 | | Re: 9/11
|
|
(...) (URL) Here>, I believe, is the first posting about it in OT.Debate. (17 years ago, 11-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | 9/11
|
|
(URL) Some postings from that sad day: (2 URLs) (17 years ago, 11-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Another Q for the Ambassadors to ask TLG, please?
|
|
(...) Yeah, there's been a lot of complaining lately, and I'm certainly guilty on that score. However, I believe most of the major complaints are all justifiable, i.e. the color change, click-hinge replacement of fingered hinges, Bionicle parts in (...) (17 years ago, 11-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Another Q for the Ambassadors to ask TLG, please?
|
|
(...) "Sometimes it feels like TLG is deliberately trying to break with the older fanbase" is close enough for me. (...) Excellent news. (...) I worry because by virtue of sharing a hobby there may be some perception of crossover between your views (...) (17 years ago, 11-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Another Q for the Ambassadors to ask TLG, please?
|
|
In lugnet.ambassadors, Timothy Gould wrote:> (...) Hey Tim, I've always noted the change in the style of roof bricks, from the circular pattern to the rougher bumpy style to the hopefully current more-smooth-but-still-bumpy pattern. That never (...) (17 years ago, 11-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Another Q for the Ambassadors to ask TLG, please?
|
|
(...) From what I remember when we last asked that question, the answer was indeed that one - the textured area of slopes is wearing off with time; in particular when molds are cleaned. We'll pass the question again anyway. Jean-Marc (17 years ago, 10-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Another Q for the Ambassadors to ask TLG, please?
|
|
(...) I think you'll find that there has always been variation in the depth of the texture on slope bricks, it's just that the variation is now greater. I'll hazard a guess and say that TLG are using their molds for longer to save money. If you (...) (17 years ago, 10-Sep-07, to lugnet.ambassadors, lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) This reminds me of a debate loooong ago on RTL (search LEGOdeath, IIRC) about art. The rub is in the defining of "art". What is art? Because if art is anything, then art is everything, and therefore nothing-- that is, the term is meaningless. (...) (17 years ago, 25-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Exactly? I feel, that art should be something that is admired by "the common" man; and not be reproducible by the commoner. To me, art is something I would not be able to do. I can not paint a Mona Lisa, or carve "The Thinker." That is art. (...) (17 years ago, 25-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Why, exactly, must art represent anything? Dave! (17 years ago, 24-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) NO dave, Everyone knows with an infinite number of monkeys you get the works of Shakespear. NOT Picasso. Once again, proving that Janey, and her monkey abstract art is NOT art. but really, just a pile of monkey SH-- (1) Chris 1. not at all (...) (17 years ago, 24-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, C. L. GunningCook wrote: snip (...) So if you had an infinite number of monkeys flinging an infinite amount of monkey-poo around, would you get a picasso? One wonders... Dave K (17 years ago, 24-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Okay... I am officially "grrrrring" at my favourite rtlers. Darn geeks! Grrr and Grrr... I think I will go make an abstract painting that represents my disillusionment with you both! Or I may have my untrained monkey do it for me. Janey "If MY (...) (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: OpenGL spec (was LDraw File Format spec)
|
|
(...) Like I said before, the DOCS were written with column major notation but the API isn't column major. Please show me a place on the API where it requires a column major matrices, there isn't one. OpenGL matrices are simply an array of 16 (...) (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Chris Magno wrote: snip (...) If it were up to me, I'd tell all them artiste types that they have to go get real jobs!! Artists--baah! What have they done for anyone?? Dave K (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Thats my job. THIS poll was FLAWED!!! (URL) me) and my favorite question: Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all. man, i wish there was an option greater than STRONGLY AGREE I would have checked that (...) (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) What a shock, so am I... giggle.... (URL) thing is, I took one of these before (but a completely different site) and my placement is almost exactly the same. Janey "Red Brick" (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Or "perfectly centered"? :-) Yeah, I was surprised, because I don't consider myself a "moderate" at all. I did mark a lot of "strongly" answers; I'd bet that my libertarian responses softened my conservative ones, and viola. Of course, that is (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) would that be classified as a 'fence sitter'?--right in the middle of all things?? Or a moderate? Dave K (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Vary eeenteresting. Now, here might be a big surprise: (URL) ME> (Ec=.38, Soc=0.21) JOHN (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
