 | | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) No, he's just adjusting to being a New Englander... Todd, you need to do better than that though, that's a poor example of double negativese. Frank (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Shiri wrote in message ... (...) his (...) misteaks." Now there's an idea! Of course that won't help those not in the know any... Frank who may be a respectable member of the AFOL community who does make the occasional misteak (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) Larry's the best one to answer that. :) (...) Well, I don't think they can -- and that's 98% of the reason I jumped on Larry for what he posted. And it's also why I posted something similar-but- different right afterwards. The other 2% is (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
(...) I can answer this much - when Larry makes a mistake (which, people say, he never does), he answers by saying "I never make misteaks." Or someone else says it for him - because this is 'his' line, his little pun, a trademark of a sort. (CMIIW) (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Allan Bedford wrote in message <01bf79b1$4ab7e040$3...hx1138>... (...) It's a running gag. Check out: (URL) is given a little more leeway than some people, but that is because of his history as a solid contributor. There really is no way to avoid (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No gimmicks, just some free background images
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article <Fq3o8y.6nK@lugnet.com>... (...) few (...) raised (...) something (...) more (...) know (...) even (...) I'm glad you used that last little quote. It highlights my point exactly. I've been reading (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) This is an incredibly ridiculous statement. While the Army Airborne were the first troops on the ground (with M16's only), everyone knows that the Marines, thanks to the maritime prepositioning system, were the first fully equipped armed (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) No offense taken. (...) But it is relevant to those of us who are employed in the computer networking industry. I, as a developer / administrator of networking technology, have a responsibility to myself and my career to ensure that wanton and (...) (25 years ago, 18-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Having also been "in an armed conflict on foreign soil" (in fact, I was in the middle of Iraq with the 1st Cav while the Marines were still sailing back and forth in the Arabian Gulf playing decoy, but I digress), I can say that the Gulf War and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
Hello Jeremy, First let me apologize, I agree with many of the replies that it was not a gentlemanly thing for me to have publicly criticized you in such a fashion. I meant you no disrespect personally, it's very easy to become dettached when you're (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Agreed 100%. The biggest thing about spam that just steams me is the cost-shifting of advertising. In a traditional marketing situation, the advertiser pays the expense of hawking his product. With spam, the advertiser spends *nothing* -- all (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) (3 URLs) before you leap, please. While I will conceed that it isn't much of a pain for me to hit the delete key, it is a pain for me to hit the delete key several times a day. It is a pain to have to set up filters, and potentially miss mail (...) (25 years ago, 17-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) No, I don't think he (*must* be a male) would ever give up his precious Mad Hatter® pseudo-- he thinks he *is* the Mad Hatter. (...) Sleeping dogs lay, people lie. But don't get me started on the depravity of man;-) -John (...) (25 years ago, 15-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: SPAM
|
|
(...) If you respond to spam you have just given the spammer your email addy which he now knows is active and will then sell it to whomever he chooses. To suddenly find porn in your mailbox is not an event I wish to experience. And once your addy (...) (25 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: SPAM
|
|
(...) Whoops, slight mistake... The letter I received WAS signed. I guess that would make it a less-plausible spam, but not always. I sometimes get spams that start out "Hi, my name is ___. A mutual friend told me about you" or some sort of trash. (...) (25 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: SPAM
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, John Neal writes: <snip> (...) A chance of what? I get tons of spam as is, even though I'm not active in ebay (being registered to hotmail makes it bad enough.). Why would the person sending this (say it is a spam) go out of (...) (25 years ago, 11-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
(...) great (...) Zellers is decent. About the only place to routinely discount (15% once a month)... Sears and the Bay are also good places to go - their prices start 5-10% higher, but because of that, they often have older stuff, which can be (...) (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.ca)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
(...) I like Zellers. I always scope them out when I am Canada... (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
(...) Hehe, I can actually :] (...) Cool! We do have Winners here..., I'll have to look for one in Windsor tho (I've only been here half a year or so). Shall have to add it to the list of stops on my LEGO hunt. KDJ. ___...___ Kyle D. Jackson (...) (25 years ago, 10-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
You're from Windsor! Can't you see the US just by looking out the window? ;-) I don't know if you have Winners stores in Ontario, but I've found some great sets cheap in Calgary. I got a couple Cyberslam kits with motors & the pneumatic Sub set for (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay nailed?
