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 / *19121 (-5)
  Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
 
(...) That assumes a particular definition of MOC. One could argue that "Take hairpiece A, put it on top of head B, on torso C, with legs D" is as much a MOC (albeit a very simple one) as "Take brick A, stick it on plate B, etc". Bruce (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
 
(...) Maybe a few decades ago, but not anymore. At least, not unless the patent can legally be ignored by 10+ other brands! Dave! (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
 
I thought that the patented part of the basic brick was the tubes Lester (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom from information
 
(...) With due respect, John, what book would you call "worthy" of the award? Have you read either of Moore's books, or have you only read what other conservatives have said about them? I've previously noted Moore's really unfortunate tendencies to (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brick Testament in Trouble?
 
(...) Wow, John--this is one of those rare moments when you and I are in complete agreement (at least with the NEA part). I can think of absolutely no reason whatsoever that the government should provide public funding for artists. Having said that, (...) (22 years ago, 26-Feb-03, 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