I'm a social libertarian... (URL) thought you'd like to know... Dave K (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) I guess you didn't bother to watch the video. Dick himself used the Q-word to describe the aftermath of a unilateral invasion of Iraq. But that was before he used it to mock people who said operation Blood For Oil was a Bad Idea. (...) Four (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Ah! I get it: Not that numbers mean anything. Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Prettier than you, at least. (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) What a thing to say! (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) And yet it's not really an answer, is it? (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) I guess you answered your own question. ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Do you have a cite for that? ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) "This is precisely the mindset and rationale the terrorists would like their enemies to have. " Seems pretty unequivocal to me. (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Okay, I'll type slowly so you can follow along. (...) It shows that the enemy is afraid to engage the US military. The cowards decide to fight a war of propaganda targeting innocents instead. And really, do they think that the Iraqis will (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Not one death is "acceptable" (YOUR word, not mine). (...) Yes. What I mean is: if 10 innocents are killed today, and 12 tomorrow, then that doesn't mean we are suddenly "losing". And if there are only 2 the following day, we are not suddenly (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Averages are seldom a good measure of populations. Mind you, as the declining population approaches 1, they get a lot better. Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Hmmm, I have to admit I'm a little confused here. The death of innocents shows the US is winning, but actually keeping count of those deaths is what those terrorists want. Could you clarify something for me: is the death of innocents a good or (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) So you'd consider ANY body count "acceptable" in order to "win" this military action? And do you think the average Iraqi would have the same answer to that question as you do? ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) We are winning because we are taking control of areas that once weren't under control. Little by little the terrorists are being squeezed out. Winning or losing isn't based on the daily body count. This is precisely the mindset and rationale (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) So the more the US wins, the more innocents die? Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Ahh, thanks for dusting off and bringing the Q word into the discussion! If you think that any of the homicide bombers over the years would have reconsidered their actions because there had been broad support for the invasion of Iraq, you are (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) The difference is that Cheney's prediction in 1994 was *exactly* correct. Current events clearly show that invading Iraq without broad support from our allies resulted in a quagmire. Are you saying that in 2003 Cheney was so certain of his (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
Yes, but what in the WORLD changed Cheney's mind? To date, there really hasn't been any evidence whatsoever that has surfaced that would explain his about-face on the issue. (and before you tell me "we don't know all the facts", (...) (17 years ago, 16-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years. Two years later we ourselves made flights. This demonstration of my impotence as a prophet gave me such a shock that ever since I have distrusted (...) (17 years ago, 16-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
This guy sounds like he really knows what he's talking about. Too bad he doesn't have any influence over U.S. foreign policy today... (URL) (17 years ago, 16-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Credit where it's due (was Re: Fan Thank You Letter)
|
|
(...) In the past few days I've been in a discussion on another forum wherein people have referred disparagingly to Ms. Liebeck's lawsuit. I recalled this thread from a few years back here on LUGNET and was able to use your link to shut down most of (...) (17 years ago, 13-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) "Let the eagle soar, like he's never soared before." (17 years ago, 26-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Swift was Right! (He just named the wrong people...)
|
|
(...) And who would have thought that the very next Attorney General would be so much worse than either of them? Dave! (17 years ago, 26-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Arkham Asylum - A cool set, but a bit disturbing.
|
|
(...) Vegetable? Mineral? ;-) Tim (17 years ago, 25-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Massive Layoffs At Lego (in Enfield, CT)
|
|
(...) I'm quitting my job now I know Harvey's on the job supporting everyone. Who do I send my bills to? The IRS, or directly to Harvey? Allister (17 years ago, 24-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: BrickShelf and the bust.