|
|
(...) I don't think your random clicks will be a problem when time comes to charge per packet. I expect that the rates will be so miniscule that casual browsing will be free (the problem might be that it won't do enough to spam because it won't cost (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay nailed?
|
|
Charging per packet, and blocking packets both sound good in practice, and I support them in theory. They are problematic though, the way the internet is currrently engineered. Packet headers are too easy to spoof. The internet is built on the (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay nailed?
|
|
(...) Yep, that sounds like exactly what I'd want to do-- keep tabs on who's sending the most requests and if they look suspicious, deny them access, rather than have a flat "no more than X transactions per Y time", seeing as how you might get (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: eBay nailed?
|
|
(...) Well, it could be handled on a very gross basis by the router/firewall. If it keeps track of the top IP sources of packets, it can just start discarding packets from certain IP addresses. It could also recognize large company firewalls to (...) (25 years ago, 9-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tell us (was: Found Discounted 5978; and Clearance Question)
|
|
(...) Me too! Oh, wait, I'm already here. I'm moving to Wal-Mart! Actually, isn't it possible that in part it is these overseas activities that help float the company over smaller margins at home? There are a few companies that operate this (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
(...) this (...) I can't really say anything one way or another regarding what Larry has said about the types of markets..., it seems to make sense, but economics tends to stretch my 10 s attention span a little too far :] Now that I think about it (...) (25 years ago, 8-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tell us (was: Found Discounted 5978; and Clearance Question)
|
|
(...) After reading that, I'd hafta agree with you... Especially that last sentence. Darn it, I'm moving to the States! Bryan (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
(...) And you thought I wouldn't like your answer! Nothing there I disagree with, although I don't think regulation has too much to do with, in the end, whether an older Lego set is discounted by 15% rather than 50%. I think I'll pose this question (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
See my reply to Erin... It's the standard libertarian dogmatic answer. :-) (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Tell us (was: Found Discounted 5978; and Clearance Question)
|
|
(...) Well, in my opinion, the US is a more market driven economy and so stores are more concerned with financial results. Managers are managed more on effective use of capital, and less on compliance with government regulations. Also, the US (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Ok Larry: US vs Canadian Discounts
|
|
Actually, Larry, I am interested in your take on the types of discounts that stores offer during a sale. For the benefit of other readers, we Canadians (at least on the West Coast) had lamented that we only occasionally see 10% - 15% mark-downs for (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Tell us (was: Found Discounted 5978; and Clearance Question)
|
|
(...) Ok, why are the US stores seem to be more concerned with moving merchandise out and why they can afford to give steeper discounts? (Note: If you say something incredibly horrible, disgusting, shocking, vulgar, I will not lash out at you, cuz I (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
Susan Olson wrote in message ... (...) the (...) Certainly eBay owns the format and technology that makes the listings possible. Certainly the seller owns the text used to describe the item. But certainly eBay can not be forced to give away the (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
William A. Swanberg wrote in message ... (...) thing: (...) If the DOD hadn't allowed the internet to expand beyond the government, it would have just delayed the internet for a while. By the time the internet started to be useful, Usenet was (...) (25 years ago, 7-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 4558 doors(x4) for exchange
|
|
(...) This post was to trainheads, most of us don't mind being spammed with metroliner parts for trade! James P (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
"Susan Olson" <so0s@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:FpHB1t.BJ9@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) would (...) to be (...) new (...) I've said (...) Far be it from me to get in the middle of this one, law was about as far from my college major as you (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) I'd dispute this... but Frank's question wasn't framed very well. So I'll just provide some anecdotal evidence. Now, this anecdotal evidence is applicable to domestic flights only, and to the carriers I fly most, but I have checked well over (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Hah! (...) Friends who travel regularly suggest the percentage is around 10-20%. And yes, they need better baggage-handling. But who is going to pay for that? Oh, and one tip: Never Ever leave old routing-tags on your bags if you want them to (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Then it's gone, also quite effectively reducing it to zero. My point is that it's not a good thing to punish mismanagement as if it's the same thing as whatever things the mismanaged underlings get up to. (...) If your manager is a floor or a (...) (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We are not amused (was Re: Keeping Larry Amused
