 | | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
Richard Franks wrote in message ... (...) it (...) steam (...) process. (...) Whatever happened to Mad Hatter? (...) or (...) offensive (...) (!), (...) So, we are in the right group now? I agree that people ought to be decent on Lugnet and RTL. I (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) As clearly stated above, I don't know. If someone were hell-bent on murder, I suppose they should be put down and parted out to pay for the whole affair - or their assets given to the kin of the victims. I suppose there should be some method (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Keeping the record straight (Was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) To set the record straight, since it seems to be a sticking point, this was said in response to Richard, not to me. Trimming the thread the way I did might leave readers with the impression that Bruce admitted I was right about something, (...) (25 years ago, 28-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | This whole thread isn't amusing any more...
|
|
(...) Thank you. (25 years ago, 28-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
Adam, (...) Hmm... I know I do that from time to time as well, such as why did I just spend 300.00 on LEGO? :) I can tell it would affect some people though. (...) Well, I know I am usually on one side or the other (Usually on the right ;) ), and (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Larry isn't amusing
|
|
(...) The preceeding line did not appear in Larry's original message, and the way it appears it seems to be written by him. This is not the case. I'm not quite sure how it got there, but I have double-checked, and he did not say it. I wish to (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Blair Witch Project - Thoughts?
|
|
(...) This movie *really* affected me; such that I would go so far as to say I was not stable after seeing it. Had I known what I was in for, I would have not chosen to go. Shortsightedness and a complete lack of common sense at the time enabled my (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are not amused (was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) I did. It was right there. I admitted it. *You quoted me*. All you were trying to do is get in a cheap shot. (...) You asked me about where I thought you were wiggling. I answered. Note that you accused me FIRST. Sorry you didn't like the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | We are not amused (was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
Yes, I cut some stuff away, but my point stands. You need to be able to admit you're wrong when you are, and you need to admit that a point is proven when it is. I have no issues with my own record on that score, my honesty and integrity are pretty (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Larry, you cut the attrib to Richard, so you make it look like I was saying that to you (wiggle). Further, you cut the part that prompted my response (wiggle). The part was more critical of the person I was responding to (wiggle). That person (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
