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 / *3111 (-100)
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
Paul Davidson wrote in message ... (...) stick (...) Well, if we were to stick to convention, does anyone have any solid historical evidence of whether people living around the end of the first millennium considered 1000 or 1001 to be the first (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
You seem to know a lot about that which is unknowable;-) -John (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
why not make life easier and just state that (...) and (...) Because it's not true. :) It's true that the calendar is somewhat based on arbitrary convention (since Christ was born around 5 BC), but one must stick with convention if it's to be of any (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
(...) Agreed...the '90s are considered to be dates between '90 and '99, not necessarily the 199th decade A.D. (which goes from '91 to '00). Paul Davidson (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Well, at least an all encompassing definition of good. It is not something that can be comprehended in its entirety-- it is a continuous learning process. (...) Sorry if some things aren't easily understood-- that's just the way it is, baby. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) That's an old misconception. Having just helped teach a course called "The Emergence of Medieval Europe" (c.300-1000), I can tell you that it wasn't anarchy--things were in flux, but it only appeared anarchic because the meaning of fealty and (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) You are correct, John. (...) Never say never(;), but I'm with you in thinking that we as a race aren't anywhere near that state. (...) I believe that existence after death will be on a higher plane, although I know not how or even care (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
James Brown wrote in message ... (...) relation (...) In what guise would you expect Him? Could it not happen that someone could formulate their (and His) idea of good, put it into practice, and then people see that it works?! I think that is much (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38850a4f.919486838@...et.com>... (...) fancy of a (...) seekers of it (...) I take back what I said. I think Larry could tell you his objective definition of good, which I agree with. I will try myself. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <387ab92e.833168838@...et.com>... (...) relativism I (...) others (...) is by (...) Discerning (...) good (...) I think you are just plain wrong. Some societies flourish while others perish because they have a better (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38830931.919200318@...et.com>... (...) evolution) (...) I had to think about what John said for a day or two to know what he meant. I am still not sure if I took it the right way, but I don't think he is nuts. I (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
(...) Actually, if a particular thrice appearing planetary conjunction were to be interpreted as the star of bethlehem (not an unreasonable speculation, using astrological interpretation), and its first appearance did indeed happen in synch with (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
(followups redirected to lugnet.off.topic) (...) (nitpick mode on again.... :) Yes, there was no year 0. Yes, the 21st century does not begin until January 1, 2001. Howeever.... Where in the world did you get the idea that 2000 would be *ANY* part (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Welcome to the Ohs
 
Mike Petrucelli wrote in message ... (...) 0000 (...) Logically (...) curiosity, do (...) While I can agree with the thought that we have not yet entered the new millenium, we have definitely left the '90s. Of course on another angle, we almost (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) Ah.... *bask* (...) I relaised latyer that we were talking about Asimov's robot, which movie now apparently has made it into release. I wonder if it'll go staright-to-video here or not get here at all. (...) Well, I hadn't been reading the (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Darn. I always forget _which_ hallucinogenics to mix with which stuff to make crack. I guess I'll never be a dealer or a chemist now. Jasper (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Which means that there is no meaningful definition of good at all. That's not very useful either. (...) <antagonist>Drat. It was a dud. Well, I'll try again in 100 years. </antagonist> (...) If God is good, why has he never deigned to touch (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) If you can't see the contradiction, I'm not going to be able to point it out to you. (...) Yes.... and? I'm not quite as inept as you seem to think I am, you know. Jasper (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Either you're nuts, or you havent read your history books. Remember what Europe was like when anarchy ruled? Think medieval times in between Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, etc.. It was _not_ fun. Even less so than with great dictators. A (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) So the american frontier is what you want to return to? I've got news for you: That also requires returning to the technological and productivity levels of then. The reason those two are so much higher now than they were then is (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Wow
 
