 | | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
(...) The movie was promoted as if it was real and as you've probably seen, the official site is full of back story material that makes the movie seem more realistic. The movie was not based on a true story, but they thought that promoting it as if (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
(...) Doh! c/it's/its James (URL) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
(...) I didn't bother finishing to watch it. The whole gimick of the show depends on you buying into it, and about 20 minutes in, I saw something that shattered my suspension of disbelief - I left to avoid spoiling the mood for the people that (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
Ben Roller wrote: < snipped Ben's oberservations > Good points, seeing it in a theater always helps. I am not really scared by anything anymore, much less movies. I have been looking at the official website for this a little this morning, was this a (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
(...) As with many movies like this, the mindset you have while watching makes or ruins the experience. I first saw the movie on opening night at the midnight showing at my favorite theater back home. I had seen very little commentary on the film (I (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Todd, I couldn't agree more. Thanks for taking a stand for civility. When my kids get old enough to read, I'll be happy that they will be able to use LUGNET without picking up language they don't need while they are too young to understand the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
To All, My friend rented this movie this weekend, and after watching, I can't seem to find what the big deal was. I saw some parodies on it, and the actual movie was just stupid. I was actually rooting for whatever killed the filmmakers at the end. (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Law (was: Art) Debate (Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) I find this an exceedingly callous statement, on the surface. Explain further. (...) The disposable income of the US government isn't that high. (...) You are. The law just happens to be unconstitutional. Jasper (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Law (was: Art) Debate (Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Ugh. Yes, if corporations break the law, they do hurt people. They should be prosecuted. The government prosecutes corporations, right? I agree with you that the US government has a tremendous amount of power because of money, etc. The (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Some would, and some wouldn't. Obviously if your culture feels that it's appropriate to feed them via the government, they would still feel that way if the government disappeared right? But they might make them work a little for it, which (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Law (was: Art) Debate (Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Two things: First, I think that there is a miscommunication here. You are saying that companies have little power compared to the government if they don't break the laws. Others are saying that by breaking the laws, companies have the power to (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The fix is in: Rams go to SuperBowl
|
|
(...) Cemented there, as a matter of fact. :) At least I don't have to feel bad for rooting against Manning since the Titans are going to the Super Bowl now. Lots of people around here had a problem picking sides for that game. (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The fix is in: Rams go to SuperBowl
|
|
(...) We're not talking about the WWF where no pretense is made. The NFL is *supposedly* on the level (I'm assuming your tongue is firmly planted in cheek). -John (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The fix is in: Rams go to SuperBowl
|
|
(...) I can't believe you would suggest such a thing. Are you honestly suggesting that something as time-honored as a championship professional football game could be rigged? What are we supposed to believe next, that a popular televised quiz show (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The fix is in: Rams go to SuperBowl
|
|
Did anyone see the NFC championship game today and think the Bucs got screwed? That overturned call in the last minute was beyond belief. I guess ABC wants the flashy Rams to go to the Super Bowl rather than the defense-led Bucs. And Kurt Warner's (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Just one major point here: I don't agree with what Todd is doing or why he is doing it for reasons stated previously. It should also be kept in mind that this thread began with the use of certain language on RTL and NOT on Lugnet -- I think (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
Wow, hasn't taken long for this hot potato to bounce out of the oven again. No sense in missing out on all the fun of the discussion, so here's my two minifigs worth (Star Wars, ofcourse!) (...) I'm with you there. Far too many arguments have got (...) (25 years ago, 24-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Fix Or Repair Daily (was: Re: Lego in Chevy Venture)
|
|
