 | | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) As per my reply to Chris I wasn't actually saying that governments should run sewerage, only that government is critically important, like sewerage is critically important. (...) I think we've got a large area of agreement on this, looking at (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) That's wonderful. The point (in case I was not abundantly clear) is not that governments should run sewerage systems, but that governments are important, like sewerage systems are important. Richard Still baldly going... (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Me either. At least not the idea of it, and the time was about right, or if anything. My issues are with the execution of it. Too many compromises for it to achieve the promised cost reductions that would have driven vastly greater usage.. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) It's not just the challenge of the order of magnitude increase in velocity that's required, but significant issues in handling rentry and hypersonic flight in general. I don't believe SS1 has a thermal protection system that's anywhere close (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) The prize does not pay for the cost of development. SS1 is not going to go into any kind of orbit. Both those are from a friend of mine who works on the project (I literally asked him those very questions a few weeks ago). -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 24-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) The type of sewerage handling systems that I may install are defined by building code. So I guess, the government. Discharge testing at the site (I'm running with septic) is done prior to accepting the design as legal. I'm actually not sure (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We're here to go
|
|
(...) The above assumption is massively invalid, apparently. The velocity achieved by SpaceShipOne is way way too low to be stretchable to LEO by leaving a few passengers out. I hadn't done my homework when I posted this, and I'm perfectly fine with (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) The exact term you used, I think, wasn't it? (...) I don't recall ever making any such claim, I think you have me confused with someone else. However, if you can provide a cite where I said it, I'll gladly retract any statement I may have made (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) If this is such a monumental waste of your time, perhaps you'd prefer to get back to our discussion of whether or not tritium can be harnessed as an economic power source? I seem to remember a similar response when I pointed out that we'd need (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Yes, exactly! What's the point of developing a single-capacity heavy-launch system that's so prohibitively expensive as to restrict the range of customers to just Washington D.C.? I love the concept of strapping three D4's together to get a (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) I pride myself on my sophistrication. Dave! FUT ot.fun, because I'm having such a swell time! (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) So due to your lack of inclination to post a proper rebuttal, we're suppose to take the 'absolute nonsense' as the end of the arguement? "Hey Joe--you're an idiot!" "Wha--? Why???" "I don't have time nor the inclination to tell you, you're an (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Personally, I like the spurious fake-quotation that raises (shouldn't that be "lowers"?) sophistry to a new level. ;-) -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) From page 112 of (URL) The Libertarian Playbook:> "Though technically not a valid rhetorical device, argument by assertion is commonly employed when attempting to dismiss an argument by fiat." (...) Also (URL) from page 112:> "One may attempt (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) That's absolute nonsense. I could say more on this topic at this time but I'm not sure it's a good use of my time. (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) (URL) This> is interesting. "The Saturn 5 was also not cheap to operate... the launch cost of a single Saturn 5 at $431 million in 1967, or over $2.4 billion a launch in 2004 dollars... ...It’s not inconceivable that a new heavy-lift vehicle (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Not from what I understand. Rutan did start work before the X-Prize became fully-funded at $10 million, but he was inspired to get started by the X-Prize itself. He is reported to have started his program in 2001, but the X-Prize was founded (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Saturn V rockets would have, admittedly, had a lower cost per payload pound, but who would have been able to take advantage of that capacity besides the government? Commercial enterprise needs greater cost efficiency, not greater capacity. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Is that for development or launch? (...) NASA is also a governmental agency, and therefore bound by red tape. In other words, they have to spend money to spend money. The government has been cited as spending $300 on a hammer, but the hammer (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) S'funny...I've often thought much the same thing about you. BTW, did you ever track down your answer on using the (R) symbol when typing "The LEGO Company"? (...) Lessee, from what I've read, the OCST was formed as part of a bipartisan effort (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Costs money to store - does Ford still have the tooling for the Model T? And let me express at least some skepticism regarding the alleged motivation you attribute to NASA. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Probably. But how many major aerospace endeavors come off exactly like they sound on paper? Hindsight is always 20/20. I certainly wouldn't call the shuttle program a huge mistake. Sure, it didn't deliver the promised goods, but I believe the (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) True. But it's difficult if not impossible to divorce NASA and Congress. NASA does what Congress tells it to do. (...) You're sort of trying to put words in my mouth here and I have to correct you, I'm afraid... No, the point is why (in 1969) (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Merely a stepping stone. (...) Well, knock me over with a feather. Somebody inside NASA is apparently considering whether NASA should give prizes too. Maybe nothing will come of it, maybe it was a misquote, who knows. But maybe??? (URL) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Did it? Wasn't it Congress who wasn't too keen on buying more Saturns and cut the remaining moon missions and all the cool future Apollo applications projects that NASA DID want. The shuttle was then sold as a way to get more bang-for-the-buck (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Inside Bush's secret Afghan gulag
