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 / *15981 (-20)
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) I would also hope the receiving party would at least say something about it! There was a situation in my past when a family member found 2500 dollars (CDN so like 50 bucks for you Americans ;) ) in a parkinglot somewhere. He did not put an ad (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
Ok these are all good points, and I would like to apologize to Jeremy for my earlier "you're a thief and so is your daddy!" post. I agree that my tone was a bit harsh, now that it’s past lunch and I’m settled in for a calmer afternoon I will (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) Now this is a discussion :) 'Tis true, if *I* have something that I did not pay for, which should have been paid for, it is stealing. If I knowingly went to a store and stuck something in my pocket and walked out, that is stealing. If the (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) Darn. Good points. After I posted, it occurred to me that my analogy was flawed, but it was too late. (...) Legally, sure. But the issue was "is it stealing based on Xian values?" and I think it fairly clearly was. Dave! (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) In the first example, if the item was addressed to you, it would be the same. See below for analysis. If it was not addressed to you, then keeping it is stealing. This is different in a material way. Helping yourself to three off the delivery (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) I think it is fair that LD kindly put the limit in place when they realized it would help even distribution. Don't get ticked off because you did not order 20+ when you had the chance, after all we all had the same window, which I think is (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) First, it's not a "right" but a privilege of opportunity dependent upon TLC's policies. Second, TLC can produce as many or as few as they wish, and they can impose whatever purchasing limits they care to impose, whenever they care to impose (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) Okay then, not fair is that tons of people ordered 20 + right off the bat before the limit was in place and now I am denied the right to get three more? Come on. (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) As a hypothetical example, if you had ordered $1000 worth of LEGO and it was delivered to me in error, would you accuse me of stealing if I kept it and didn't pay for it? Or how about if I saw three Super Chiefs sitting on a delivery cart and (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) I had originally indended to post this following the first reply, but my e-mail server was down and by the time it was back up, two others had replied, so i deleted my authentication. But I see that this is going to continue ;), so i'll jump (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Free Super Chiefs
 
(...) No I would not, I would assume the limit was set in place for a reason, even if I didn't like it. It's their store and they can set any limits they want, I don't have to shop there. (...) Fair?! Nice way to rationalize. Maybe they realize that (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
 
This thread got me thinking. As you may or may not know, my site is called 'LEGO on my Mind'. (URL) visual motto of this site has always been a picture of a man with bricks for brains. After it had been around a couple of years, another site (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Time to write Lego Consumer Affairs a (nasty) letter..
 
(...) You know what I mean. =) Though I have to admit that the 2000-2002 products lines have been superior to the things they were producing before.. 10.9 cent apiece? What sets are you buying? Surely not Jack Stone! (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Important Questions
 
(...) Hejsan! (...) Yes. (...) Only if they make it out of anti-matter and keep it away from 1 x 16 beams. (...) 3,4% of my Technic figs are left handed while 97% of my minifigs did not hear the question due to ear-lack. Of the 3% that gave me an (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Important Questions
 
(...) Only if "YOU ARE INSIDE A BUILDING, A WELL HOUSE FOR A LARGE SPRING", or "YOU ARE IN A LARGE ROOM, WITH A PASSAGE TO THE SOUTH, A PASSAGE TO THE WEST, AND A WALL OF BROKEN ROCK TO THE EAST" and "THERE IS A LARGE "\'Y2' ON A ROCK IN THE ROOM'S (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  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)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR