 | | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) The attack wasn't an attack, try looking at what I specifically said about Jude's site and tell me how you were able to tell whether I was being sarcastically funny or being rude. The fact of the matter is that you couldn't. There was no way (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) This? (URL) What about it? (...) Pardon me for my obtuseness, but I see no line of reasoning given behind your attack -- all I see is a page of kvetching. (...) Did you enjoy making it up? (...) More sharply than you may think. --Todd (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sad state of affairs
|
|
(...) People in the Lego community are responsible for my current views. I first had contact with the Lego Community on RTL, I had some suggestions and ideas about a new website and was looking to see if anyone would be willing to help me. I got ass (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) Well let's see who told me to grow up, you were encouraging people to not visit my site, you accused me of being egotistical, ranting, being rude, being insulting, am I missing anything Mark? As for what I said to Jude, it's bullshit. Even if (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Sad state of affairs
|
|
It's a sad day when a person posts a teaser about his site and is immediately trashed for it. It's even sadder when the trasher is trashed by the community in return. I've refrained from adding to the flame war, but it is apparent that everyone (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) Please be specific. What comments of mine were worse than you telling Jude his page "looks like it is going to suck" I have NEVER and will NEVER tell anyone that their creations "suck." All I have done in regards to you is recommend that you (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) That's not what I did. I needed proof to make a point, I could have simply stated my feeling about the Lego Community, but then I wouldn't have expected anyone to believe me if I had no proof. Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not proud of (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) And so that justified having the entire group attack me, of course, you see I already know all about how the Lego community works. RTL introduced me to the way most of you think some three years ago. (...) Consider it a payback for a really (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) the (...) Let me type this again to really get the meaning of it. "My point is that there are people in the Lego community who although put on a smiling face are willing to try to completely destroy a person for the sheer satisfaction of (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Heck, I wasn't especially impressed by the little teaser...but then again, it's getting harder and harder to impress me with all the great stuff that people have built to compare to. It was the rude and un-called-for way in which you stated (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) You (...) all. I don't see your point, in fact you are belittled even more in my mind now. And yes, I even hit REFRESH. Do us all a favor, pull you lip over your head, and swallow. -Tim (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Pot, kettle, black. (URL)If you have issue with the way (...) POT, KETTLE, BLACK! (URL)Believing we're right (...) So if I disrespect something of yours you will blindly and automatically disrepect me in ways that are 10 times as bad? (...) (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) What an immature thing to do, seriously. If you have issue with the way people think, post just that - don't make up something that's going to piss people off. If you have issue with specific people, take it to them in person. We weren't out (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) And do they justify your comments, which were far worse than anything I posted here? -Matthew (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) None of what I said was real, I don't actually think Jude's page was bad, frankly I don't have an opinion of it either way. I used it to prove a point though. My point is that there are people in the Lego community who although put on a (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) I made a point too. Check out the data section of my site now, make sure you hit refresh. Then you'll see why I attacked someone for no apparent reason. If you want to know the truth, that chat session, it never even happened, I completely (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) wasn't (...) was (...) things (...) that (...) alcoholic. (...) parents (...) he (...) Mine are both ;( (...) in (...) I know what you mean, it nearly destroyed mine. Last summer I could not even go outside (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) I just noticed that - and I do recall seeing him posting for at least a few weeks here. He's been very respectful up until now, even on things that he has attacked the most today. Strange. ...perhaps he didn't fill a perscription or something (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) for (...) Isn't this effective: "Although we hope that everyone can play well together, we must reserve the right to allow or to refuse access to this site to anyone, for any reason, with or without prior (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
(...) I should say one thing: My comment about perfectionism and alcoholism wasn't meant as a jab or stab -- on the contrary, I meant it as a very serious question (not that I expect a response) and empathize with anyone suffering from either or (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) into (...) <insert voice of moderation> Well, Matthew Moulton has been, IMO and in the apparant majority of opinions, a jerk today. *BUT* If you search back, you'll notice that he's been an infrequent, generally reasonable poster for upwards (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
(...) Me either. I haven't gotten really mad in a long time and I've somewhat forgotten how to act professionally while mad. I guess I need more practice! (...) Well, technically, yes, of course...but I don't see any clear-cut grounds for that, do (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... *snipped the topic* (...) issues. (...) considered (...) This is not the response I would have expected from you Todd. Isn't it easier to deny him to post, rather than upsetting people that maybe suffer from the (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) You're right -- it wasn't a good idea, and I didn't add anything constructive in that post, and worst of all it didn't come out how I meant it. I was trying to make a point about blowharding and not about ability or results. --Todd (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) Todd's just as much a part of this community as anyone else here, and I don't think anything should limit him from speaking his mind, aside from his own discresion of course. I think he's also looking out for the community by standing up to (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: blowharding (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) community's (...) Todd, I don't think this is a good idea. You, of all people, don't need to get into a shooting match about who has done what for the community. I myself think highly of you and, through what I've seen on Lugnet, you are (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Begone Vile Troll (Re: No promises when I'll be done...)
