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 / *16811 (-20)
  Re: Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
(...) Your tone suggests, contrary to your words, that you'd appreciate an acknowledgement of your effort. And I don't think that's out of line, but I'm also not sure what our common understanding of this issue is (if there is one). (...) I think a (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
(...) No one can tell you whether you should or should not be offended, but had I gone to the trouble to write what you wrote and got no acknowledgment specifically from the person who requested the info, you bet I'd be offended. (But then I guess (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
Dave and Lar: Thanks for the replies. I am really interested in what people have to say about this issue, but at the same time I am really NOT offended that Christopher has done nothing at this point. It is merely that his having done nothing allows (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
(...) Agree with Larry. Netiquette could swing both ways depending on who, when, and what forum. (...) Ok, my take is a very definite "no". My advice is: Don't be offended by anything. Or try not to be. It's a waste of emotion, and being a negative (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
(...) If it had been me that asked for info I probably would have sent you a private thanks. Or maybe even a public one. The line between clutter and politeness is indistinct in this area. I doubt very much that Chris slighted you deliberately, (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Netiquette Question (was Re: Legal Education? etc. )
 
I am just curious about something... Christopher posed a request here, and I have gone to some lengths to fulfill that request in the previous post. Now it happens that I don't care if he responds to the previous post or not (REALLY!), but I wonder (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) I've been following this since last week and I've got to say that that quote is one of the funniest things I've seen recently. Good work. Matt (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) In school (we are talking about PoA in public school) the pressure may come from the teacher, the state, classmates, or a combination of them. It happens all the time. It has been noted here before, but you seem to ignore the point. Claiming (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) Not really; if my command of the obvious were so astounding, I'd have realized long ago that you are unable to employ logic or reason, but here I am still trying to persuade you. (...) Okay, maybe we've come upon a legitimate example of my (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) I agree! If the US Mint has the wherewithal to commission 50 new designs of quarter, it really should take much to scour the religious invocations from future stampings. And to address John's frothing over-reaction; no one here is trying to (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) The force is a social compulsion. When I was young, I thought that the right thing to do was to refuse to recite the pledge because I didn't agree to it. My first grade teacher (Mrs. Henderson - Fern Drive Elementary, Fullerton, CA) tried to (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) Where's the "force"? down everyone's throats, as long as they keep (...) persecuted for (...) My words happen to echo Judge Fernandez's dissent (though I hadn't read it at the time). No one is being forced to say the pledge (that was ruled (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Legal Education? (was: real conspiracies?)
 
First, let me just say: Holy Crap! What a lot of complicated questions! Obviously, I have to make the usual I AM NOT A LAWYER warning here. But, really -- I am not a lawyer and you shouldn't consider anything I say any kind of legal advice. These (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One Nation (Under God) Indivisible, With Liberty...(was: Re: Troll Alert)
 
Well, if you were someone we've been debating with, that new word would obviously be "freedoms", since he has absolutely no clue whatsoever about the meaning of the word from his statements to date. (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
Yet you see no problem in forcing God down everyone's throats, as long as they keep their mouths shut and stop "crying": "(unless one is an atheistic activist who goes about crying about being persecuted for believing in nothing)." (your words) "I (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: One Nation (Under God) Indivisible, With Liberty...(was: Re: Troll Alert)
 
(...) Hah! Who says .debate is useless??? I've learnt a new word today! It's up to you to guess which one.... ROSCO FUT: .o-t.fun (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) Hardly. What I meant was it's irrelevant to me because it is none of my business *what* other people believe-- they are free to believe what they wish. -John (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  One Nation (Under God) Indivisible, With Liberty...(was: Re: Troll Alert)
 
(...) Hey, that's how I felt about the Troll Alert-- funny, but not very useful;-) I suspect that in this current (...) I gathered. Your posts seem to fit his definition (...) Thank you for recognizing that fact. Of course I'm not a troll, and while (...) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Legal Education? (was: real conspiracies?)
 
(...) Richard, In the past you have made references to your legal education and the woeful lack of legal education in virtually all of The People. I'm wondering if you have any reasonable suggestions about how to obtain said education. I applied to (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: real conspiracies?
 
(...) money and you will find your answers -- while all the pretended reasons (morality, justice, etc.) remain mute. Another example: Some call if graft, others call it Title 12 of the U.S. Codes. -- Hop-Frog (awaiting the year of Jubilee) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-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