|
|
(...) Absolutely, I agree. It's a good habit to leav all the attributions in until the lat moment, so you know how many to leave in. An advice i'd do well to follow myself, of course... ;-) Jasper (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) Indeed. They are. Jasper (25 years ago, 6-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
(...) I have no issues with you personally either Larry and this is a civilized discussion not a "brawl" or a flame war - I am somewhat toward the libertarian view myself (I'm not dogmatic about anything except how cool the Internet and Legos are (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
Susan, I don't want to start a brawl with you but I disagree with several of the points you're making. You're new here, so you may not know me and my stances, which I do not hesitate to articulate, and which I do so quite vigorously. Don't take this (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
(...) I think I remember cases like this, maybe even cases where people got real mad about it, but S@H itself normally labels these items "not available in stores" itself it its catalog - why shouldn't eBay sellers be able to do the same? Yes, it (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
(...) Larry I think you'll find that the vast majority of AW posters are primarily bidders - since most sellers know that ebaY is the only viable game in town, I say right on to the DOJ and check it out before it becomes impossible for small sellers (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
It's interesting to note that on AuctionWatch's own discussion forum, the vast majority of posters that I have read so far are taking eBay's side in this. (URL) is a great site for information and I highly recommend it for that. However I'm not sure (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Justice Probes eBay for Antitrust"
|
|
(...) meddling/jackbootedness. I am not sure they have a case. Material hosted on eBay servers isn't free for the taking, is it? Does eBay have an obligation to make information which it has spent money gathering (the auction listings themselves) (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) PURE BS there, Scott. Averaged across the board, women get paid less for the SAME work as men (less at the higher end all the way do to minimum wage, the only equalizer). You are so unbelievably wrong if you think it is the women's fault they (...) (25 years ago, 5-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) So if the ACT is discriminatory in favor of wealth or whiteness, then it's wrong? Fine. I agree. What about the more complex situation where it's a fairly good predictor of success for white males of middle class or greater, but not for (...) (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
After looking at the article again my interpretation of what was said is different from yours. No students were selected for the program because they were black or Hispanic. It was an option given to students with average grade performance whose (...) (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
|
(...) implementation of the GST. It's enough to give you angina. You guys seem to have mastered a GST quite well. Why does Australia have to be so dumb? (...) LOL!! I loved that article!! Pete Callaway (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Maybe, and maybe not. If they wanted not to be that would be OK. But in my paragraph above I was talking about things that we need to do right now, and that we need to do whether or not we are transitioning toward a libertopia or not... (...) (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
(...) Actually, I would be willing to argue that the reason that WWII, the Korean War and the Vietnam War are not covered in US history classes, is that there are too many people to whom these conflicts are 'current events'. I remember just 10 years (...) (25 years ago, 4-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <389A0E53.92149830@v...er.net>... (...) Of course to some extent, private enterprise would probably end up involving itself if a another Hitler (oh well, we've lost the debate again) came along and a Libertopia (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Agreed. I expect Libertopia to be a GREAT place to start a commune, for example. No pesky laws about how many unmarried people can live in the same place to get in the way (although you may have to find a property not already encumbered with (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Certainly a lot of my concerns about it fall into this category, I just want to make sure that the road isn't a suspension bridge during high wind, and that we aren't travelling in a high-sided vehicle! Richard (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Driving around with a black woman in my car sure revealed this. Suddenly I started getting stopped for fix-it tickets. My favorite was when they noted a broken light on the far side of the car that they couldn't see when they turned on their (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) So are you saying that in Libertopia, the LEGO test for some people and the SAT for others is ok (Larry said that using different tests for different people and different schools is ok, both implicitly in this most recent post, and more (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Well, for what it's worth, I don't disagree with any of what you say below, though I suspect that in a Libertopia, we might find ourselves supporting some different causes. That's fine with me, I don't expect everyone to have the same (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