|
|
(...) Matthew, please move your drivel to .off-topic.debate or somewhere else off of LUGNET. You're adding no value to the .space group -- in fact, by all these off-topic posts, you're detracting value from it. (...) I hope you leave. --Todd (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | memoriam (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) Matthew, when will you realize that the more you try to discourage people from this, the more it will have the opposite effect? I bet that makes you very frustrated. (...) A one-dimensional, warped perception of reality. (...) Humans need (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Begone Vile Troll (Re: No promises when I'll be done...)
|
|
(...) (tone down your sarcasm meter - it might go off) AH, I see. So you're only a jerk other places! Here, you're the essence of good-natured fun. Sorry, bub. You seem to have some capacity for critical thought (albiet used very childishly - just (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | harsh criticism vs. noise (was: Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...)
|
|
(...) I generally share that belief. However, it seems to me that you come here to make not criticism but noise. Harsh criticism only has a chance of positive results when those doing the criticizing are respected and well articulated. --Todd (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
(...) Tin God, no. Maybe a tin spitoon. --Todd (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: No promises when I'll be done, but...
|
|
(...) I used to be a fan of Matthew's weapons designs, but I'm afraid that I too am going to suffer, going forward, from limited interest in things Matthew says and creates. It's my own fault for not being able to ignore his rotten attitude, but I (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | why the bad attitude?
|
|
(...) Words from someone who has been eating too much humble pie? (cough) (...) I must be missing something -- all I saw that Jude said in his announcement was, "I left you a little teaser for now." I don't see how that is tantamount to making (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego's old, blessed address
|
|
(...) Thats what i meant, sorry (...) True (...) On TV in the UK i have seen it in books as well in the College Libery (24 years ago, 14-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Is this a US only usage? In Australia AFAIK "Lego" is "Lego", a collective noun for the toy system, and the bricks are "Lego bricks". Maybe it's because we're used to sheep and wheat, or maybe we're just smarter ;^)(hey, this is o- t-d!). (...) (24 years ago, 14-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Aspirin is still a trademark here (Canada) but not in the UK. It varies from country to country. Kevin ---...--- Personal Lego Web page: (URL) Park: Limited edition kit (URL) Kits & Custom Lego models: (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Exactly. That was the initial motivation of my post. (...) Heh! You're right--even insofar as AFOLs already face a certain stigma, unfounded though it may be, the sort of pedantry we're describing stands out as somehow more extreme. Dave! (24 years ago, 14-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) but (...) brick (...) Good general example, but bad specifics, both of these product names are still protected trademarks. Contrast cola and aspirin, lost by The Coca Cola Company, Inc. and Bayer Farben AG respectively, I believe. ++Lar (24 years ago, 14-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
You also have to consider that most people just don't care. If you go around correcting people, they're going to roll their eyes and give you that look reserved for Trekkie conventions and people like me who stood out in line all night for Star Wars (...) (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) I'm not disputing that. In fact, one of the first points in my original post was a recognition of the possibility of product dilution. Nor am I asserting "Legos" as the correct form; I'm simply saying that, if a person identifies a single (...) (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) This has nothing to due with the English language's rules for pluralization. It's a legal issue of trademark dilution. By referring to their products as LEGO bricks, LEGO building