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 / *20631 (-10)
  Re: Free Speech, again
 
(...) I honestly don't know! Must be some other forum I hung out on or something. Or maybe I made it up? Who can say. I use it to mean "yes?" (as in, "do you agree?") and only at the end of sentences. Anyone recognise it? Google wasn't much help. No (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Free Speech, again
 
(...) Most importantly, you haven't told me where "ne" came from. Very clever omission--what are you hiding? (...) I've wondered about something like that. I believe the Turing test hypothesizes that a computer convincingly able to mimic human (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
(...) Uh, I meant the "royal we";-) (...) Definitely political (adversaries). (...) I wonder how the second place documentary maker looked in a swimsuit;-D JOHN (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
(...) We? No. I'd be laughing with him. So, do you reckon this is coming from his political targets or his rival documentary makers? It's certainly not coming from the Academy. What would be interesting is what the 'second placed' documentary maker (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
(...) He is so far removed from reality that he probably would. I believe that a normal person, having some semblance of dignity and pride, would be horrified were it to happen to them. But the fact would remain that we would be laughing *at* him, (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Free Speech, again
 
Oh heck, I snipped most of it without regard to whether I agreed with it or not... (...) No they aren't. At least not always. AM I THAT predictable? I'm not a number (in a platform plank somewhere), I'm a free man! But maybe I could make an (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
(...) That's the downside of this, yes, but preventing future budding Moores from winning might be worth the cost. (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
(...) ROFL! Humiliation? Don't you think he'd enjoy the publicity? Cheers Richie (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  "Fictitious Presidency"? How about "Fictitious Oscar"?
 
The consequences for Tim Robbins' recent unpopular ramblings are miniscule compared to the potential humiliation MM faces if the Academy is convinced that his "documentary" Bowling For Columbine is in fact not eligible under its own rules for (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The U.S. Economy: The Thousand Yard Stare Through the Years
 
(...) Hey Tom, what if I made you Transportation Secretary? You could push a federally funded 2 lane hiway down the Left Coast (or east coast as it will be for you soon) with a minimum speed limit of 100 mph...;-) Even if you decline, I use this (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-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