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 / *1766 (-20)
  Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
 
(...) It touches my heart when Larry can vouch for me. (Wipes away a tear...) :) < snip Larry's commendable observations of ignorant, intolerant people a.k.a. so called Christians > I agree with Larry on his observations on "Christianity". People (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil? (Was Re: POV-RAY orange color (0)
 
(...) You know that, and I know that. But John, being a mac user, doesn't. :-) Just kidding. But I, right after that, did express it in decimal, exactly. It's just not a non-repeating decimal. He didn't say it couldn't repeat... (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
 
  Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
 
(...) Yup, I'll vouch for Scott. (...) Eminently sensible advice. I'm certainly not out to convert anyone to atheism. If you need me to tell you how to think, you need some sort of crutch anyway, so why not pick one that to the uncritical thinker (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil? (Was Re: POV-RAY orange color (0)
 
(...) But that's not _dec_imal, which implies base 10. (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
(...) Why does Lucas *need* to do that? (Or anything else for that matter?) Isn't what you really meant to say instead: that you personally would be happier with Lucas's movies if he spent less time pandering to the audience and weaving racist (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
Plowing though .debate and a couple numbers caught my eye! (below) (...) Larry, IMBW, but I think John might've meant "pi" when he said "22/7" -- at least, I know I've heard people accidentally refer to pi in that manner before. John, pi = (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
 
  Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
 
Moderate? Communist? HA! I am about as much Communist as George Lucas is poor. ;) You can ask Larry P. even. Right Larry? :) Scott S. P.S. I think this is one subject that will never be resolved between non-believers and believers, some will (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
Who cares what motivation was behind George Lucas movie making attempts? I like them, I found them entertaining, and if he profits from that, good for him. I am just glad that he made TLG make real sets again! Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
 
Scott Edward Sanburn <ssanburn@aeieng.com> wrote in message news:37C0092A.3C8A36...eng.com... (...) who (...) "agree (...) "LEGO" (...) Hey, keep the voice of moderation out of this. This is America, where you fight to the end over everything, and (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in message news:slrn7rvvio.5kv....UTK.EDU... (...) So now it's not just money, it's ego? Is that better? Jesse (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: U.S. Lego (Was Re: What is Samsonite Lego?)
 
Not when the Chi-Comm's give you millions of dollars in campaign contributions for the election and nuclear missile technology! Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Taking things on faith (was Re: POV-RAY orange color
 
< clipped Larry's and John's view on God > That's what makes America great, gentlemen. I don't agree with Larry's assessment, but I won't get gunned down for it either (At least, not yet, who knows in Clinton's America). You have your beliefs, I (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
(...) Sometimes I'm not so sure Lucas is motivated purely by money. He could make a mint right now if he released the first 3 movies on DVD, then PM next year, but he won't. He isn't going to release them till they're all done. Will he make a (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Extropianism
 
John Neal wrote in message <37BF0506.AE7F8075@u...st.net>... (...) The (...) like (...) I guess there is an art in getting rich, too. George Lucas seems to have it down pat. If the guy wants to make money (most people in Hollywood (or anywhere else) (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
(...) Agree with everything you say in that paragraph. But a film can still be low quality in my eyes even if there was a lot of time and money spent on it, and the technicians knew their craft. Consider "Waterworld". Conversely, a film can be high (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:37BF2A50.B6DC18...ger.net... (...) Quality takes time and effort. You can't just throw something together and have it be quality, unless you're some kind of genius. In films, quality can be (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil? (Was Re: POV-RAY orange color (0)
 
(...) Yes, in fact it does. The rules are the way they are because the devisers of the rules have desired outcomes and want the game to have certain characteristics. Why the devisers want those characteristics would be a matter for sociology or (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
 
(...) I apply the "in my living room" rule to art. If I'd be proud to have it displayed in my living room it's valuable art. If not, it may still be art, just not in my living room. Lots of the junk you find on college campuses, in fact most of it, (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Extropianism
 
(...) Well, suppose you wanted to make an anti-war movie, and the test audience came out of the theater laughing and playing mock war. Would you conclude that you had done something wrong, or that the audience was just stupid and incapable of (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Extropianism
 
(...) Is it possible to evoke *a* particular response? Unless the response you want is for people to give you money for your work. (...) A good artist IMHO works independently of his audience. Pop artists might be a different story. -John (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, 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