(...) You posted this in off-topic... So you're off-topic in .off-topic. Being on-topic is expressly off-topic in off-topic. Confused yet? (...) ITYM: Any GM or Ford cars would be built outta Mecabloks. Any Japanese cars would be built outta Tyco. A (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) That's it, yes! And because of the tenets which hold that... 1) people give their real-life name rather than posting anonymously, and 2) people avoid the use of obseneties/profanities/etc., ...LUGNET is a much more friendly, much less (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) No. These people and many others were visible indicators of a serious problem facing the community of AFOLs. Frank and others aready explained this quite well elsewhere in this thread, so there's not much I can add, and I don't want to get (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
Richard Marchetti wrote in message ... (...) all (...) certain (...) When a bunch of people are leaving some venue (and as I understand it, some of the people leaving RTL were major contributors), one should look at what is going on. The purpose of (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) Why, that is totally betraying the Aryan philosophy and everything Adolf Schicklgruber stood for! (just doing my bit to provide remarks _really_ irritating to neo-nazis. Don't use without police protection nearby, and I will _not_ accept the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I disagree with the assertion that human psychology is a such a linear process. One person may read a post and think "this writer is deluded, and clearly wrong on points A, C, and D", someone else may read the same post and think "what a (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
No one could have put it better, Mr. Braun! -- Paul Davidson Mr L F Braun <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:388A4DF2.B4F052...msu.edu... (...) and (...) silly. (...) I agree (...) argument (...) taste, (...) comment on (...) expressed (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Terms like "bad taste" are extremely subjective, and to my mind have no real meaning although I understand the gist of what you are saying -- really its more of a simple put down than anything else. And by "ignorance" I thought the original (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) *whisperwhisperconsp...uswhisper* See Larry. See Larry act innocently. Larry acts innocently. See Larry up to no good. Larry is up to no good. See wet noodel. The Noodel is wet. See sturdy branch. The branch is sturdy. See sturdy branch with (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) If you think all right-wingers are fascistic, you need to get your head serviced. And no, the fascistic system of thinking is not necessarily right-wing. From Merriam-Webster: (...) See how that compares to Stalinist Russia. (...) And by this (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) See below. I see your points and follow your line of reasoning with which I agree for certain topics, but not this one. For example, I believe that your argument defends ignorant speech but not necessarily profanity. Bad taste is bad taste, (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
X-FUp-to: .fun (...) Look, if you want a proper answer from my omniscientness, you'll need to do a proper grovel. Something like "Oh, Great Internet Oracle, I throw myself upon your mercy, for you are the only one who can hear my plea" would be (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Fix Or Repair Daily (was: Re: Lego in Chevy Venture)
|
|
(trying desperately to pull back on-topic) A Ford would be built outta Megablocks. A Chevy would be built out of Tyco. A Toyota would be built out of LEGO!!! (I miss my Tyco, but I won't trade my lego for it.) --Colin (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
(...) Actually, I have. It's loads of fun coming up with Terribly Clever non answers (or BS answers) to questions. Never got my answer selected as (it's been so long, I forget what it was exactly) "best of the..." though. Wow, that's a blast from (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) Which Idea? I'd like to know so that I can develop that one and not one that will create more disturbances. It seems ubnlikley that TLG will listen to me as in thier eyes I've propbably 'stolen' someone else idea. It's a shame I always put my (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
It seems I went too far in claiming certian things! (...) Agreed. (...) systems such as LGB. Therefore I propose the following. (...) Accepted. (...) Again Accepted as not new. (...) Again Accepted as not new. (...) But not an offical Lego(R) one (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) My understanding is that you can't copyright an idea either: copyright protects an *expression*, ie a poem, a computer program, a piece of music. Writing a program to print a calendar means you have copyright in the program, but not the idea (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) Probably not, no. (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
(...) You should go work for the Internet Oracle. jasper (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) FUp-to: geek. There are two kinds of car that seem to be surging ahead right now. There is the fuel-cell type, and the hydrogen type (which may also be fuelcell, but whatever.) Fuel-cells typically use hydrocarbons (ie, gasoline (but cleaned (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Yes, I know. I really do. But it's not just the dole. It's also generally the better economic climate. (...) If the government stopped feeding them, they would be fed by charities. Maybe. At least, that's what the libertarians keep telling me. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego in Chevy Venture
|
|
