 | | Re: For some Lego is a religous experience. (Was: Re: Quantifying and Classifying the LEGO Community
|
|
(...) .debate doesn't suffer fools gladly, no. If you just waltz in there and tell people you have some Good News for them, you're not likely to get a warm reception. (...) and some silliness, and you have the common sense to tell which is which, (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Must be from Anime or Manga then. Thanks for that, Mags... whew, that's all settled. (I'm gonna go with her explanation, Dave! Sorry about that, but she's smarter than you, Dave!... you're allegedly not as smart as Tim Robbins, at least (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Actually the Japanese connection makes more sense because if you make a statement and then append the "ne" it does mean "don't you agree?" or "isn't it?" But I wouldn't have associated it with the Lar "ne" because I always read that with an (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Urp! Maybe. Try not to let "brother"(1) Ashcroft know about that, OK? I'm on enough lists as it is. 1 - you used capitalization as if to imply he were a monk, I suppose. I use quotes as if to imply I'm not convinced he's the same species as (...) (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Doh! How about the simple "ne c'est pas?" in the now-forbidden language? Dave! (21 years ago, 24-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: For Sean...
|
|
(...) For some european news as well (not that I expect anyone but Kevin Cheng to care... ;-) www.uefa.com UEFA Champins League quarterfinals, 2nd round: Barcelona 1, JUVENTUS 2 (agg. 2-3) Valencia 2, INTER 1 (agg. 2-2) Man. United 4, REAL MADRID 3 (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Wow--both my spelling and acronymism have been off lately. Too much pudding (which are part of dinner, not lunch, around here). Dave! (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: *** For the record, I've snipped parts with which I disagree but which I recognize will not yield to discussion by either of us--you're as convinced of your correctness as I am of mine, and never (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech, again
|
|
(...) Suppose you were right... So what? This case isn't about free speech the way I read it. It's about false advertising. If it would be wrong for you as a person to deny you owned a sweatshop when actually you did, it owuld be wrong for Nike to (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tim Robbins "Countering a Wave of Hate"
|
|
(...) The difference being that he signed a contract that included (as apparently many major league contracts do) a clause about his conduct off the field as a representative of the Braves. I'd have to go digging in news archives to get the exact (...) (21 years ago, 23-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