To all, I am not the most articulate person in the world, but what Larry said is dead on. Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Your evading the question. I asked about "disadvantaged" minorities as classes. I am quite aware that INDIVIDUALS of every "disadvantaged" minority have been extremely successeful. My question is do you think that blacks as a whole have the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Frank raises some good points. But if I am careful I will find myself disagreeing with him... I think it would be naiive in the extreme to say that past history has not seen injustice suffered by some groups at the hands of others. Name an (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
Which is precisely why silly things like WW2 history are not emphasized in US schools. The US is a memoryless society where the opportunity-of-the-moment guides the actions. Having vast masses unconcerned with geography and history is an important (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Some do and some don't, just like everyone else. It depends on their life choices, etc. (...) That is debatable, but if they get paid less, that's something for the EEOC to look at. (...) To who? Does every job category have to have x this, y (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Ok, if the only discussion is about affirmative action, tell me, do you believe that currently blacks and women as general classes of people have the same opportunities as white males as a general class of people? If you do, then what is your (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Larry & all, This whole set of posting is off from what I am arguing about, which is affirmative action. I think discrimination, on anyone, is wrong, in the context of jobs, education, etc. If we test people, shouldn't everyone take the same tests? (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) My college education (at the first "engineering" college in the US (world?) - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) certainly focused on a well rounded education. We were required to effectively take one humanities or social sciences class every (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Heartlessly snipped, as usual (...) I guess I'm mostly with Chris on this one. Scott, you raise some valid points about flaws in the current system. But short of scrapping the whole notion of regulating how colleges admit people, which is my (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
"Scott E. Sanburn" wrote: > Why is that? Should the tests be designed to determine who has a good (...) Making it so they all go to college together segregates them? (...) Should not? What do you mean should? What if it does? Does matter, whether or (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) In that case, I think we should test ALL students at all levels on their assembler coding skills. Hey, you think using different tests for different people is not fair. Of course I'll start picking doctors who went to school in some other (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) There was a bar,(1) we went to when we went on Copper Country cruises. Among the things they had in this bar were an amazing gun collection hanging in the rafters (something like over 1000 guns including some very rare machine guns and stuff), (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Chris, (...) Because it sets up different standards, which segregate black and whites, and other groups. There is something about not discriminating because of race, sex, etc. Isn't there? Or should we? If we want a fair society, race and sex and (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) No one claims that it is a perfect predictor. Not high schools, not colleges, not even SAT. (...) SAT is a pretty good predictor. It maybe didn't predict well for you, but on average it does. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper for schools and (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Chris, (...) I still resent it, simply because others dragged my grade down. I work with people all day, every day. My performance reviews and my salary depend on it. However, in school, it is not a real situation (See above posts), and me having (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) When I was a sophomore in college I had to work with a group of five other people to write a 40ish page paper. We met over several weeks and it became more and more evident that this group simply didn't have the dynamic to make it happen. I (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Why is that? Should the tests be designed to determine who has a good chance of succeeding at college? I think so. What if research indicates that testing 'white' people with the ACT is valid and testing 'black' people with a teamwork (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Did you tease mynah birds Larry? Where did the profit come in? (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
(...) Well, this is off-topic.debate, so I wouldn't mind hearing some of this. Who is more free? How is it measured? I'm not even opposed to believing this, it just doesn't fit my current understanding of the governance of other nations. (...) It's (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
|
(...) I'm not one for using ROTFL or even LOL. But this really did make me laugh out loud. Bruce, you're great! Pot | Kettle == Black Chris (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) I'm sure there would be some sort of scandal about the politician taking money from Danish foreign interests... ...a scandal about LEGO sets being built in the White House... ...and then suddenly LEGO branches into the nuclear arms industry... (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Lindsay, (...) That's not what the article was about, or the intention of this and other tests. Affirmative action is discrimination, and should not be there period, whether whit females, pink elephants, or blue martians benefit from it. No one (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