(...) What about the Chevy Camaro, Corvette, and Pontiac Firebird? C'mon, GM makes the only American sports car--they can't be that bad. Plenty of GM concept cars look pretty cool too. --Bram Bram Lambrecht / o o \ BramL@juno.com (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
(...) It's a limited perfection. I'm perfect, but not omniescent. Either that, or I DO have all the answers but am not willing to reveal them. :-) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Actually, no. See, for example, any first year Macroeconomics text, for example Samuelson. Excess production (that is, more goods than wages) causes deflation. Excess consumption (that is, more wages than goods) causes inflation. Now, it so (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) That was my point... but even if he *HAD* been the original person to suggest those things (at least one of his ideas struck me as being one I had never seen mentioned before), it wouldn't have made any difference, would it? (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) You didn't. Takes a LOT to offend me. :) (...) No need for shame either. (...) Right, and if they've truly come up with something original - like the pics of his awesome Castle Ed Boxer shows on his site, that makes sense. (...) Yup, any (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) I hope whoever is responsible for that, in that company, gets tried for breaking the law. Breaking the law is never a excessive liberty, the exception being the Clinton administration, of course. Scott S. (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) The Kerr McGee corp running Karen Silkwood off the road and killing her for blowing the whistle on safety problems at their nuclear plant ... perhaps an example of, um, excessive liberties being taken by a company. -- jthompson@esker.com (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Stanley writes: Sorry If I offended you! I was wrong (Hangs head in shame). <SNIP> (...) Accepted. (...) Accepted. But some fan websites do state that thier are not for commerical use. (...) Accepted. - I had intened (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) No. There's no way to prove that Joe Blow, who at some point in the future comes up with say a custom model of a large "beachfront" house, got the idea to produce it from this thread, and specifically from the author in question. But even if (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Government Power vs. Corporate Power [Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]]
|
|
Frank & All, (...) I don't know how simple I can make this. Overall, if you compare the power of the government that can dramatically effect your life, which there are examples, and the power of any corporation (If they do illegal things, that is a (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Farlie A
|
|
(...) Well... this is ideal, of course... but is it actually enforceable? Even if the information has already been copyrighted, copyright does not protect against independant discovery. Since the information presented on lugnet is practically (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Just a quite note on gasoline: One of the engineers here at AEI has a husband who is an electrical engineer for a certain car manufacturer (I won't divulge too much) They have been working on hydrogen fuel cell cars. It has been so successful (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Well, there is the occaisional landlord. There are also the bail bondsmen, but they are in a way an agent of the government. (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3889b27e.4370108@lu...et.com>... (...) One problem with this is that in the US, minimum wage for 40 hrs/week isn't really a minimum sufficient wage (for most parts of the country). I do think that companies have to (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) You do then, as well. (...) I asked how many companies do you know that did break into your house, etc. You said they have the power to, to which I disagree. You never answered the first question anyway, which is which companies do so? I know (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Right, but you've set yourselves up for that. By having all those friendly social programs, you paint a great big target on your chest. My grandfather expatriated to (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
(...) (I stopped reading .debate a while ago because I don't have the time to read the same old arguments, much less participate in them but I just had to respond to this since I glanced at it before hitting delete.) How can you be perfect and not (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
(...) What I am talking abouit is where I use a desktop-class machine, sold by say Compaq (because I have a contract with them to supply all my machinery), instead of the server class machine or router they wopuld otherwise have sold me. