is even a chance that the average "Joe" will think that the WOD *lowers* the price of drugs on the street? I really do doubt that. I really do. (...) Perhaps many view the military costs as a price worth paying? (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) I'm probably the only one with this stance, but I'd prefer people to use their drugs intravenously. I find the exhaust -- whether from tobacco or cannabis, troublesome and difficult to avoid. If they're passed out on the stoop from their (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) It is supposed to be good, and have a relaxing effect. No surprise. But I have not tried myself though (so far; I won't say it is not in my plans to do so in due time). (...) I believe Portugal is one of those countries, at least up to a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) No, I haven't. The seeds are good for their nutritional values, but I don't know about the tea. (...) I don't know when the habit of smoking hemp started, but you are probably correct that it was not a social problem at the time. The alleged (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Next time you're thinking about flaming someone on-line
|
|
(URL) interesting to find out what Mr Whatley ends up doing... ROSCO (23 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) That must be it. I mean, it is possible to grow hem in Portugal with a simple permit, if it is to be used commercially; but every once in a while, the Guard comes and burns the fields, even legalized - then they "appologize for the honest (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Have you tried the tea? (...) I fear the results... :-D By the time the US constitution was written, the drug issue was still not a social problem: all drugs were smoked (as opposed to the current IV ones). So it is fair to think the general (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Yup, I know that. There used to be hemp-like plantations for rope production in Portugal a long time ago. (...) :-) What really gave me thoughts were all those people who say "politicians would like to burn the constitution"... ;-) (...) My (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) I wouldn't have any knowledge of the CIA specifically, but I agree with the logic that the only way drugs could be so prevalent is with complicit law enforcement. My buddy Aaron got a degree in criminal justice because he started out wanting (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) When I visited Berlin in the mid-nineties, I bought half a kilo of hemp seeds to bring home. This was the non-THC variant. It tastes good and is very healthy. I used it in my breakfast cereals! When it comes to the American constitution, the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) If you can get your government to realise it. Here in Australia, many people have been lobbying for years to make it easier to get approval to grow hemp for these kinds of products, but they *still* have to jump through hoops. I guess the (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) Hemp is a great fiber. Works most places cotton or wood work (paper, clothing, and rope). (why do you think they call it "smoking a rope"???) As far as pot goes, well, to each his own...at least as far as legal in the country that they are in. (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Maybe, maybe not. Never ascribe to malice what stupidity (or empire building) can adequately explain. Law enforcement types and their lobbyists, prison guards and their lobbyists, prison operating companies and their lobbyists... they all (...) (23 years ago, 3-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Curious, if true
|
|
Hi all, Today's newspaper had an interesting article about possible uses for cannabis, besides the obvious "smoke it" one; one of the many uses mentioned was paper, and as an example they mentioned the American Declaration of Independance, along (...) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Why be so generous? I think they are STILL dealing drugs, as are many members of most of our law enforcement agencies. My assertion is and essentially HAS TO BE correct -- how else could drugs flood our streets and prisons? Moreover, the only (...) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) The LP mailing list received an update. I could post it if there's interest. The drug czar didn't take the bait, unfortunately, so it did generate some other coverage, but not quite the controversy that was hoped for. (If the DEA or whoever (...) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) No harm done! I wrote "I think" and "I hope" for a reason! :-) (...) Ah, ok. My mistake then. In my place money is understood to have correspondance with central bank reserves (USD + Gold). Now it may have changed, with the new "Strong (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Would you expect a drop? (...) What? Do you think that people do not realise that the War on Drugs raises the price of "drugs" on the street and that organised crime (in its many forms) benefit? I think they do. What, perhaps, they have not (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I hate to be overly harsh -- but you have no idea what you are talking about. The corresponding amount of paper money to precious metals is by definition in U.S. federal law supposed to be .999 fine 1 oz. silver for a dollar (it is essentially (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Yes, I do go to church on a regular basis. Of course some of my fellow congregants very vehemently deny they go to church. I happen to find that church is a pretty good description of what I go to on Sunday even though the beliefs of my (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) <Snipped> (...) You are assuming housing costs would not fluctuate in the 6 years in study, right? I mean, by the time they reach 100k the house cost a tad more... and in the meanwhile, they may have been experiencing other possible (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Quite recently, I saw a graph of the net private debt/savings in the US. Since the second world war, the average debt of US households had increased from roughly 0% of the household income to around 100% today. This means that on average, US (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Dave! Way to keep your eye on the moving targets! This was not a small topic you raised with your seemingly simple query. Of course, all of the things you describe are brought to us by the friendly passages contained in Title 12 of the Federal (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I thought you were always off to church and such...my mistake. (...) Why not? I am trying to suggest we give those under the thumb of the world be given a clean slate. Anything they do from this moment forward can bring them whatever wealth (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) You are, of course, advocating communism: "Anyone who possesses even a single item beyond basic living requirements is equally culpable as one who possesses countless frivolous luxury items." And in fact I think there is a manifest difference (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Excellent! Do you have any way of knowing what attention the ad attracted? Has the LP web site had a burst of hits or mail? I hope that this does raise awareness of the reality of things. Chris (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) It's a nifty visual, I agree. I'm still not sold on the film for a number of other reasons, but who wouldn't love the idea of someone swooping in to negate our debts for us? Ignoring for a moment the problem of destruction of private property (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Careful about making such assertions, or you'll be labelled a classist! In any case, you're correct (by a long shot, I believe). Dave! (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...)
