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 / *22831 (-10)
  Re: RTL query
 
(...) That's *a* way. Calling it "best" is a value judgement. Another way is to exclude the noise if it can't behave itself. In my value system that's a lot better. (...) Which authoritarian organization is that? I'm not aware of one. The mere (...) (21 years ago, 26-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: RTL query
 
FUT: lugnet.off-topic.debate "David Koudys" <dkoudys@redeemer.on.ca> wrote in message news:Hoyz39.12rB@lugnet.com... (...) I'll The best way to solve newsgroup Signal to Noise problems is to set a good example and to drown out the noise with good (...) (21 years ago, 26-Nov-03, to lugnet.faq, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Money, but no justice.
 
(URL) US pays up for fatal Iraq blunders> The US military has paid out $1.5m (£907,000) to Iraqi civilians in response to a wave of negligence and wrongful death claims filed against American soldiers... Families have come forward with accounts of (...) (21 years ago, 26-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Useful idiocy [Re: Bush toppled]
 
(...) It does when one is a blind supporter of Bush Jr! :) John castigates those who question Bush Jr, but remains silent when the FBI start harassing peace protestors(1) or when Bush Jr pays for people to be boiled alive(2). Who is the real "useful (...) (21 years ago, 25-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: A sincere question about the Bible
 
(...) I may be wrong about this, since I was raised Methodist/Pentacostal, but my understanding of predestination only affected whether you went to heaven or not. In other words, I don't think Calvinism (the origin of predestination) assumes that we (...) (21 years ago, 24-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Seriously...
 
(...) It's a cookie thing, I think. If you are required to check the TOS every time posting as a member, or required to enter your posting info every time, try resumbitting your posting set up while logged in as a member. James (21 years ago, 23-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Seriously...
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Chris Phillips wrote: signed in as a member, you explictly check once in a blue moon) (...) I don't *think* I do, but maybe there are some differences, I'll have to ask Todd. (...) That's really strange because I'm not (...) (21 years ago, 23-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Seriously...
 
(...) Maybe you use a different web interface than the rest of us do, but I am always signed in as a member, and my posts are not accepted unless I check the box on every post. Your other points are well taken. It seemed from your earlier post that (...) (21 years ago, 23-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Seriously...
 
(...) You don't get a pass because you're an "angry young man"... (...) No, I'm telling him to abide by the ToS, and explicitly acknowledge that it applies to him and acknowledge that he erred and wronged EVERYONE, not just Todd, and make up for it (...) (21 years ago, 23-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Seriously...
 
(...) (snip) (...) (snip) (...) Okay, Tom, I think I see your point now. Your issue is that the entire exchange took place outside of .debate. So you think that Jon's comment would have been fine in .debate, not not outside of it (where it occured). (...) (21 years ago, 22-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR