 | | Re: The nature of being (was Aids, Vegetarianism etc.)
|
|
(...) Even if rights were a fiction, I'd agree with you that to avoid causing suffering is better. But, fundamentally, from a bedrock philosophical basis, we have no ultimate way to condemn evil if creatures do not objectively have a right to (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) you (...) Nope. I would chose the human option, but not because I believe that it is capable of experiencing a "Better existence." I'm familiar with it, I know it's OK, I'd go with the known over the unknown in this case (unless I had reason (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) It still has enormous theological value; the difference is that it is now read and understood in light of our fuller understanding of God as compiled in the New Testament. (...) Ok...I concede the point that it was inconsistent to include (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've been (mis) quoted
|
|
(...) I was quoted by the Richmond Times Dispatch recently about the ILOVEYOU headache, and they caught me while I was driving between meetings -- I gave lots of info, but the starting quote for me they used was "...and we just forged ahead and (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Why not do away witht the old testament then - as part of scripture, only - obviously it would retain historical value. (...) Uh...no. I misread and now feel foolish. :-) (Actually, yeah...yeah...that's the ticket, you can catch him at the (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Why not do away witht the old testament then - as part of scripture, only - obviously it would retain historical value. (...) Uh...no. I misread and now feel foolish. :-) (Actually, yeah...yeah...that's the ticket, you can catch him at the (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | I've been (mis) quoted
|
|
(URL) guess I should be flattered that other than Messman and Sims, the CEOs, and two analysts, I was the only name quoted. But I'm not. I am more annoyed that the part about how much I loved the company, and the part about how culture was an (...) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Fair enough. (...) Very honest. Very nice. :D eric (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Correction to a poorly-worded statement; I meant to say: The afterlife will be a poorer place if it lacks animal life, but I believe that animals will be present. James (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) me (...) of (...) Christopher: I haven't been offended by how you have expressed your views; in fact, I enjoy a friendly clash of arms. (...) I believe that gratuitous killing includes killing for sport, but I'm not prepared to say that (...) (24 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Agreed. (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: >>BRICKYARD WARNING <<
|
|
(...) I think Matt Martin was perfectly fine in trying a public method of communicating, and of making his fellow hobbyists aware that there might be an issue. While I might have quibbled a bit with the exact wording, we can't all be at the same (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Buyer warnings (was: Re: BRICKYARD WARNING)
|
|
(...) While I agree more than you think (it takes me an hour to make $5, and I only get a chance to work three hours a week, normally) - asking about an auction/sale/trade in a public forum like lugnet or RTL before emailing the seller can cause a (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
James Simpson wrote in message ... (...) deal (...) 100% (...) Chris (and I) have never said that the "victim" is ever 100% responsible. We have just argued that the victim does have SOME responsibility. Thankfully North Carolina doesn't see it (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: >>BRICKYARD WARNING <<
|
|
(...) While I have not used Brickyard, I certainly have used AucZilla. We don't see these "warnings" for AucZilla because Todd is very up front about the fact that it is a long time between end of auction and shipment (and we certainly see plenty of (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
James, upon reading through your response to my last longish note on this it struck me that I was kind of beating the same topic, and that I sounded antagonistic to you as a religious person. While I disagree with you, and it makes it harder to (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) It's hard for me to fault them too much, when the government (by your account) seems to have gone out of its way to make this happen. (...) He should have negotiated for a better employment contract. This scenario seems bizzarre in this land (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Agreed. (...) Yes, but life is a terribly complex and complicated thing. People must deal with their mistakes, but often it is not reasonable or right to make them 100% responsible. (...) Regarding Lego, unfortunatly, I have not made yet made (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I'm still not sure that I follow you. My answer, if I understand the question correctly, is that I believe that it is a moral evil to kill animals gratuitously. (No doubt we'll find some common ground here, but disagree as to what exactly (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Personal Responsibility (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Well, I do think that people are victims. I just also think that they bear responsibility for their situations. And I largely think that people are victims because they don't see to it that they won't be. (...) Yes. And as such, people need to (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) being (...) I mean, why does the difference between being fully animal and being merely animal have anything to do with who should be able to victimize whom? (...) I think that murder "is an unfortuante part of the reality of this world" too. (...) (24 years ago, 27-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I certainly didn't mean to suggest that I expected an imminent flame from you...I was merely acknowledging that some people following this thread will no doubt vehemently disagree with me. (...) I'm not sure that I follow your question...do (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) True, but surely you realize that this is every bit as absurd as my infant- stomping example from my earlier post. He could have been driving a tank. He could have demolished every car driving over the hill. He could have posted a sentry at (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) I agree that the speeder was responsible for the accident, but while I can point to ways that your friend's behavior could have avoided it, I can claim that he shares responsibility. (I realize that this is not an argument against what you've (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I do mostly agree with