 | | Re: Curious, if true
|
|
(...) And by choosing that, are you not "taking care of yourself"? ;-) (...) By "taking care" I do not mean legislate or coerce. Sometimes a simple "WAKE UP!" scream is what's missing so that someone realizes there may be something wrong. Just the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question... (long)
|
|
(...) I think that there is a misconception about the role debt plays in the economy and what interest actually is. Here is some basic financial theory (A good way to get this is to have you company pay for you to get an MBA (U of Michigan) :-)) (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Never let it be said you can't learn something from LUGNET. I always thought one of the meanings of 'inferred' meant 'related to', like the inherent properties thereof. such as 'I thought that this particular thing inferred that'--read as--'I (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) By the way, an "inference" is traditionally made by the person who's doing the reading/listening/interpreting. You're thinking of "implied," which is done by the person/thing making the statement. Person A: Are you implying that I'm stingy? (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) leave (...) That's true to some extent. But isn't it changing the rules mid-game every time new laws are passed? Obviously we're discussing a much larger change than just adjusting our property tax rate up .25% to pay for school renovation or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Few are more anal than I when it comes to the proliferation of such apparent pseudo-words as this, but the burden of precedence is against us. According to www.yourdictionary.com the word "attendee" first saw use in 1937, so if we're (note (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Not that I'm an expert on grammar, but my entire life 'begs the question' meant to expound on the previous thought with a question... let me see if I can make a Daveish scenario... Person 1 "I think that your interest in LEGO is too extreme." (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) ...there's an apostrophe in "we're" when used as an abbreviation of "we are". I always wondered about the title of that New Zealand film "Once Were Warriors", but apparently it is intended to be the past participle of 'are', as the line is (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question...
|
|
(...) If they are, then yes, but if the losing side suddenly decides it doesn't like the rules and wants to change in mid-game, you can bet it won't sit well with the side that's ahead. And no one will take the new rules seriously if they are (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
(...) As long as Tim Courtney apparently wrote the mail on behalf of LDraw.org, I don't think it is a personal mail. I think it is perfectly acceptable to bring it's content up in a public newsgroup. I would have tended to agree with you, had the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
