 | | Re: Disney's public conscience
|
|
(...) It's just a marketing decision, nothing sinister. Disney decided they already had enough fantasy films in this summer's line up. (I won't pay anything to that man, because even when he's right, he's annoyingly hatchetjobbish. Why not just (...) (20 years ago, 24-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney's public conscience
|
|
(URL) Once I see this, I shall post a review for those living within "Disney's public conscience" zone. ;) Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 24-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego seems to be copying Mega Blocks
|
|
(...) But this is the US naval classification system (or perhaps Jane's)--and it is therefore that also used by those of us operating in retrospect. Remember that German battleships and battlecruisers in WWI (and in WWII--Scharnhorst and Gneisenau (...) (20 years ago, 24-May-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Weapons in models (was Re: Lego seems to be copying Mega Blocks
|
|
(...) It's not *my* reasoning. It's my speculation about *their* reasoning. If you want to infer what I think, think about "slices pretty close"... and what I meant by that.:-) (...) I could (facetiously) argue the point, in that since they mass (...) (20 years ago, 23-May-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Weekly Update of New AuctionBrick Items
|
|
(...) This person has either cheated the system to somehow get 200 Mearsk ships, or they do not really have that many to begin with. I also agree that asking $200 each for a set that just came out is both rude and absurd...so I'd like to do (...) (20 years ago, 22-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm Glad Bush is Standing by Rumsfeld
|
|
(...) Yeah, but it's not enough for me. I was looking for more info about Kerry, but clearly I don't write well enough to convey that question here. That's ok though, the internet's a big place. I'll find it. (...) It's not what I asked for, but (...) (20 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm Glad Bush is Standing by Rumsfeld
|
|
(...) I won't get into that debate again, but thank you for respecting my choice. I'm a separatist, as you canadian folks call us. I've never been canadian at heart. The point, however, is not to break Canada. It's to have our own Country. Québec. (...) (20 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm Glad Bush is Standing by Rumsfeld
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper wrote: This should make things clearer... Basically what I tried to explain, in better words. (URL) (20 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm Glad Bush is Standing by Rumsfeld
|
|
(...) Vote for a party whose platform is to break up Canada? Probably not Though, to be said, at least the Bloc stands for something, instead of this vague 'give us your money so we can waste it on stuff...' Beyond that, whereas I'd prefer a chance (...) (20 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm Glad Bush is Standing by Rumsfeld
|
|
(...) Hehe David, I guess you're almost sorry not to have the Bloc Québécois to vote for now, don't you? Because what choice do Ontarians have? Paul MArtin the scumbag or Stephen Harper the right-wing extremist. Or you could waste your vote (or (...) (20 years ago, 21-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