(...) the (...) a (...) The war began in 1939. The U.S. joined at the end of 1941 (not exactly by choice, admittedly). The war continued on into 1945, so I have to disagree that the U.S. joined in towards the end. It's possible that Russia and (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Lindsay, have you ever been passed up for a job because you were a white male? "Sorry, even though you are the most qualified, and out of work, we hired this Hispanic guy with no experience and a family to support because the government will pay (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
Sorry, just a nitpick: (...) I just want to point out that the single largest group that has benefited from Affirmative Action and equal-hiring legislation is actually white females, both numerically and qualitatively. What's to fear from adding a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Umm... I think that was the point! That colleges are looking for people with leadership, teamwork skills, creativity, etc., and that traditional testing doesn't seem to show this ability in people, so they're looking in to new ways to test for (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
< cross posted to off-topic-debate and off-topic-fun, Lord knows where else it should be, maybe off-topic.scott.rant.evil or something? > Gary, (...) I would hope not! I don't like supporting communists, that's for sure! If it is, boy oh boy, I (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | RE: Legos get you into college
|
|
(...) ??>> else. (...) But they aren't just "simply admitting anybody". If you read through the article, the Lego building exercise is just a small part of the experimental admissions process. It sounds to me like they ARE trying to find people with (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Absolutely... although, in practice, when you are stuck with a poor team, it's really best to *NOT* do their work for them - at least my experience has shown this. Although it's possible that you could end up getting a lower grade for the (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
OK Scott. Somehow I knew that your conservativism would lead you to agree with Rush. I suppose if Robert Bork said LEGO was a Danish commie plot, you would agree?? Gary Istok P.S. :-) - Scott was the first AFOL that I ever met, and I like to tease (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Well that explains a lot... no wonder you're not having as much fun in later life! Seriously, a lot of the stuff I mentioned happens at colleges where the majority of the students are not commutters... (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) To underscore the importance of teamwork, I will also point out that here at IBM, evaluation of teamwork is roughly 1/3 of our annual appraisal. (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Hmm... I just went there for classes, not much else, especially those mentioned above. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator-Affiliated Engineers -> (URL) Page -> (URL) Page -> (URL) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Good points! I was pressed for time with my last post, so I didn't have the chance to explore the subject further! 8^) Dave! (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
To all, I forgot, I disagree with Rush sometimes as well, with the LEGO quote, but he wasn't addressing the LEGo item, he was talking about the affirmative action issue. Now I don't need to tell a group the bias most people have against s AFOL's, he (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
To All, OK, folks, since nobody got the ideas posting on this subject, especially from me, let's see if I can clear this up: 1) If this LEGO test to determine different skills was one of the factors to determine certain characteristics that the (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cheap American shot (Was: NEW Mindstorms set shown (with picture!))
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) <snip> I have several Turkish friends studied at US high schools during a one year period by scholarship from AFS (an international student exchange program for high school students). While all of them impressed their USian high (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
I am glad I read this whole thread before jumping in. I just want to say that I agree with Robert. -- Have fun! John The Legos you've been dreaming of... (URL) weird Lego site: (URL) Brunskill wrote in message ... (...) They (...) original (...) (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) This is changing. Businesses want people who know how to work together, cooperate, and communicate. While a high grade student probably won't have trouble getting a job, an average student from one school is more likely to be passed over for a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) The statement that initiative and leadership, etc., have nothing to do with going to college is dead wrong. It's not exhibited in college as often as it should be, and that's part of the reason for the search for better processes. People who (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
|
(...) Wow Lar your just lightin em up huh? LOL I can see Mindstorms maybe a excuse for college application.. Because thats some serious Lego shtuff (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