you - victims are rarely 100%, well...victims. Often some act of indiscretion or carelessness is a contributing factor, but...isn't that just the nature of life? I have a friend who just got 2 fingers ripped off in a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Part of this was my error in blurring the relationship between "fault" and "responsibility." My feeling, though, is still that while we are primarily responsible for ourselves, we are also societally responsible for others. I don't think this (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) This is an interesting point to consider. What one needs to consider is that being involved in an incident is not what creates your responsibility for avoiding the risk. It just actuallizes the risk. The responsibility for avoiding the risk is (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) No. Of course not. You are equally (that is to say fully?) responsible in each instance. In neither case is your death or survival exactly your fault, but in both cases it was your responsibility to assure your safety. And it was the piano (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Heh. Not being *purposely* obtuse, though I was trying to extend your argument to (one of) its extreme conclusions. As I mentioned in a response to one of Frank's posts, I'm not comfortable with the latitude such words as "victim" and (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
I'm rearranging here and there, not to mislead, but to address things in the order that I chose... (...) If you expect to be flamed by me, guess again. First, you are expressing eloquently a very normal belief. It's wrong (at least for me), but I'm (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) I agree completely! Unfortunately I didn't read your other post on this subject until after I'd posted my previous message, or I'd've addressed your points! (...) That's not my intent at all, and, since this is for all intents and purposes a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) OK, you caught me. You found a loophole for which I'm not willing to stick to my guns. Infants, having not attained a reasonable measure of maturity and ability, don't count. Infants do not make themselves victims. OTOH, to some extent, the (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) In the case of the infant, where were the parents? In the case of the sleeping person, where are they sleeping, why didn't they sleep in a safer place? Why didn't they get a buddy to watch them? Sure, the necessary action to completely protect (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I think that there is a real inherent difference between eating human flesh and eating other animal flesh, because there is a difference between being Fully Animal, and Merely Animal. To explain: The fact that humans possess all of the basic (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) So if I stomp on an infant or kill a sleeping person, they're still somehow responsible? Your assertion, after a fashion, amounts to "victims make themselves victims." (...) A tempting offer, but I must decline. However, by your previous (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
OK, hopefully the kiddies are kept away from l.o-t.d (...) would (...) I would apply the same standards that I do to humans...we must both be willing and interested. There is nothing wrong with inter-species copulation when both (all?) parteners are (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | personal responsibility (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) accident. (...) To say that one is "asking for it" asserts they desire that outcome. Few people desire to be raped or collided with by another automobile. On the other hand, they didn't desire the opposite enough to secure that outcome. Such (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Just to pursue this to a morbid conclusion, you would therefore have no compunctions against sexual relations with any animal you found suitably attractive, and you would likewise be as willing to donate an organ to any animal (antigen issues (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) think (...) accident. (...) I would never, under any circumstances, blame the victim of a rape - or any violent crime (it's not a violent crime if it was justified) - for the crime's committal. That's just not a viable or productive stance. On (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Chris's point, and I agree with it, is that the victim does have some responsibility. Perhaps they should have lived in a safer neighborhood. Perhaps they should have instituted a neighborhood watch. BUT, this minor responsibility doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) that's (...) Right. And that is, in fact, what I believe. But I assumed by "full cannibal" you meant that I would eat human but no other meat. That idea can't be logically derived from what I wrote. Were I to resort to eating any animals (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Do you mean they're "responsible" because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or "they're asking for it?" So if I start knifing people at random the next time I'm on the subway, it's somehow they're fault, at least (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Ok..into the fray I plunge: You have a point regarding promiscuous (spelling?) behavior, but I know someone who was raped when an intruder broke into her house. I'd hardly blame the victim in that case. I wholeheartedly disagree with your (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) But surely you don't have a problem with handling ABS?! Dave! (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Okay, but my point was that if you equate humans (of any group) with animals (also, presumably, of any group), then you would see no difference between eating people and eating "animals." Thus any meat consumption would be equivalent to eating (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) No longer, but that's another idealogical debate. :-) Chris (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Right, sorry about that. I mean that to give up ultimate responsibility for your own situation is essentially the same thing as volunteering for a kind of slavery. It's like saying that you're not capable of taking responsibility for your (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) Do you carry Credit Cards? :') (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) other (...) I don't think so. By my above statements: I could be a full cannibal - but I'd also have to think that eating other animals was OK, just not as tasty. Or I could eat anything that I wanted to - people, veggies, beef, whatever - (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) No. (...) For two reasons. First, because the harm has already been done. I also assert that we should use the