(...) Well, personally I'm glad he isn't Prime Minister anymore, I was for Barak. I'm glad things are working better now, and talks with Syria are developing, even though I'm not there to see it off personally ;-) -Shiri CP to .debate (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.il, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Multiple times, I think, although it hasn't always been you on my dance card. (...) I highly suspect that we are of similar minds on this issue, and just keep insisting on different definitions. My position in a nutshell, morals=subjective, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
John DiRienzo wrote: <snippage> (...) Ahh, I think Libertarianism would be an excellent system; I just shared James pessimism that it would have a hard time working given today's entitlement mentality. Lazy people want things given to them rather (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Hmm. Opportunity was closer to equal then than it is now, but it still wasn't entirely equal. But I'll conceed the point. ;) (...) Then we're of the same mind here. I'll try and remember that next time I flare up at some LMF. :) James (URL) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Well, that's my point. I'm saying that good is beyond what the particular fancy of a given society says it is. We are not the author of good, we are the seekers of it (hopefully). (...) We'll soon see about that;-) (...) All of these (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yes, you crossed categories - "crack" is a form of cocaine, obviously a coca-derived drug and not an opiate. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily" (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) We've been around this particular mulberry bush before and I continue to hold with the stance that "good" and "morals" can be objective, correct ones are based on life affirmation. Further, I hold that I can very well label a particular (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yowza! When did this society exist? I'd also love to return to it! It must be millennia since everyone had an equal chance of getting rich, and certainly never in the US! Dave! (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) OK, change that to ANYwhere in America or Canada. But yes, it's biased. That's the point! That's the society I want to see us return toward, a society in which everyone knows that if they work hard and are clever, they've got just as much (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Whoops! Forgot the footnote: 1:Which, assuming He exists, IMHO He hasn't(2). When the proverbial omnipotent being wants to provide us with an absolute morality, we will all KNOW, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what it is. 2:What He has provided (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I disagree here, but I'm a cynical little punk. :) I think people in general are only as industrious as they have to be. I don't think the mean is quite as low as "lazy" tends to imply, but I do think the mean is too low for a system that (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Anything based on morals (which "good" typically is) IS subjective, and can never be anything else, at least until God (in whatever guise you like, assuming you believe in Him) provides us with an absolute morality.(1) Neither you nor I can (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) LOL! We'll see, Larry. Scott S. (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
Point taken. You're absolutely right. Savor the moment, it comes so RARELY in discourse with me... To be actually immortal means to not be able to choose not to be immortal. However, I think for this discussion we are using Immortality (incorrectly, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Simplistic answer is that they DID have cash to spend, it was economic boycott that finally broke the "back of the bus" thing with buses, and was going to break down a great deal more quite soon. As for the legal barriers, Laws REQUIRING (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) That's _not_ what immortal means. By definition, immortal means _not_ able to die or be killed. Not by a .25 bullet, not by an A10 2 kg depleted uranium round, not by a tac-nuke, not by a full-blown 20 megaton H-bomb, not by hurling yourself (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) So how would the situation be in the southern states? The black population _didn't_ have cash to spend, and they didn't have much chance of improving that either. Would gays be open about being gay like they are now, without the entire (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Best Lock instruction scans (Re: Best Lock Adverstising
 