|
|
(URL) Inside Bush's secret Afghan gulag>: "They were kicking me and beating me and shouting like animals at me... Then they asked me which animals - they made the noise of goats, sheep, dogs, cows - I had had sexual activities with. They laughed at (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) This whole tooling issue reminds me about the destruction of the early Lego moulds. (...) If they had kept this stuff, I expect their critics would have harangued them for wasting tax payer’s money maintaining and storing obsolete equipment. (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) (I should have said 'and infrastructure') (...) Nope. But if you get rid of one element then it becomes easier to justify getting rid of the rest. The tooling was just the last thing to go in a whole sorry parade of wanton waste and (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Well of course they did. Is there any reason to spend money to preserve and maintain the tooling viability for a rocket that can no longer be launched? All the existing Saturn launch infrastructure was modified for shuttle use. The launch (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) Sewerage systems tend to be monopolies. The only way to ensure treatment and conveyance standards are met is to regulate performance... the "market" is poor at protecting our environment. (...) You are cherry picking. I'm sure IBM and BATF (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) Who makes sure of that; you or the government? Who tests WWTW discharges; you or the government? I assume your local sewerage operator runs a monopoly? Scott A (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) I heard a statistic indicating that the amount of energy needed to go into low orbit is about 70X the energy needed for this touching-the-face-of-God launch, so there are many difficulties to overcome, perhaps more daunting than the obstacles (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) Disagree, see below. (...) I'd agree with that. Properly construed, government is a tool to protect rights. Improperly constructed, government is a master that takes them away. (...) Two points. 1, Perhaps there's a bit of cause and effect (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) All of the Saturn tooling is no more. NASA admitted they did that on purpose to "focus efforts on the shuttle". Arguably the Saturns would have been really great Big Dumb Boosters if heavy lift was something that NASA was really interested in. (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) My sewerage system is completely privately owned and works just fine. Chris (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) If I understand things correctly, Rutan and Allen were working on this project either before the X-Prize happened or before they knew about it. The prize did not catalyze their involvement in space. Chris (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Manoeuvring thrusters are the least of his worries; he shall need a 6-7 fold increases in velocity... and then he'll have to think about re-entry. Scott A (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) What tooling have they destroyed? The shuttle cargo thing was bad because of the very thing that happened: JPL knew that any problem (as in loss of crew) meant long delays that could be avoided by using non-crewed launch vehicles. And there (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Only nations can generate patriotic pride (Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?)
|
|
(...) An interesting idea - a distinction that had never really occurred to me before. To me the government is just an expression Australian-ness, not at all unlike an Australian company is another expression, as are our (non-governmental) sporting (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) I'm reading between the lines, but I think only a little: new design, high orbit Yes, but let's imagine that Rutan can do it for $60M. What did NASA spend? (Of course, they were pioneering the technology!) (...) What if it's double those times (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) You're entitled to your viewpoint, even if expressed not very politely, but I have a different view. As for your second para, do some research into how NASA, the FAA, and the OCST have held things back. It's not lack of desire or lack of (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) That's absolute nonsense. My impression or lack thereof has no direct impact on this venture, as I don't have the money to throw at it either as an investor or as a customer. I could be the most excited person in the world and it wouldn't (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) NASA was sorta forced into cheating on that one. The Russians got the jump on them, so they had to bypass the X-15 suborbital jet plane by outfitting nuclear missiles with crew modules instead of warheads. The ironic thing was that the X-15 (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) With a completely new design, or with a modified version of this one? At the very least he'd need to add manouvering thrusters to make reentry possible. (...) Ten years to achieve what, exactly? Low orbit? High orbit? Moon-landings? Privately (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) My understanding is that to win he'll have to make two flights within a two week period; each of which must carry the weight of three people. The prize runs out at the end of this year, so Mr Melvill may well be the first of a handful making (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) My view was that those who had noted a dislike for Moore in the past appeared to welcome this apparent opportunity to grind their axes. It’s just an off-the-cuff comment; don’t read too much into it. (...) I'd have thought you would not have a (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Iron Reich Assault Shuttle U-25
|
|