|
|
[OK...I'm going to keep my cool here, and not attack Scott, despite my sensabilities crying out for lots of sarcasm, exclamation points and capital letters. I'm just going to point out a couple of facts and leave it at that. I suggest that anyone (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Please show me where I have EVER stated that I pay much heed at all to the Bible. I really would hardly consider myself a Christian either, true, I do consider Jesus to be a "great man" (possibly even supernaturally great, but definitely NOT (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) These *were* usually public projects. The present trend is to make everything dependant on private initiative, with State subsidies according to the strategic interest. At least it is happening in my country: the state wants to establish a (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: how to lie with statistics
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Eric Sophie writes: <snip> I stand behind what I said, (in the middle of a very involved thread) three months ago, including my analysis of what transpired when you spammed many groups. But even though I could mount a (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
| The big irony here is that drug production in Afghanistan has increased | since the Taliban were removed. No doubt that will reduce the price on the | street a little (but not by 16999/17000) - which appears to be an LP goal? | ;) Lastly - it (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
No way. I spent all my adult life avoiding debt (other than my mortgage - and the rate I pay on that is *less* than I get on my savings). I don't see why I should pay for others getting bank loans to play the stock market. (...) I'm sure I read (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...)
|
|
(...) Why keep reducing this to personalities? This is about issues - not personalities. Stick to the issues. Forget your relationship with Larry for now. I shall ask again: This is what I don't get. Larry offends people. Larry acts childishly. (...) (23 years ago, 1-Feb-02, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: how to lie with statistics
|
|
RRRRrrrrrr.... (...) Big Whoop, and, gee thanks for Dragging my name into this for no good reason. I warn you, please do not use my name at all for any reason in this forum for purposes that advance your own pleasures. I build for the sake of (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Eh? These are usually public projects, how is it that there is not enough money collected from taxes to accomplish these things? Don't even get me started on how Californians have already paid for their power plants. Anyway, it's the interest (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I believe he's referring to railroads and such. Roads are funded a bit differently, but may use loans. Phone lines, gas pipes, electric plants and transport lines... they are all usually funded with loans - it is unfrequent one or ones have (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Gee, Frank -- don't you think its weird that I, a pagan, have generally come out in support of a custom enumerated in the bible; whereas you, a Xtian, have come out against it? Curiouser, and curiouser... (...) Didn't you mean: Wealth in and (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) Dave! are you coming over to the "Fight Club" side of debate? This is exactly what happens at the end of the movie...my fav part. This is all part of an ancient custom, in the bible it is known as The Feast of Jubilee -- its celebration (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) I think it would cause economic collapse. One question you would have to ask is what really do you mean by debt? If I buy stock in a company which is trying to raise capital, is that a debt or not? One serious problem is that you would (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon Leader ordered Massacre?
|
|
(...) Ok, so I am a real ignorant about American History. But what is the impact of this, anyway? It was a long, long time ago; what harm can it do now to reveal these facts? It is not as if someone were ot be arrested or anything... (...) (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Mormon Leader ordered Massacre?
