 | | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
I'm curious about this 'not my kids, not my responsibility' attitude a couple people have expressed. Is this a stance only taken when it comes to children? If I follow this reasoning I could say that there are no adults I am specifically responsible (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Reality == fiction?
|
|
OK, now we get to the heart of the matter that I was trying to put my finger on when I started this... but before I comment on Josh's post let me say this... Todd kind of backpedaled from his statement that he hates JarJar. I don't think he should (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The artist hasn't the courage of his convictions? (was Re: The Censors have won.
|
|
(...) Fair enough. If you think that my opinion matters to others, that is. I'm not sure that my likes and dislikes ought to be taken into account to the point of restricting the actions of others. ++Lar (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) OK, this is one of those instances where things get muddled over time and multiple quotes. I never said Lar or anyone else called for the comic to be changed or removed. I did use the "C" word in my post this morning, mainly because I was (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) difference. In Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads, the reader is likely to emphasize with the captain. In the Halloween story, the reader is more likely to emphasize with the kids. Of course, on top of that, the violence is subtle, and also is not (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) Mark, please show us ONE place where any of us has asked for the comic to be changed or removed. All Larry has said is that he is uncomfortable with his children reading the comic, and will take action to prevent them from seeing it. He also (...) (24 years ago, 5-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My Official Viewpoint
|
|
OK, I think it's time to restate and clarify a few things before this gets totally out of hand. To Lar) First of all, Lar, I apologize if anything I said seemed like an insult of any kind. It was not my intention, and I don't hate you or anything. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
Preface: Chris, I don't know you, and so I have no realistic means of evaluating you, your personality, your values, etc. But you've got some SERIOUSLY flawed arguments here. (...) One certainly might assume this, if one had difficulty (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I'm just gonna snip out all the other stuff. I'm tired of rehashing it. <snip> (...) Yes. (...) No, what I resent are efforts to change *my* world to make it safe for *your* kids. Having kids is *your* choice, not mine. therefore, it becomes (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Censors have won.
|
|
(...) I am not suprised at the reaction but I am sorry it has been changed. I might put a few words into the thread as I have spent a bit of time on this very issue. When I started making my STAC things I was very careful about what I was saying (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thanks a lot Pieniazek! (was Re: Something not right...)
|
|
I'm sounding off my opinion just as Larry has the right to do. Your point by point critisism is as bad as everything you're accusing me of. (...) There's nothing about censorship in my response. When Larry put his message up I passed it off as an (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) Here's an example (remember this one?) in which the creator (IMO) found a far more effective way to express his feelings about Jar Jar. I thought this was hilarious and the best use for Jar Jar heads I've ever seen. (URL) in the third frame. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I should probably clarify that, so that it doesn't get mistaken for saying something it's not. What I mean when I say "I hate Jar-Jar" or "I hate Timmy" or "I hate Barney the Dinosaur" or "I hate Microsoft" is: "I'd like to see as little as (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) Ya, "humour-impaired" isn't an accurate phrase to use in this context -- it's too loaded. See last paragraph here: (URL) I'll even admit that when I read the story, I laughed at Jar-Jar's beating (...) But it's not Jar-Jar being beaten -- (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) What I mean by this is that I believe the following is true: If you take a random cross-section of the population and ask them to rate on a scale of 0 to 10 how strongly they feel they were a "Star Wars fan" in 1998 (prior to the release of (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) I'm a little disapointed in that coment. I don't think it's being humor impaired to question the value of something which shows intolerance. I'll even admit that when I read the story, I laughed at Jar-Jar's beating (though not nearly so much (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The artist hasn't the courage of his convictions? (was Re: The Censors have won.
|
|
(...) I guess I would sort of agree with Todd, in that when one makes a public statement about how they dislike something, that they hope it will have a an effect. However, this does NOT consitute censorship. To me, this is the way change should be (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
With the Ewoks, Leia was their advocate--she begged you to consider their good qualities. Qui-gon Jinn never had a connection with the little Gungan twerp. Plus, you could negotiate with an Ewok and they were rather intelligent. There is nothing (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
I'll agree there. I'd much rather have Elmo on than Barney. Heck, 3 years ago I'd be in 100% agreement with you. It's funny that me, my wife and my sister-in-law and her husband as well as many more of our DINK friends were all anti-Barney and swore (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) My take on it is this: When SW fans rip on Jar-Jar, it's their way of letting off steam -- venting -- and really, that's about all there is to it (to the motivation behind it). Hardcore SW fans (no, I haven't done a scientific survey) feel (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
Sorry should have been clipped to ot.debate "Rob Doucette" <rob.doucette@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:G3Ios1.G43@lugnet.com... (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
"Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G3IM77.9yF@lugnet.com... (...) explain (...) The Sesame Street magazine had an article on the child psych design of Elmo's world. Each aspect of the 15 minute segment has a purpose. Adult (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) JJ is a portrayal of a fictional sentient being. One might assume from your statements of vilification that you would feel that way about real people who act like JJ. Now, I'm sure (or hope) you'll say that you don't support that people who (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The artist hasn't the courage of his convictions? (was Re: The Censors have won.
