 | | Important Questions
|
|
Greetings all, It seems to me that LUGNET could use a good lighthearted release from all the friction that's gone on here recently. To that end, I've developed a list of questions that I think we ought to consider... If you're exploring a mammoth (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Santa Fe War Bonnet sticker alternative
|
|
(...) Hellow! First, I'm directing this to offtopic. (Jared is my best friend) Jared, I would reccomend you to look around- and figure out when to move to another newsgroup! As for the spiffcraft... I need your digital camera! I've rendered it, but (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with you. A lot of people had expressed their opinions on this subject, you included. When Scott Arthur did so, this suddenly became wrong, and had to be pointed out? I can't see any logic in this, sorry. It's not (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Not the most constructive title Ben!
|
|
Judge not lest ye be judge Benjamin! . .. ... .... ..... ...... ....... ........ Spydèr ........ ...... ..... .... ... .. . Fading back into the night… (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Incidentally, that is why I set FUT .debate. Scott A (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spyder is definitely bad for lugnet
|
|
(...) (URL) his 11 posted "newsgroup articles", and his (surge of 4 most recently), I would largely suggest that his input is for the most part negative. I wouldn't stoop personal name calling against him directly. This really doesn't do anything to (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Indeed, and why? Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet? (URL) reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) If you mean Larry P'k, he has already done that at least once. Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet? (URL) reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Scott will do. (...) Good. (...) To you. Perhaps, even to me. (...) Perhaps we can talk about that once you demonstrate how you give others a hard time when they post a message in a dead thread? Or perhaps you were stirring the pot? What am I (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Actually, he did. It didn't make front page news (I mean, evidently you didn't notice it). Which bolsters Scott's point, doesn't it? Maggie C. (who knows she should just shut up and stay out of this whole thing) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
I’m afraid I did not misspeak. Personally, I thought Tim’s post was self-indulgent{1}. I chose the term “melodramatics”, as I thought it was relatively innocuous. I suppose I’ll have to be even more careful in the future! Scott A {1} That's just my (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Let me put it this way so you'll understand. For someone knowledgeable in general, (Dr.) Scott Arthur stated the "shared" view on the highlights of the newsposting to lugnet.general... if he found it so offensive, then why did he highlight it (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) For the record, just in case I was being a little obtuse, I concur with Scott, et al. that they are entitled to their opinion that mayhaps Tims Hiatus shouldn't have been listed in the Top Stories. Tho, when you look at it, if Suz took a (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) (not cutting out anything so as to not be accused of trying to manipulate the argument) (Dr. Scott) Arhur, I don't think anybody here is trying to prevent you from stating your view. My point was that your view was already expressed at least (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) There have been issues in LUGNET, and there have been long, drawn out threads to help resolve these issues, and there has even been some 'flame wars' 'n such, but what I continue to notice, time and time again, is that much comes from the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
<snip> (...) Jude, this seems to me like an attempt to get something started. So don't do that, it's the last thing we need. While I agree with the message that Tim's original post carried, (in fact, I agree *very* strongly with him, but that's for (...) (23 years ago, 10-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) I guess that means the conversation is over, the admin thinks it's noise. Jude FUT o-t.debate (23 years ago, 10-Mar-02, to lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Interesting look at the SSSCA
|
|
So like...some politicians were bought out by Big Money... ...SHOCKING!! Seriously, that was an interesting read. Thanks for the link. (...) (23 years ago, 8-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Interesting look at the SSSCA
|
|
(URL) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A hypothetical economics question... (long)
|
|
(...) Then lenders will be reluctant to loan. But that doesn't mean that they won't do it ever again under any circumstances. They'll just make the loan's terms more favorable to account for the risk. (...) I understand that this is what the FDIC (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