gains of the Nazi doctors. You can (rightly) claim that by being a consumer of that good, I'm reinforcing that behavior as (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) cabs (...) really (...) :-) Honestly, there is something romantic about the idea, just like there is about hiking the Appalachian Trail, which is something I'm working toward (but my car will be waiting for me that the end). And maybe for a (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Say on, brother! I'm 29 and have never had a license, nor have I ever really wanted one. Regretably, circumstances will soon force me to sell out to The Man, but I've done just fine--and saved many dollars on insurance--without a car up to (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) be (...) for (...) rare (...) And that is exactly when the government finally starting funding AIDS research - when Nancy Reagan's friend Rock Hudson got AIDS. (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) a (...) Then you'll never understand the freedom of not owning a car, not having that responsibility. WHen I need a car, I rent one. But for the cost of car payments, NYC car (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: [snip] (...) You lost me there - "To claim less is to give up something so valuable that I can't even approach why you might want to." I have no idea what the comment means. (...) some (...) (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) No, the research dollars will be spent where there is the *perception* of best return. Further, it may be simply be the perception of the best short-term return. And just to add to that, it may involve more resources than a single company can (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) the (...) For research of course one can't use pure cost/benefit analysis. There has to be risk and potential analysis also. Also, some amount of basic research must continue, so that you don't purely allocate money by ranking all the possible (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Further, he must by definition be either a full vegetarian or a full cannibal, at least in principle. Dave! (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Does this mean that if you contracted a life-threatening illness, you would refuse any treatment that in large part resulted from animal testing? If not, why not? eric (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) When I first read this I just knew (incorrectly) that it would end with something like "infringing on my trade dress." Oh well. Hey Lar, do you prefer Lar or Larry? (...) Wow. I'd heard that about NYC inhabitants, but...wow. European friends (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Oh, OK, Thanks. :-) (...) Something that struck me while reading Ed's and Larry's responses to all this is that ultimately it's not a matter of need. We _DO_ take moral and financial responsibility for these things. If you sleep around, you (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) - (...) than (...) It was a coin flip. IMO, its not a yes/no, black/white question. (...) someone (...) Why is it weaseling to expect people to assume the responsibility for risks they did not know of? Did you know that Singapore (I think it (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Sorry if you were offended by the all caps Lar, didn't even realize I typed it that way (6:00a.m. pre-coffee). Give me a break, if I was going to name call, I'd do a whole lot better than that. :') (...) So in essence, you are saying that, (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Oh my gosh! Something that returned close to the original point! :-) This is not unreasonable - put the money were it will do the most good. Lots of times my wife and I decide we want a number of things and there isn't enough money to go (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) ED: My name is Lar, not LAR. By spelling it or capitalizing it in a way that I don't choose, you are trying to use a form of namecalling. You know better. people should "take (moral/financial) responsibility for things that they (...) (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) engineer of the ME generation. :') (...) Simple, its not a black and white, yes or no, question. (...) It doesn't change a thing. A very simple example - if, according to you and LAR, people should "take (moral/financial) responsibility for (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
I'm not sure why you two continue to intermittantly duke it out. Larry thinks you're an evil commie, and you think he's an evil...umm...I can't think of a good word...robber baron? (...) How so? (...) That's not really true. Obviously I agree with (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A piece everyone needs lots of... Chairs.
|
|
(...) Yeah right. Not even TLC would be dumb enough to sell something that doesn't generate profit. Molded plastic does not cost alot to produce once you have the eqipment and molds. (...) That is my point though. DVDs cost far less then VHS and (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Was that really a coin flip? I doubt it. I really truly believe (see your weaseling below) that you don't think people ever need to take responsibility for ANYTHING, even if they do know all the risks. Stating that there are unknown risks (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
(...) Mmmmm... sounds good. :-) Glad we got this settled, I guess we're off-topic for .debate 'coz we're agreeing <grin, duck and run>. HAND, -Shiri (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) economy (...) the (...) social (...) earmarking (...) other (...) (getting ready to duck and run) Another point to raise about the issue of lobbyists getting to decide how money gets spent: If one feels that (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
:^) There, now. Let's all have some milk and cookies. (and LEGO) ~M (...) not the (...) Mark's (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
(...) Same here - sorry for that. I guess my post WAS badly worded (and it's not the first time either, dang, I should watch my english) and when I read Mark's reply, I got pretty heated up... sorry Mark, and apology accepted. No hard feelings? (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Ummmm.... which lobbying groups are you talking about that do anything other than stuff money in politicians' and parties' campaign funds? I think its pretty clear that's what Larry was getting at, not talking about people (or groups) giving (...) (24 years ago, 23-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
I responded a bit strongly, though it -was- intended to be sarcasm. That's why I apologized... I didn't want any permanently hurt feelings. ~M (...) the (...) when (...) right (...) the (...) misconstrued as anger (...) didn't (...) very well on (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