(...) That's the kind of historical attitude I like. However, I'm not entirely sure Marco isn't a fake. He makes some big claims (like he met Kublai, was a governor, etc) and yet there is no corresponding Chinese mention of him or any European at (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) As Ray himself knows very well! A LUGNET member-at-large reminded me that Bradbury's (URL) Wicked This Way Comes> is itself a rip-off of (URL) an earlier work.> Pedants and kneejerk anti-Moore zealots will no doubt observe that Shakespeare was (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) No, actually I don't. What I would expect your words to mean is that Democrats are supportive of Moore and Republicans are not. But that's not what I'm seeing in this thread, so I was curious how you were viewing things. I wasn't nitpicking. (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) This thread concerns MM, so I'm allowed to be loose with my English... ;) I think you know what I meant. Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) The party of those who "deplore his methods" (quotes deliberate) but think he can nevertheless do no wrong since his cause is just and who embrace all sorts of lies and mean spirited things when Moore (or others in their pantheon of "heroes") (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) It's valid to ask whether this is scalable technology or not but if one isn't impressed by this, one is part of the problem, in my view. It's not the technology per se that's the impressive part, although that's certainly cool, it's that (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Which parties? Chris (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: 9/11 Panel: No Evidence Connecting Iraq to Al Qaeda
|
|
(...) I'm not "old enough", but it's my feeling that the Vitenam War was perpetuated by anti-communist hysteria and an unwillingness to concede defeat. Ordinary Americans thought they were doing the right thing, but when service men started refusing (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) What else could he say? To go into orbit he'll need a quantum leap in technology and funding. Perhaps the North Koreans could help with funding? ;) Being cynical, I'd say SpaceShipOne is nothing more than another way for the wealthy to waste (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
I'm sure both Moore & Bradbury are enjoying the publicity. It’s interesting to see the rather partisan spilt in opinions expressed in this thread... Scott A (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Rutan says he's going for orbit once this step is perfected. I don't think that a ten year timeline for that is at all aggressive considering what the last ten years have provided. (...) Yeah, those will be better. And then there are better (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Tito wasn't an astronaut (or, technically, in his case, a cosmonaut). He was sentient ballast. An astronaut is defined as a pilot or crew member on a space flight, not a tourist. (...) If she would have qualified (I'm not sure if she reached (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) No I'm not. Reread what you cited. "tends to suggest" is hardly Summarily Dismissed. Further, being wrong about an issue or cause is not the same as dismissing the issue or cause. I dismiss his opinions about issues (for valid cause since he's (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) Moore has stated numerous times, both in articles I've read and interviews that I've seen-- F451 is the temperature at which paper burns--the book is about supression of literature F9/11 is (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) But isn't this the difference between Trade Mark and Copyright? The have different names because they ahve different rules. Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Isn't that exactly what Larry is warning against? One of us is missing something because it sounds like you (Dave!) are saying "Larry, you're wrong because what you just said is true." Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
(...) ROAR! (Guess I don't know my own strength!) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Hmmm, seems this case is different. Perhaps because MM choose it for his title. I'm sure I'd have a difficult time starting up a department store chain called "Wall to Wall Mart", or a toy company called "Lay-Go" There is a definite connection (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Because you are, in the post-at-hand, dismissing causes solely because Moore supports them. You may have additional reasoning that you haven't shared here, but since it's not yet been introduced in this discussion, it's irrelevant. Although (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) What is Ray whining about? It gives some attention to his book, and parodies of an actual book/film/play titles are a long standing tradition in this country. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
(...) "And Bullwinkle "War Between the States"-hips his way down the field for Wossamotta U.... (I suppose one had to watch the episodes to get the civil-swivel-war between the states running gag) -->Nuthin' up m'sleeve, Presto!<-- (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Why? Is it ad hominem against short sellers to point out that when short interst is high is often a good time to buy stock? (1) It is not. It is merely an observation of a useful negative correlation. Same thing holds here, Moore is a liar and (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Since common courtesy is in the eye of the beholder, and since a title can certainly be spoofed without seeking the indulgence of the title's holder, then Bradbury is left with nothing but sour grapes. Sorry, Ray, but that's how it goes in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Technically Tito wasn't the first paying passenger either, but I think he was the first to fund his own way. (...) True, but Tito got a week's vacation in a space Hilton. Today's flight was the equivalent of a couple of minute ride in the (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) No, it's based on common courtesy, or the lack thereof on the part of Moore. Farenheit 911 is so obviously a takeoff on Farenheit 451 that it's not really questionable that Moore intended to rip off the name recognition Bradbury has earned for (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) I read an article (might have been by Roger Ebert) that suggested that this time, Moore used real facts. I wonder if he caught too much heat over Bowling for Columbine for which he seems to have made a bunch of stuff up. Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Well, news programs constantly use punch/pun titles, and no one complains about it (except when the torrent of stupid puns overwhelms the discourse (such as when Trent Lott pined for the days of segregation: "Lott of Trouble," "Lott of (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
(...) You mean the "War to Defend the 'Right' to Hold Slaves"? But ya, like that. (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Yaay! (URL) Civilian pilot, civilian ship... Tito was a passenger on a government ship, so I'd say only quasi civilian. Cost for Tito's ride/stunt == cost for the entire Rutan SpaceShipOne program (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) Perhaps if MM was addressing Bradbury's work, which I believe isn't the case. Basically, MM merely ripped off the title for punch/pun effect, and so is profitting at the expense of Bradbury's IP. As an aside, are you asserting that Farenheit (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Fair use and allusion?