(...) Despite our Bicentennial Man issues 8^), I agree with you here 100%. I'm pretty sure that all the Best-Lock sets available to date are still available, if not still in production, so it probably isn't cool to scan the instructions yet. What (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Do tell. (...) That was a joke, son. (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Opiates and Coca-derivatives _are_ generally harmful for human use, unless done under guidance. Most humans tend to not be able to provide that guidance to themselves, as seen in all the addicts. AFAIK, various opiates are legally available on (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Yeah, I didn't do the best job of citing references--sorry about that. I'm at work now, so I can't give you the titles at the moment, but I didn't want you to think I was ignoring you, either! Next time I log on from home I'll follow this (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Good isn't objective. What we, society as a whole, consider to be "good" is both up for debate in certain areas (I'm specifically _not_ going to mention ab*rti*n here), and it is no more valid than the ideas of other societies, other than (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Industrious in the area of work is something completely different from lazy in other areas. You know that. [move stuff around a bit] (...) Exactly. Now replace "feel" with "under their analysis", _or_ replace "under our analysis" with "we (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
I am going to ~try~ to make a sensible post... John Neal wrote in message <386C54F9.20331CB5@u...st.net>... (...) think (...) definition - (...) relativism I (...) others (...) is by (...) Discerning (...) good (...) In a huge thread where I (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Basically good ===[by The Jasper Janssen English Dictionary] at least trying hard. So that about corresponds ;) Jasper (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Stuff and Nonsense to the both of you, lazy thinkers!... I have 3 points to make: 1. People aren't as lazy(1) as you think. Most people are industrious and hard working, even in this screwed up society of today. It's only in Legoland where the (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I like a more objective definition because I hate the trend towards relativism I think we are experiencing these days. If a sociopath considers killing others good, is it? But if good is objective, from who's perspective? God, who is by (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) No, as in "The pundits were predicting that Bubba's successor would either be wood-boy or Dubya, but a miracle happened and we inaugurated our first Libertarian president in 2001"... :-) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I heard of a friend of a friend of a friend that got very very sick from doing weed that the federales had sprayed with herbicide, in their foolish and failed drug war, but it probably was an urban legend. I had a friend who passed out in a (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Best Lock instruction scans (Re: Best Lock Adverstising
 