|
|
(...) I guess it's different if it's an Ad ;) Tim (17 years ago, 24-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Massive Layoffs At Lego (in Enfield, CT)
|
|
Harvey wrote some stuff, including: (...) Good for you! (...) Like playing with little train horns? (...) Why would I want to silence you? Your posts are a source of great amusement to me, lol. (...) ROSCO (Wondering just how your taxes support me) (17 years ago, 24-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Massive Layoffs At Lego (in Enfield, CT)
|
|
(...) -snip- (...) And for that, we(1) will be forever grateful . Cheers Richie Dulin (1) I hope I'm not being too presumptious in speaking for the rest of the world here. (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | (murfl)
|
|
(murfl) (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A new community of mischeif and mayhem
|
|
(...) Because I don't know how to post and cross-post properly... (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A new community of mischeif and mayhem
|
|
(...) Woohoo! Sounds like a great place! (...) Yes, that seems to cover all the themes which are popular in the community. (...) Sounds like a bargain! (...) Cheers Richie Dulin Stajinaria Member #2 (Not sure why FUT is set to .o-t.d....) (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A new community of mischeif and mayhem
|
|
You know how when you go to look at the list of rules for a community forum, and the last one is something dumb like "The most important rule is to have fun"? Man, that irks me. Nobody has to tell me to have fun, it sorta comes naturally to me. And (...) (17 years ago, 22-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.announce, lugnet.people.adults) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Brickshelf?
|
|
Brickshelf is back up, with a warning date of the end of the month. Now's your chance, GO! (17 years ago, 16-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Brickshelf?
|
|
(...) A bit off-topic here, but I'd hardly call Flickr a "bigbox". From their earliest days they have been a community oriented company in a way that nearly every other company around can learn from. They built a fantastic tool always keeping in (...) (17 years ago, 16-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | BrickShelf and the bust.
|
|
Hello! I was just roaming the recent galleries on BrickShelf. Embedded inbetween the Lego folders was this advertisement: (URL) made me smirk. I remember a picture that concentrated on a female bust covered by a Lego t-shirt once caused uproar and (...) (17 years ago, 11-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
Big thanks to the defunct pseudo admins ! were you able to save my :BP: or :RA: ? Steve (17 years ago, 2-Jul-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) :whistlesinnocently: (URL) Stajinaria Forum - A New Hope> :-) (URL) (17 years ago, 29-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
Darn and bugger... Just as I was coming back after a short break. *sigh* and thanks to Ross and Janey you two can have my babies you were so awesome. (17 years ago, 29-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Ah,because you my friend know the sad state of affairs. (17 years ago, 28-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Janey-- If I had known of JLUG, I'd have been there. Sorry to have missed all the fun, but best of all new endeavors to you. It sounds like it would have been fun. Especially the robotic cat thing. Play Well and Prosper, Matthew "The Brick (...) (17 years ago, 26-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Says you. Ley (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Surely you could have summed up all of the above with "Bonk"... ;-) Peace and precis, Professor Whateverly (URL) (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Surely you could have summed up all of the above with "Bonk"... ;-) Peace and precis, Professor Whateverly (URL) (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
Alas, how will I continue my 'debate' with Lar? Thanks Janey and Ross for all your efforts. I shall now doubly cherish my engraved brick. Peace and passing, Professor Whateverly (URL) (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Santa Fe B-Unit: OK or not?
|
|
(...) On closer inspection it would appear that copyright law is a bit more complex in what it covers than I realised (second paragraph of (URL) suspect that Lego may differ from needlepoint because of this in that it is (most probably) counted as a (...) (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Santa Fe B-Unit: OK or not?
|
|
(...) not exactly. The printing of the design can be copyright, however what you do with building it is not. I am more familiar with the needlework part of this for an example. You cannot copy the instructions, however you can stitch as many designs (...) (17 years ago, 25-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Santa Fe B-Unit: OK or not?
