|
|
 | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) Had further thoughts about this - are there guidelines about recognizing at what point a thread should be rerouted into a different group? This particular thread, IMO, is pretty harmless (now), but I can see how (URL) threads can deteriorate>. (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) Hmm, thought I was on topic for .geek, but you're right, it was starting to become a debate. I agree the followup on this should go to .debate. (...) I saw part of that thread, but hadn't read it in a while - I had a hard time with some of the (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Big 2 willing to help with ballot access?
|
| (...) I didn't pay too much attention to the 'Perot' years, but I wuold imagine, just thinking about it now, that possibly some Dems were more than willingto work at getting 'Little Yappy' on the ballot in many states, considering he filtered off (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| (...) I think the topic of 'right level of notification/intervention' is worthy of public discussion. IMO, in this specific instance, the intervention was unnecessary. I hadn't read any 'debate' into the discussion, and any time 'NASA' and 'budget' (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
|
| (...) Let's see--by this logic, 5 therefore people count as the majority in a pool of some 100+ million voters. Hmm... Dave! (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Big 2 willing to help with ballot access?
|
| (...) The GOP has already pulled this trick - Washington, Oregon? And I think they got challenged on some technical grounds, but I don't know the specifics. Anyway, what do you expect from the party of Tricky Dick and a candidate from Texas? (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.geek, Kelly McKiernan wrote: (snip) I have forceFUTed your post (and am considering others in the tree as well) to .debate as it's veering in that direction (discussions of the merits of funding are probably not nearly as well (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
|
| (...) Uh, I never said that. (...) Uh, I never said that. (...) A straw man if I ever saw one. If my attitudes sicken you, at least be sickened by the ones to which I actually adhere. JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
|
| (...) And in California and Massachusetts, but it's still illegal. (...) Change comes when the majority decide it should change, not a tiny minority. JOHN (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Big 2 willing to help with ballot access?
|
| It was reported in the local press that Ralph Nader is getting some aid in his quest to get on the MI ballot from an (at first glance) unexpected quarter. (URL) GOP! yes, as long as the big two think a third party or independent candidate can, by (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