(...) When I originally read Shiri's post, I originally thought she had crossed the line, but then I re-read it. Her post was fine, but could have been better worded. Mark responded with obvious sarcasm that could have been misconstrued as anger if (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: [snip] (...) that (...) Ah, Hobson's choice number one. I'll choose the LAR method - coin flip says - NO. However, your question (and your eternal preaching on this subject) makes the asumption (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
(...) I don't think she called you annoying -- she said it can get annoying when something is excessively cross-posted. In fact, posting things to the right group is a basic point of netiquette. [Followup to .off-topic.debate, as the previous post (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Digital Camera
|
|
... and just in case you didn't catch it from my previous post: I apologize for the toe-stomping. ~M (...) (24 years ago, 22-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 8880 Supercars for £55
|
|
(...) his (...) I'll buy you a diamond ring my friend if it makes you feel alright I'll get you anything my friend if it makes you feel alright 'Cause I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love (Lennon/McCartney) (...) (24 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 8880 Supercars for £55
|
|
(...) I know about as many people with lots of money who denounce capitalism, as I do people with not very much money who praise it. So maybe it's a case of circumstance influencing opinion? But how much bias this puts on each side I don't really (...) (24 years ago, 19-May-00, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
|
(...) Not undeservedly. (...) I considered asking Todd to cancel it, but decided to let it stand as a form of mortification to remind me not to do it again. Besides, now people have replied to it, etc. eric (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
|
(...) Oh...OK. Sorry about that. I guess I got my hackles up. When I've regretted sending a note, I just cancel it. I like being able to do that even if it's only been used a couple of times. Chris (feeling disarmed :-) (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
|
(...) Nope, you were right on target. I was wrong. I let a particularly frustrating day at work mix with a bunch of other stuff and went off. I pretty much regretted it shortly after sending it, but c'est la vie. eric (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) Why? What does it matter what our opinion on this is? It's only tangentially related to the day to day operation of LUGNET, so let it go. ++Lar (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) No, but I think it is a step in the right direction. (...) That is right I do not know. Neither do you. Lets wait and see what TLC's response is. (...) Well, I do care what the groups opinion is. It does not mean that Todd or Suz must accept (...) (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) I guess if that's all it takes (for you) to have them make up for years of blowing us off, you must be pretty happy. (...) Does it? Exactly who in TLC/TLG contacted you to explain the purpose behind having that there. I gotta tell you, I'm (...) (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: May-June 2000 Mania Magazine
|
|
(...) Right! :-) I've been pretty sporadic but my latest eBates check came so another tiny dollop is coming. since I switched to the web I haven't had my siggy reminding people that if you sign up for eBates and use member ID lar 1/2 of my income (...) (24 years ago, 16-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) No, it isn't. And the mob agrees. There is no way that Joe Average is going to give up his petrol and plastics and lots of electricity even if it does mean that we'll leave the Earth a burnt-out husk. (...) I think that there are specific and (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I don't know. That explanation seems plausible especially given how SEAsian river fish behave given the option of a current. You have to be a pretty hard-core cichlidiot to keep track of all the different P.zebra strains. But I raised (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Fish :-( (was:Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) feeding (...) caught, has advocates, and will be slow to ruin the whole of the lake. I guess we'll wait and see. Chris (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) They are plenty of ways to confidently estimate temperture. I'm looking at a graph I'm placing into a report right now that has sea-surface temperature estimates off the coast of California back to 130 kyears ago. As Dave said, they are other (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) in (...) Thats right. They did ignore the online LEGO community for a very long time, but now thet are not. I good example of this is the fact that the LUGNET logo is in the Mania Magazine. (...) Yes that is the progress I am talking about. (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) I haven't seen one, but I don't think anyone would have recognized as needing a trademark or I don't think it would have appeared at all. I'm pretty sure most people at Lego didn't make the connection at all or even know our existence. I think (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) for further worries... (URL) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) Answered it 4 days ago, let me know when you have a chance to answer in turn... ++Lar (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
|
(...) I understood that, I have probably been influenced/corrupted by Richard Dawkins... (...) perhaps. I guess that would fall under artificial selection. I think we may be bordering on eugenics here, which has its own set of problems. (...) true, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Warming (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
|
|
(...) Maybe we use too much energy then. We waste so much electricity. Many of the modern TV's use energy to keep the picture tube warm will it is off. I don't know how much this is but, since I began to unplug my television when I am not using it, (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Million Mom March
|
|
(...) No, I was out of range for the WAMU broadcast and the NPR near where I was doesn't carry it. You only get the national hour right? Kojo also has a local hour that is really good. I wish i could get realaudio working so I can listen to the (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This is incredible!
|
|
(...) Agreed! I was wondering, though; does the Mania magazine have anything like a general Trademark disclaimer? I've read other magazines that say something like "individual trademarks are held by their respective owners, and their mention here (...) (24 years ago, 15-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