|
|
Interesting news here: (URL) free registration. You can enter false ID if you want to be anonymous) ~GAMH (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
What would happen if all debts public and private were just plain cancelled as of, say, 1/1/2002? I choose an already-passed date so that there couldn't be a mad dash to accrue huge debt in hope that it would be eliminated. In all seroiusness, what (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
| Their site doesn't say how they're gonna pay for the extra resources needed to | treat drug abuse as a medical problem. That is because the LP is about ideas, not solutions. The LP should be able, as a fringe party, to raise the level of debate. (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) My guess is the "War on Drugs" probably supports some politicians & businessmen, too. For that matter, there's probably politicians & businessmen that support terrorism. The average Joe probably (unknowingly) supports terrorism indirectly in (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Wackiness, Thy Name is Two-Headed Moose Foetus
|
|
(...) I'm afraid I explained myself poorly: what I mean is that, besides the obvious scientific study of mutations, and the sociological study you mention (this one I did not recall, to be honest), there is no point in making such a display of (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
(...) Yeah, probably. I liked the ad. It reminded me of the better Robbie Conal or Barbara Krueger stuff, some of Conal's posters can be seen at: (URL) esp.: (URL) Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
Strange, I would have thought that a greater priority for the LP would have been protecting the rights of those held by your government in Guantanemo Bay or even those held without formal charge in jails in the USA? But I expect there are few votes (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | War on Drugs SUPPORTS terrorists.
|
|
To counter the propaganda run a few weeks ago the LP supposedly placed an ad in today's USA Today. Here is the info on it: (URL) here is the ad: (URL) pdf, may be a bit slow to d/l) Did anyone see it? I don't normally get that paper except when (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | scientology conspiracy in Hollywood (was Re: Urantia?)
|
|
(...) I’m afraid I don’t know enough about French culture/legislation to really answer your point. But you appear to be inferring that this could never happen in the USA? Could the scientologists not just be labelled “un-American” and then a witch (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Urantia?
|
|
(...) Yeah, I've wondered about this issue as well. For me, much can be made of the fact that the "religion" in question [allegedly] goes to great lengths to restrict its member's freedoms, such as freedom to choose a different religion, so there (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Urantia?
|
|
(...) "The trial, the first to be heard under tough new anti-cult legislation, was brought by three former Scientology members who accuse the organisation of harassing them after they had left." It seems to me that having "anti-cult" legislation (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
(...) I meant "Long Term". It is actually a "ET" (Edinburgh Transport) system. David Begg is (was?) an Edinburgh councillor (as well as being a transportation expert). (...) A satellite dish on the roof will do no damage to the dash! (...) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
(...) I thought he meant Long Term. Chris (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
(...) By that do you mean London Transport? 'cos it isn't actually one of ours. I can explain the differences between Transport for London and London Transport and Road User Charging and Congestion Charging if you'd like. I expect that *if* it goes (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
(...) you simply mean to be pointing out how trivial the accounting would be by using this kind of technology. (...) Cost to whom? In the US you have to have annual or semiannual vehicle inspections for safety and emissions standards. If the UK (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Urantia?
|
|
(...) I thought what is happening in France would add to your comments: Scientologists face Paris ban (URL) "an essentially commercial enterprise," which offered members "the illusory promise of revival" in their lives. "The methods of Scientology, (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
(...) It is a LT proposal (10 years). I expect that *if* it goes ahead, the technology (based on GPS) will be fitted to new cars. In 10 years, I expect GPS will be almost standard and cheap anyhow(?). Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Pay per mile in UK?
|
|
Seem to recall some debate a while ago about privatising roads - here's a link at The Observer: (URL) wanna know how much it's gonna cost to make sure all vehicles have a "black box", and how often they're gonna sample. There's an awful lot of (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Urantia?
|
|
(...) I figured that you would at least have seen the main site, of course, but it seemed a good place to start! (...) A little? Nah! 8^) (...) Unfortunately, a quick run around the 'net doesn't return much other than decidedly pro- and decidedly (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Urantia?
|
|
Thanks, Dave! I did, of course, find the first link of my own before posing the request. Some dead links detracted from the experience there -- at least their central texts links were down when I visited last night. The second link you provided is a (...) (23 years ago, 22-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