|
|
(...) If I knew (URL) how to spell,> I would have gotten (URL) link right.> Sorry about that! (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Fair use and allusion?
|
|
Ray Bradbury is fired up about (URL) title of Michael Moore's forthcoming film.> Regardless of your opinion of Moore or of Bradbury, it seems to me that this complaint is largely based on nothing. Bradbury's (URL) 451> is a copyrighted work, to be (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad day for individual rights
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:Hzo4Gy.11KG@lugnet.com... (...) reading the (...) I guess the 2nd decision is more of a state's rights issue. But it should be an individual rights issue. Why do state or federal (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad day for individual rights
|
|
(...) I don't have an opinion on the second ruling -- it seems OK (without reading the laws in question), but I do disagree with the first. In 1906, in _Hale v. Henkel_, the court wrote: "The individual...owes no such duty [to submit his books and (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Bad day for individual rights
|
|
Hmm, a bunch of Supreme Court decisions today... (URL) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:Hznzvx.5DF@lugnet.com... (...) astronaut in (...) Hmm, I might dispute the first civilian astronaut bit. Dennis Tito would qualify for that in my book. Well, actually, before that (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
(...) And nations! Like during the War of Northern Aggression? Chris ;-) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:HzMHDG.1E6q@lugnet.com... (...) mean, wow, (...) caused a (...) Yea, anyone who is at least nominally a Christian who isn't Catholic has no business worrying about splitting churches. If (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Whoo-hoo! I just watched spaceshipone land and the first civilian astronaut in the history of mankind walk into the history books. What an exciting day! Chris (20 years ago, 21-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) Look, I'm in the camp that thinks Tim was objectionable, but your text really _is_ hard to read. It takes your readers extra time to figure out what you're saying because of your wide disregard for grammar. I personally, think that you are (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) I completely and thoroughly reject the notion that I was being mean. (...) I agree, we should make an effort to foster a generally positive environment here. I also value intelligent posts with reasonable effort given to composition and (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) Was that a joke? I'm serious. I laughed out loud, but no one else has singled that line out, so now I'm curious. And can't you guys take it to .admin like Larry said? Chris (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
snippage... (...) a) Dan posted in Castle in the first place...its not like he posted in general. That's where he likes to hang out. So he doesn't take care in his postings... b) on one hand he's in grade 9, so he should be starting to know (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gay Marriage
|
|
(...) Fair enough. When the Government and your church leaders tell you that you must accept the marriage of gays within your church, you can protest all you like, and I'll be right there with you in expressing that feeling. Unfortunately, that's (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
Original message cancelled, reposting with XFUT --> admin.general. (...) Regardless of those other forums being lax, here on LUGNET, people judge you based on how you conduct yourself. Since this is the internet, one of the few ways to evaluate that (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Some good news for a change, maybe?
|
|
(...) Tomorrow's the scheduled launch day for the first suborbital flight (this apparently is not an X Prize qualifying flight, needs 3 people on board to be the first of the pair required, but predictions are that if this goes well, the prize will (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
just want to say sorry if you think i am not putting effort forth but, i have showed them many works and thier responses were That guys a looser ect... and as for my grammer well you guys who have been around a while know abouth that. Ben Leo Ant (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) This is, in my considered opinion, *off topic* for the off-topic.debate newsgroup as it has to do with the norms and standards of LUGNET itself. If you have an issue with the approach Tim, or anyone else, uses to try to improve things on (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) Please don't assume I did. (...) And do you have any stats on how many people decided not to get involved in the community because of the flame wars they saw while lurking on RTL? (...) And that's great, but you're only one example. (...) I (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) Please don't second guess my assumptions. I came into this community (well, RTL) eight years ago as a 14-year-old. I was very immature, and as a result got myself pretty beaten up by those who weren't simply direct, but downright malicious in (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: i decided to
|
|
(...) You're assuming everyone here is as mature as you. Which discounts the young LEGO fans who may be lurking in .castle, and be put off by such a post. Yes, maybe their parents should explain what such a post means, but if a young kid chooses not (...) (20 years ago, 20-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