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) You know what _really_ bugs me about US lawsuits? Punitive damages. The whole _concept_ is just utterly asinine. Fines, if any are necessary, should be _fines_, and therefore payable to the government, not J Random Victim. Jasper (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) No, by making them hired for life, or at the very least not hired on the basis of the Great Unwashed Masses. Makes for a much better judicial system if you don't have those pesky jury things, either. Crawl out of the judicial sixteenth (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Maybe it'd be a good thing for the country or the world -- but not necessarily for the individual voter. Anyway, we currently get enough non-economic refugees here in .nl that it severely skews the population count -- and in some cases we're (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Stop putting words into my mouth. (...) You mean it wasn't rhetorical? Besides, I did answer. Any big corporation has the power to do so. Just not legally. Jasper (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) And I wasn't thinking straight, or I'd have known what you meant. (...) Yes. And...? (...) When there is production that is going unbought because money that would have been used for consumption (in addition to there being larger production), (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) My stance on this is surely colored by the history of the US, but I feel that the primary reason that I live in the greatest nation in the world is the melting pot effect. I would be completely open to allowing anyone who wanted a fair shake (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Irrelevent to the appropriate punishment. I personally know several people who prefered it when the coffee was (to my judgement) assininely hot. McDonalds was supplying a niche product - ultra hot coffee - and people were buying it. They (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
Selcuk, (...) Well, it is there, I have seen enough of it. < snipped Turkey info > (...) Well, I was talking about the US mainstream media, for one. I have hardly any information about Turkey, since you are the resident expert. Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) No, I think you give corporations too much credit in terms of their power, and you don't seem to care how much power the government has. I don't have to look to far in terms of "it is illegal it won't happen." The Clinton Administration has (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) No, I think you give corporations too much credit in terms of their power, and you don't seem to care how much power the government has. I don't have to look to far in terms of "it is illegal it won't happen." The Clinton Administration has (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: IP (was: Re: Any suggestions on a homepage?)
|
|
I have to think more about the rest of your post but I did just want to point out: (...) That isn't quite what I mean here. Unless Cisco has invented the entire notion of routing based on IP packets, which I highly doubt (seems to me to have been (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Left out an assumption, thank you, as usual, for not letting me get away with one atom's worth of implicitness. Sigh. Assume the same total revenue take. 40% across the board is surely more distortive than 5% on everything except food (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
Scott E. Sanburn <ssanburn@cleanweb.net> wrote in message news:3885CFB4.9FF04C...web.net... (...) I think this bias mentioned above is a virtual one, and it is mostly in your thoughts. I live in a country, which ruled by Islamic fundamentalism for (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
Jasper "I didn't invent Libertarianism, I just laugh at" Janssen wrote in message... <38b4684b.609370836@...et.com>... (...) Weeks (...) <Mega snip> Jasper's post is evidence of my case. Even though Jasper is from a country currently more to the (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) As you're so fond of saying, that's not the only solution. I'd posit: not even close to the best one. (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Right. Guilty until proven innocent. Don't do this, please. Jasper (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Oh come now. You're acting like it never happens that a previously-thought-unharmful stuff is later considered extremely harmful. cf Asbestos. Greatest thing since sliced bread, right up until the fourties when the studies came out. I really (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
|
(...) So make it work despite opposition and predation. If it's so much better than the current situation, a measly 70% income tax shouldn't harm you at all. Jasper (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Yup. There are very good reasons not to let economic refugees cross into your country freely. Most especially if you are richer than your neighbours. (...) The problem isn't that the market wouldn't provide food. It's that the market would not (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) You're harbouring the misconception that if it is illegal it won't happen. Jasper (25 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<3885F5ED.ABD@mindspring.com> <388625A1.F24912E7@eclipse.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Of course I see the McDonald's coffee issue as one where the system actually for the most part worked. A (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) can (...) What if the guy who's rude isn't rude because of poor training, or anything that *you* did/should have done/could have done? What if he's rude because he just had a huge fight with his ex-wife, and took that baggage to work? If (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Yup, I agree, but you missed the phrase "might have lead". If there's no clear indicator as to where the responsibility lies, how can it be arbitrarily assigned? That just screams "WRONG" to me. <snipped bits about the Pinto> Yes, I agree with (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<3885F82B.31DF@mindspring.com> <FoLIpw.MEu@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Until