(...) Have they been out long enough to be out of production on some of the sets already? Seems to me (and I ain't speaking for anyone else, just myself here, you have to decide for yourself what is right, no matter how clear cut it seems to me) (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) satirist. (...) Any (...) I just moved and don't know the book's current whereabouts. So, despite my desire to do so, I can't see those chapters now. Refresh me (titles should be adequate). IMHO, it was a (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <38728079.753103163@...et.com>... (...) Wish I could say that! Well, I've paid for my previous misteaks, and its a whole new millenium, almost. (...) Me too. (...) Well, there are legal ways, and it seems like a step (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Do you have any back-up for that ad hominem assessment, or are you just angry? In fact, he's quite insightful and an acknowledged political satirist. For one example of his punditry, I refer you to chapter 30 of his book. Further, if you want (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Wow. You have a fairly radical definition of good, it seems. I tend to think of good as 'not meaning harm', but that's a very loose and general definition - don't try to pin me to specifics, please. "Good" in my books is almost entirely (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Let me say this again (I'll type slowly so you can get it easier;) only God is good. Yeah, I know, some people *seem* good and some more than others, but when you get right down to it, all people are motivated by fear, selfishness, pride, (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Ah.. this explains all. G Dubya Bush. (...) "and I was wrong AND HERE'S WHAT I AM GOING TO DO ABOUT IT:"[emphasis mine]? Neither did Frank answer that one, BTW. Although I inferred that to Frank, "here's what I am going to do about it" would (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I've never heard of _anyone_ dying from bad weed. Heroin, cocain, crack, XTC, yes, but not weed. (...) What's the difference between the politician and the parent? (...) Absolutely. And sleeping pills, caffeine,... (...) Hah. As if he could. (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Is that why they call those little dogs "Pugs"? the one that look like thier faces were "punched in"? : ) John (...) (25 years ago, 31-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Al Franken is a stupid little idiot, but funny as Steve Martin or Chevy Chase. I liked that book too, despite its erroneous and pugnacious (1) title. 1 - I remember learning that English word in Latin class. -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Oh yeah, I know what the word means. Probably derives originally from pugno, pugnare, the Latin verb meaning "to fight, punch, etc". I just don't hear it used much. :) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Have you read Al Franken's "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot"? Regardless of your political views, it's a riotous read! Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
Mike, (...) You're welcome. I can't take credit for that word, however. I heard that on Rush, and looked it up. It describes most flaming leftists, IMHO. It is fun to see people balk when they hear it, though! "Man, that movie was bad." "Yes, it was (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Pugnacious. What a great word. I'm going to find a way to work that into conversation tomorrow night at the little party we're throwing. Thanks. :) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Not that this impacts her views any, but she was recently diagnosed with breast cancer, and has been (as one would expect) encouraging women to "Get. The. D*mn. Mammogram." (Actual quote, with apologies to LUGNET ToU.) (...) As in "Mumble (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Molly Ivins should go to China, Cuba, or some other Communist country where she belongs. What a pugnacious malcontent! Scott S. (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Who coined "dubya" (Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Thanks for the info. I actively dislike that woman, though. I usually have trouble getting all the way through one of her columns without swearing at her under my breath. It IS a good coinage as it sort of rhymes with "bubba". (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Molly Ivins (the columnist, based in Dallas, I think) has been using "Dubya" to refer to GWBush for some time now, well before Trudeau. Y'know, much as I like living in Austin, it depresses me that my presidential vote won't count (I usually (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) " 'Dubya " is a nickname I've heard used for George W. Bush. Say his middle initial slowly, and put a little Texas drawl into it and "double U" mutates into "dubya". I think it may actually have been Gary Trudeau (Doonsbury author) that coined (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
<386B7C15.40D460AE@voyager.net> <FnKBD7.Ao9@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I've played with one, but never used one for anything serious. I did use a slide rule a few times in High (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) If they are not involved in any control of drugs (for example not a politician, cop, or parent), and they aren't still doing drugs, nothing other than perhaps acknowledge that yes, they did do drugs . If they are a parent trying to keep their (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
(...) Another extremely cool thing about him is that he was better educated than just about any SciFi writer out there, then or now, and as such was able to impart greater technical insight to his writing without sounding like he was trying to (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Which I didn't ask because I don't think they're relevant. I agree with you. I wouldn't mind too much, personally, if there were at least legal ways to get the stuff under medical prescription. AT least that would be a step in the right (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
<FnInFv.CHL@lugnet.com> <FnItEp.D5q@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Asimov is "the master" not because he's the best of all SF writers, (he's not) but because he was writing stuff that others (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) I'm not running for office. <crowd sounds of huge sigh of relief> Not the same standards of behaviour. However, I can honestly say that I never swiped anything. And as for drugs, which you didn't ask, I freely admit that I've used them. The (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
(...) Interesting. I wonder if Asimov changed it because "bicentennial" became part of the U.S. popular consciousness in 1976. It would seem an easy thing to research... Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
 
(...) Can you honestly tell me that you have never ever in your youth swiped a candybar or something similar from a store? Taken a pen home with you from school? etc.? The point isn't that it wasn't _wrong_, it's that after <mumble> years, there is (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
<386A85C4.716D28B3@n...scape.com> <FnJ57G.8vs@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, I don't know what decade I read it, but I do remember that the Asimov story I read was titled (...) (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
(...) Was that its original title? I only came across it about 7 years ago, but I'm almost certain it was "Bicentennial Man" even then. Dave! (25 years ago, 30-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
Scott E. Sanburn wrote in message <386A5CF5.B1434BC3@c...eb.net>... (...) all (...) Treating (...) Just a comment, when did regulation of the waste disposal industry occur? Around the same time that Civil Rights was in full swing? While the Civil (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
Sorry for so many posts on this boring subject, but... Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) transferring (...) I think if this particular industry (and nearly any other, for that matter) were privatized, the actual costs would go down (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
Frank Filz wrote in message <386A45E1.237C@minds...ng.com>... (...) Remember what you said, stupid consumers... (...) I don't think (stupid) "consumers would quickly demand a level of packaging which would minimize waste" simply because they must (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) "We" (who?) already are saying those things, statistically. We just shouldn't write them. What do you mean, "giving in?" This isn't even an issue of grammatical correctness--it's an issue of style. There is no rule in English that prohibits (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
<FnIv3w.JtC@lugnet.com> <FnIvDJ.Kvp@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Of course, the short story *I* remember was called the "Sesquicentennial Man" (150 years). (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
(...) The short story is among my favorites in any genre, so I recommend it whether you plan to see the film or not. I confess that I don't see how characterization that isn't in a film can affect the film, except by its absence, regardless of its (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
Because of your description of this movie, I have made plans to go see it. Your "scathing" review has interested me in something I would have skipped, so thanks Dave!. It sounds typical of movies, to leave much of the story out, so should I read it (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (spoilers, and quite lengthy)
 