toys, etc., the Lego Company is trying to avoid having their (...) (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Fair enough, but this *is* a LEGO-based discussion group, and the demographic here might reasonably be expected to make a more thoughtful effort to adhere to the "correct" form. In my experience, though, this simply doesn't pan-out to the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Amen, Aaron (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) I truly didn't mean to single you out, but I've been thinking about "Legos" lately, and your post just seemed like a well-timed segue for me! I'm sorry if I seemed to be coming down on you... Dave! (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) Agreed, if they want us older folks to buy more, they have to target us more, and also don't jack the price on us just because we are older(we CAN do the math). (...) Actually I *DO* use LEGO as both a singular and plural, have for a while (...) (24 years ago, 13-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Accesseries for Knight's Kingdom
|
|
(...) You are right in that I made a mistake. I should have refered to them as LEGO products instead of Legos. However, I presented my posting as a casual musing over the direction I would like the Castle theme to progress, and my slip was an honest (...) (24 years ago, 12-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Computer Problems
|
|
(...) Live a long and happy life knowing that someone out there loves you? Chris (24 years ago, 11-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Computer Problems
|
|
(...) What exactly happens? You need to give some more information before anyone can really help you with something like that. FUT set to .geek (24 years ago, 11-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Computer Problems
|
|
What do you do when after you re-format your computer, it WILL NOT re-install windows? (24 years ago, 11-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Birthday in Solitary Confinement
|
|
(...) Well, I'm not 100% sure what opinion you're asking for from me. My basic stance hasn't changed of course, and everyone who reads here much already knows it, I don't hold much with regulation of behaviours or of intent, only of ensuring (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Flaming
|
|
AMEN. When structured and civilized debate occurs it is a beautiful thing. And its through these debates that we are able to advance the civility and tolerance of other points of view within our community. One of the first things seen on the lugnet (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Birthday in Solitary Confinement
|
|
(...) Or an Old part of New Labour? :) I picked up my Evening Standard today, with much blushing about Widdecombe's backtracking and various Tory MPs coming out about having smoked marijuana in their younger years. I'd be surprised if Labour says (...) (24 years ago, 9-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Flaming
|
|
Nicely said. By the way, this type of tension is fairly common for webbased discussion groups like bulletin boards and listservs. I recently was bombarded with about 200 emails from a listserv for professionals that mainly focused on somebody not (...) (24 years ago, 9-Oct-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Birthday in Solitary Confinement
|
|
From the LP newsletter I get emailed to me, excerpted to remove the requests for donations to run ads and letters to Todd to show solidarity: <begin cite> <snip> Today, October 7 is Todd McCormick's birthday. He will spend his 30th birthday in a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Flaming
|
|
(...) Very well said. I completely agree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they don't have to reveal them to the whole of the Lugnet community. Mike (24 years ago, 8-Oct-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) No it's not. It's copyright violation. (24 years ago, 8-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Flaming
|
|
Hi everyone, It has been a week or so since someone has left as a result of being burned by individuals here on LUGNET. I am not about to point fingers but I just wanna say we are a community of individuals who are coming together by way of common (...) (24 years ago, 7-Oct-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate) !!