August, I managed ~140 employees in a technical customer service setting. If one of them was rude to a (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) OK. I can dance with that. But, the courts have done some pretty silly stuff. (Like McDonald's coffee.) how do we as a society regulate them? Just fire judges? There should be some mechanism for helping the courts be reasonable. Chris (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<3885C764.F1AF855@eclipse.net> <FoLCpu.CzB@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) In many (but not all) cases - yes. (...) OK, I'm in your scenario now. People dying as a result of _anything_ is (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<3885F82B.31DF@mindspring.com> <FoLIpw.MEu@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) But if you don't ultimately hold the company officers liable, then there is no way to enforce any decision (you (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Granted. (...) Back up a sec. I never implied that liability shouldn't exist. The company would be liable for the bulk of any settlements, and any company that operated as you suggest above would get hit with lawsuits so often that it would (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<38850672.B6A753EE@eclipse.net> <FoK7Jv.LHr@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) One thing - at the point where a liability issue is at hand, the internal processes of the company become (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
<FoJtsn.C9w@lugnet.com> <38850984.18212589@eclipse.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Mostly that this sort of thing is hard to talk about in the abstract. I think the longer something goes, the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Perhaps they shouldn't have dumped stuff, which they didn't know what its effects might be, in an unsecured area. Think about how we handle radioactive waste. Some of it, we don't really know what effect it will have, so be bundle it up to (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) I've heard and read "Environmental Extremists" plenty of times, if only because it alliterates. Radical, fringe, zealot, and fanatic all carry perjorative images in any case. Bruce (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snipped muchly> (...) Ok, looks like this is our sticking point. I think that erring on the side of inclusion is bad. IMHO, if responsibility can't be traced fairly directly, then assigning (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) Right. And some christians are nazi fascists. You don't like being lumped in with them - that's all I'm saying. It's important to recognize the shades of distinction and not address people as if they represented all that was wrong with a (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
1) Disclaimer: I think Chris and I do agree on most things, I think our trains of thought have crashed or whatever, maybe missed the station? 2) I had to type this twice, as Netscape crashed. Tom S, were are you? (...) Well, I get attacked so much, (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) Interesting. I guess I am too used to "liberal" news sources, which I try to stay away from, for the most part. Scott S. (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) I've seen it any number of times in the "standard" media. Both in the "liberal" Los Angeles Times and the "conservative" Orange County Register. Bruce (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
Scott: (...) True enough--I hadn't thought of that before. I've heard environmentalists referred to as "radical" or "fringe" before, but those words seem somehow to have a different resonance... Dave! (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) That's great. (...) (I had to type this twice now, since Netscape crashed) I have never said that *all* environmentalists are worshipping earth pagans. I remember saying some are, however. I think it is funny, though, that extremists that are (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: True Right Wing Fascists
|
|
(...) Hmmm... I think religious views and where you stand politically are two different things. The people in the program. They used their own religion (Aryan church, if I remember right) to spread their fascist statements / racist. etc. I am not (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
|
(...) That's not what he said at all. He's saying that others would victimize us if we did do that and made a success of it. And that's largely why it won't work in this country. The only way to be safe from the predations of others would be to turn (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) I've talked people into it who did answer the questions honestly, were placed by the test as libertarians, and who were similarly not tricked into believing that they were libertarians. It is my opinion that the questions on the test are (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
Jasper, (...) Can you name one corporation that has the power to burst into your home, arrest you and your family, take away your possessions, etc. I would love to know? Until then, the government has more power than *any* corporation. Oh yes, the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Which is exactly what is already happening with the increased threat of litigation and the _very_real_ possibility, nay certainty, of getting fired if someone can prove, or even intimate, that you were the cause of such an incident. Jasper (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