|
|
(...) It's good to hear they will act. Does this mean you create needlepoint and collect Lego? Interesting combination of hobbies. (...) Copyright law is complex. Ownership of copyright is usually very easy (at least when it's not part of a (...) (17 years ago, 24-Jun-07, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Janey "Red Brick" Why the heck you did that?.. Just heard the news from Gambort and shocked. Man, I was trying to connect to The Place every other day, still living in hope to see the day my connection problems are solved. Now I know this will (...) (17 years ago, 23-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) :-( (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) And only a few weeks ago we were flooded by a stream of refugees. LROYWD. I'm sad JLUG's gone. It's been a nice time. OTOH, there's no evidence of that resumé stain now... JLUG2 looks wizard though. (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
Phew! Finally got my posting rights back. I've been with JLUG since a few days after it was made and even today it's the one place that made me feel at home on the internet. I remarked to CM Janey the day it was announced here on lugnet that I felt (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Seems to me its the one place on Lugnet that all Journeymen could be guaranteed to read sooner or later. Very sad tidings gang. But the fact that its gone does not diminish how much I loved it, which was a lot. Thanks. Oh, and just once more, (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) No doubt because of Dagger Guy. Farewell, JLUG! We'll miss ya. Cheers! "Big Daddy" Nelson (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) This post is flawed. Bryce (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) My reference to meant collapsing under the admin load is not meant to be insulting toward CL Ross and Mistress Janey. They did do a lot of work behind the scenes. In fact, some of the things they delivered were the most wizard that I've seen (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
--snip-- (...) I disagree with that. (...) Tim (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Well, thanks for the kind words everyone, for a forum that never expected to reach 19 members we did ok. But it was time to call it a day. The other parts of jlug.net will remain for the time being, it may even get updated occasionally. Wink. (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) I was wondering why he shaved the beard off. (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) If you can get through to the mechahub one you can get through to #jlug. Come in and I'll tell you how. Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) I seem to be able to penetrate through to the one they use on mechahub, but irc, iirc, is a no-go area for me. :( (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) JLUG is died, Long live to Legnut ! lugnet.jlug would be très vool and :wiz: Well, I just started to read daily jlug three weeks ago... Shitlighted. Erik (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Did I say Mistresses? If Ross takes it that way, maybe there is something he would want to tell us... Jude (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Mistress Ross? Jude, what are you trying to tell us? Chris (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
-snip- (...) You mean no more never ending Robotic Cat thread??!! What the hell will I do with myself now??!! So I guess we'll all trudge over to BL chat now? ;-) (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Everyone mail Crown Royal to Mistress Janey, it is our only hope. Jude (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, C. L. GunningCook wrote: snip (...) As an intermittent lurker and appreciator of all things JLug, this is sad news :( I do feel that JLug served a very niche market for the LEGO enthusiast--one which was needed and (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
B****r! Where am I supposed to post ranting b****h-fests about idiots and f*****g morons! What's that you say...stop being an a*****e and become part of the WEC? Oh, the humanity! (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) I think you may have unleashed a beast ;-) tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
I feel like a refugee :-( Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Yeah, with lugnet.jlug.jchat Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) <snip the unbelievable news> Thanks to Mistress Janey and Ross for all of their effort. Can we now have a JLUG newsgroup on LUGNET? Please? The conspiracy must live on. Where else am I going to post all of those jokes? Jude (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) I'd be satisfied with chat. I'll create a #jlug IRC channel on espernet but I seem to remember some of you have troubles getting in during work hours. Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Setting up is one thing. Maintaining and administering? ... Well, you'll see. Allister (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) WOW, CL worker, you ARE a RATTC! the list of people who have registered is VERY impressive. Kudo's to you, and your new team. as a side note, and I am NOT a lawyer, but i think you might need permission from CL janey, and/or CL ross to use the (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) No. No discussion. Why not register us, and see how it goes? Will it collapse in a mountain of anticommunitarian trolling? Will you collapse under the admin load? I suspect neither. But carpe diem and all that. You have built it, they are (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
--snip-- (...) This information makes me weep. I hope that one or both of you will get blind drunk and reconsider. Thanks for the JLUG that was, it will be missed. Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) CM TheAzz (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) You know what the really wierd bit is? I don't even know who you were (on JLug) Tim (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: JLUG - The Forum that WAS.
|
|
(...) Thanks for registering and all, guys. However, this is just a sample, and I'm not sure I'm the one to be administering or hosting a forum. I really just wanted to prove to Allister how quick and easy it was to set up a forum. Perhaps more (...) (17 years ago, 20-Jun-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