|
| |
| | Re: We have too many cats in our house already
|
|
Took a few tries but here is what I got back (heavily excerpted, the person responding wasn't really having a good day and I wasn't helping matters much for him with my queries) (...) I have no intention of destroying any of my mice (!!) but I am (...) (24 years ago, 6-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Cosmic Toys now open on BrickBay
|
|
(...) Naw, that wasn't "people"... just me. :^) (...) Whoo, lookit all them space references. (...) Yay! ~M (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cosmic Toys now open on BrickBay
|
|
(...) Geez... I go away for one day to seek and buy up Legos and people get nitpickey about my store name :) For the record... Once upon a time (in a galaxy far far away, yada yada yada), someone I worked for took to calling me 'cosmic ray'. The (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cosmic Toys now open on BrickBay
|
|
(...) Like your post wasn't condescending... (...) Honestly, when was the last time you heard anyone describe something as "Cosmic" when they didn't mean "of/coming from space?" ~Mark (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cosmic Toys now open on BrickBay
|
|
(...) Wow. I won't need anyone to be condescending to me for the rest of the month. My post had 2 smileys, do they cancel eachother out? Just wanted to say that 'cosmic' may not mean 'space'. You've helped me to see that I could have done a better (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) Aya, found it... Here's what I was thinking of: (URL) and I don't know how to interpret this code, and I don't know if it even applies in any kind of LEGO way, but there ya have it. --Todd [followups to .publish] (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) I don't think that TLC legal has stated that they know about his site, but I think people have mentioned being pointed to the site as a source for old instructions no longer available from Consumer Affairs. I'd also find it hard to believe (...) (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) They've been well aware of it for at least 26 months. I don't think they would suddenly ask that it be shut down, unless they began offering something equivalent themselves. --Todd [followups to .publish] (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) Wouldn't surprise me. Of course, unless there is regulation which specifically states that not enforcing one's copyright would not at all affect the ability to recover damages, the longer one leaves a violator alone, the less likely you will (...) (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) Has TLC stated that they know about Kevin's site? It's very possible that this was discussed previously and I simply missed it. If they haven't made such a statement, though, how would Kevin go about demonstrating that TLC *did* know about his (...) (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) IANAL, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that there was some kind of time span of 3 years that figured in somewhere, something to the effect that if someone _knew_ you were violating their copyright for three years and didn't do (...) (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Look what I found in the comics section!
|
|
(...) Yes. Not doing so is stealing. (...) Nope. All that does is identify who the copyright owner is. These days, such a notice is not required to assert copyright ownership. (...) Well, I think people may have tried to ask. They are being put on (...) (24 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | We have too many cats in our house already
|
|
(...) Here's what I said, we shall see what I get back: begin quote: Your ULA on your site says that you have loaned me the hardware that Forbes sent me. I've decided that if I cannot use that hardware in whatever manner I see fit, I may not want (...) (24 years ago, 29-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CueCat calls home when you scan barcodes?
|
|
(...) Whoops! Quoting from: (URL) :CueCat reader is only on loan to you from Digital:Convergence and may be recalled at any time. Without limiting the foregoing, your possession or control of the :CueCat reader does not transfer any right, title or (...) (24 years ago, 29-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: CueCat calls home when you scan barcodes?
|
|
(...) Thanks for the pointer. I'm not going to be using the software sent to me, and if I can't legally use them for anything else, may end up tossing them. That may be an overreaction, I suppose. Companies are certainly able to collect data on me (...) (24 years ago, 29-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) You're absolutely spot on. I thought what the banks lobbied to do to the NCUA was the highest degree of larceny and was relieved when it failed. Believe it or not most of my day to day non investment money is in Credit Unions, I am a big fan (...) (24 years ago, 29-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
"Christopher Weeks" <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:G1GpwM.9qL@lugnet.com... (...) Here's a good one: (URL) sets and parts for sale or trade: (URL) (24 years ago, 29-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...)
|
|
(...) True - I actually went to .fun first, but didn't think a joke fit into Community, Gaming, Party, Crafts, or Holiday, and didn't realize that I could post directly to .fun, because when I had tried to post directly to (IIRC) .marketplace, it (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) with (...) allowing (...) I'm not surprised you take that tack, and I agree although from a different POV. Does anyone remember FSLIC? When the Savings and Loan mess broke, the insuring agency (FSLIC) was merged with FDIC to keep the insurance (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) that (...) Is this debate flamebait? Or sarcasm The FDIC needs to do risk based underwriting instead of charging all banks the same rates. Online banks with lax security should have to pay higher premiums. FUT .debate if you must (seems (...) (24 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Distribution List Detonation
|
|
This thread certainly has exploded over the last few days and I have made an effort to read every post. Some have deeply infuriated me [1]; some provided for valuable new understanding; and overall it has been a valuable discussion. I've resisted (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thanks but no thanks
|
|
(...) Just nitpicking here, not sure of the overall relevance, but... Bad analogy. (having tried and failed to move cows and having actually fixed fences). It's a LOT easier to fix a fence that doesn't want to be fixed than to move a cow that (...) (24 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) The protocol for handling some LEGO spam from Andreas shouldn't be. It seems a world of difference (even if it's one of degree instead of kind) from spambots latching on to you and offering nudigifs incesantly. Chris (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thanks but no thanks
|
|
(...) I always try to stay neutral in these mud slings, but I have to agree with Paul. No one should get you mad enough to quit any part of LUGNET. We all disagree at times, we just shouldn't take it personnally. And yet we always do take it (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) He had the opportunity to do that while I was doing business with him. And hey, it'd have been the polite thing to do. (...) You are one mean hombre. While I am genuinely angry with Andreas' actions, I would never compare him to Publisher's (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | CueCat calls home when you scan barcodes?