(...) Aagh! I've been revealed as a fraud! Actually, I was trying to maximize the Scrabble value of his name, and Z is worth more than S! Anyway, "the master?" Hmm... I can't quite get behind you on that one, I'm afraid, but I do enjoy his stuff. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  (Something - I don't know what anymore) Was [Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging]
 
(...) Ah yes, to not make misteaks like the great Larry.... All Hail Larry! ;) (...) I don't think people should discriminate on the basis of sexual preference, but I don't think it should be an issue in the first place. Some try to make it seem so, (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Yea, sounds like you need some sleep, or you need to bow down to the great Larry more so you don't make as many misteaks... (...) Things like benefits for domestic partners, having personel policies which state that the company doesn't (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Oops, I did. Ugh, I can't wait to go to bed tonight! :) (...) Hmm.. that is interesting, I don't know how Libertarians would view that. I never thought that the first part was bad. I will have the great Larry P. on that one... I think the (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) In your original statement, you said "hose" when I assume you meant "house". I was just making fun (sorry for being off-topic...) (...) To a pure Libertarian, laws telling you that your store must serve anyone regardless of race (ect), are an (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Trying not to take this out of context or anything, when you say hose, are you saying store, as in storing the balls? I am slightly confused & perplexed on my own, not by you or anything, I think I need more coffee..... (...) Really? What ones (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Well, I don't think it would be any easier to hose 1000 loose balls than 1000 boxed ones, but it would certainly do less damage to the product, however, the hose really should be aimed at the teenage jerks who play ball in the toy store (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (don't bother)
 
(...) c /Azimov/Asimov/ (getting the master's name right takes you up a notch on my "credence-o-meter" when discussing his work :-) ) I confess to a bit of shock at your perception. What a radically different perception than mine! As I said, I found (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man (don't bother)
 
(...) Just a side note: don't see the movie--it's awful. Well, not awful, exactly, but pretty darned uneven with not a single moment giving us any sense of what Robin Williams' character really has at stake. The short story is a much better (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) Yes, I am all for that! :) Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) I haven't seen the movie (yet), so I hadn't been taking it into consideration. I'd consider it a bad trade, too - but then it wasn't me making the choice. To him, it may have been worth it (and I'll shut up now - at least until I see it). (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) I have little sympathy for stupid consumers. I see too many of them at my second job for that. "This was supposed to be 80% off, there was a sign." Lets say they have a Christmas sweater. (Actual example) I went back there to see, and it was (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) Hear hear. Trash fees DON'T cover costs because the government runs most landfills, and regulates the rest. That regulation, by imposing standards instead of using strict negligence, allows landfill operators to meet the standards (of (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Bicentennial Man and Immortality (was Re: Who James Isn't (was:Re: New Castle Sucks (so far...)
 
(...) You say that as a mortal. :-) I don't want to .debate this, but I do want to highlight (and I guess I may be spoiling some of the plot here) that this character already WAS immortal, practically. He was faced with the choice of trading it away (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Brad - TLC needs to minimize packaging
 
(...) I think that it's not so much a case of the consumer wanting more packaging, than that the companies perceive that larger packages sell better because the stupid consumer thinks he's getting a better deal. As far as government regulation of (...) (25 years ago, 29-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 100 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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