|
|
CueCat users might want to check out this article: (URL) Lego Web page: (URL) Park: Limited edition kit (URL) Kits & Custom Lego models: (URL) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) Don't be a hypocrite. Using this logic, you have stole my valuable time. In all honesty, I would rather delete an email than have to wade through junk like this original post in the market newsgroup. The funny thing is, the most you can (...) (24 years ago, 26-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) I believe that currently their use is in Martha Stewart's TV show (and other productions). However, they were catchphrases in a popular spoof history book when I was a kid called "1066 and all that" along with verdicts on various rulers (eg (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) agreed (...) Actually, I was serious. I wasn't challenging your use, just asking. (...) thinking (...) Sorry. I was trying to be funny and serious at the same time. It's a tightwire act and maybe I just fell to my death. (...) Well, I did a (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) Sorry, my bad. How about Unsolicited Commercial E-mail? (...) "Raving nutcake". That's probably close -- I did become a bit unhinged when he intruded his business into my affairs. But I'd draw the line after "raving" but before "nutcake", and (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sale announcements (Was Beware more SPAM...)
|
|
(...) I'm just curious on this how people feel about things like magazine renewal notices. In theory, they are in the same category if anything other than a notice on the magazine wrapper. My personal feeling is that I do want to receive renewal (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) Sure. But not as laws. Each bank-customer pair can have whatever rules they agree too. And, I suppose, each ATM-customer pair can also layer on whatever rules they both care to agree to. IMO, the best thing about Libertopia is that the freedom (...) (24 years ago, 25-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...)
|
|
(...) Nonsense, although that's clearly overstating the point being made by the previous poster. I give you In Congress, July 4, 1776. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that (...) (24 years ago, 24-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
(...) Sure, and then when someone clicks "next" or "previous" for that Ring ID, the Yahoo! server sees that the corresponding JS code for that Ring ID and Site ID hasn't been fetched recently by that IP address, and it gacks (by design) and it sends (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
Right, but once Yahoo has spit out that content, you save it, and modify it any way you want to. (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home ***(URL) Bay Area DSMs (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Transclusion via JavaScript (was: Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net)
|
|
(...) Interesting from an HTML/geek point of view! So, in the real shebang, they give something akin to <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript" SRC="(URL) blah blah </SCRIPT> and then they, what, look at the siteid within the ringid and spit out either the (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
(...) Its all javascript, generated from the Yahoo server. All they give you is a small tag for javascript, then Yahoo spits out that content for you. Eg. if you aren't a member of the ring (not approved yet), all that will show up will be the top (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
I'm confused - what do you mean you can't customize it? The links are all standard links, just rewrite the tables, and make it look any way you want. Or are you saying that that would violate their TOS or something? (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...)
|
|
(...) And we do have watchdog organizations, which are often more effective than the government (though sometimes they are wrong) just because they answer only to the consumer (or at least far more so than the government which also answers to big (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
(...) Here's a sample page: (URL) not as bad as I originally feared - but the limited logo size and standardized navbar is a definite drawback to the new system. I'm SHOCKED that Yahoo wasn't mentioned ANYWHERE on the code. I'm still beefing (though (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Resolved: Yahoo is good for the 'net (was Re: Lego Maniac's Webring and Yahoo
|
|
[Added .publish to ng list; IMHO, this is actually more on-topic to .publish than it is to .off-topic.debate...] (...) Wow, wait, so lemme see if I can get this straight -- ? -- under the new Yahoo! Webring system, your ring logo has to be no bigger (...) (24 years ago, 23-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.publish)
|