|
|
(...) 1/2 disagree. By stating publicly that you didn't like it and weren't going to let your kids look at it, you *are* asking for change. (Not a change in what has already occurred, but a change in the future.) Otherwise, why bother to say (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) How could you tell? ;-) (...) Back in the mid-90's when Barney-bashing was at its height, I remember hearing about a lot of adults *with* small children who were going crazy from all the Barneymania (uh, the adults, that is...not the kids :-). (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Thanks a lot Pieniazek! (was Re: Something not right...)
|
|
(...) The Sistine Chapel is a great piece of work. Dan's comic was a cute piece of work. (...) Are you disputing that Dan should have the right to alter his work? Or are you disputing that Larry should have the right to his opinion? (...) Us who? In (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The artist hasn't the courage of his convictions? (was Re: The Censors have won.
|
|
(...) My goodness that *does* miss the point. I don't know whether anyone else who was engaged in honest dialog about whether violence against fantasy characters was useful/appropriate/good fun or not was asking for change, but *I* never asked for (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
Words obviously spoken by a man without small kids. Barney (and Elmo) is an hour of uninterrupted time in which you can actually get something done. With Elmo or Barney gracing the screen I can supervise with one eye and be doing something else. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Distaste for Jar-Jar (was: The Censors have won.)
|
|
(...) Maybe, rather than taking the "offensive" stuff out altogether, something like this could accompany future comic strips right at the beginning, as part of a disclaimer explaining that it is SATIRE against the offensive marketing engine that (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Thanks a lot Pieniazek! (was Re: Something not right...)
|
|
Now Dan Jassim has chosen to omit the scenes from a great piece of work because you and your cohorts found it offensive. Its great that conservatives like you can suck the fun out everything for us. Do me a favor and avoid www.3-stooges.com lest you (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I haven't called for ANY sentient beings to be ground up, thanks. JarJar isn't a sentient being. He's not subject to evolution. He's a cgi construct created to sell toys and toothbrushes and bedsheets. He's fictional. Not Real. Make Believe. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
Deliberately quoted out of context... (...) That's an intolerant viewpoint. I'm sorry, but it is. JarJar is lame, he's stupid, he's annoying, I'd choose not to associate with him, but I'm not calling for anyone to be ground up for pig food. Even in (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) Well,I think JarJar should be ground up for pig food. Does that make him a minority? I didn't hate any of the other Gungans, so I don't think so. (...) The biggest problem I have with the PC movement is that it has gotten so extreme. I'm (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Demented Jar-Jar humour (was: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?)
|
|
(...) Lar-Lar, are you saying it's time to put a lid lid on all this Jar-Jar humour? ;-) --Todd (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) Hrmmm - I think I may actually have several 6444's in my Lego room. Probably take me a few more months worth of working my way through the piles of unopened sets to part out and sell before I can find them, but I know I picked up several on (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) rights (...) Are you saying that it being "PC" to suggest that it's wrong for people to beat up on minorities just because they're minorities? There's a wide difference between the extreme "PC" view that one should always heap everyone with (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) You need a new bank then. Do they charge you $42 to pay bills also? Frank (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I didn't lump you unequivocally into any camp. Nor did I charge you with anything. (...) IMO, this sounds an awful lot like a PC sentiment. "JarJar is a minority, so let's all be ultra-nice to him" You wrote: (...) After which, I suggested (...) (24 years ago, 4-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I *was* hanging back a bit. There are some very very subtle issues here. Like I said in my original post, I couldn't put my finger on what was bothering me exactly. And Damraska summed it up nicely, it's satire of a meme, not a call for (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) <snip> I really appreciate your view, Steve. I resent the tendency to idiot-proof the world. I'm an adult, and I can judge for myself what is or is not offensive. I don't need my world pre-packaged in a child safe wrapper. ~Mark (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
I agree with Lar that this is an excellent analysis, but it is a mature and thoughtful point of view. This still leaves open the question of what ages such material may be appropriate to. What youngsters could follow this reasoning much less figure (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
Larry, I agree with you on this one. I think the "story" could use a little less random violence. Yes, we all dislike Jar-Jar, and if that's so, why bother to include this annoying character in the fantasy worlds we create? Not only that, but the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) Yer a stick in the mud. (...) Yes, it's quite funny. Personally, I find it funny because it's a poke in the eye of the Lucasfilm marketing behemoth that spawned JarJar. I can't speak for Dan, but I put the JarJar violence into my story (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) 2x2x5 girders came in 1682 in red, in 6444 in black, and in 3313 in grey. Ldraw #s are 2579 and 2580 (both are needed) (...) There IS a difference, though - a paper check deposited cannot be instantly verified. A wire or EFT withdrawal, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
Snipped back a bit. (...) Excellent analysis, Damraska... ++Lar (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I always thought of the Jar-Jar humour as wry jabs at the modern George Lucas marketing machine, and Timmy humour as wry jabs at Time Cruisers, etc. BTW, have you seen the Timmy vs. Jar-Jar Java videogame? --Todd (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
In one context, Jar Jar is a member of a fantasy world who happens to talk silly and act like an idiot (in my opinion--these are subjective statements). Within the framework of that reality, he does not deserve pain and suffering heaped upon him for (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) I think this might be more of a comment on society than it looks at first glance. Case in point: Roadrunner, Three Stooges, Bugs Bunny, etc. all work pretty much the same way. A character gets beaten, squashed, blown up, etc. for our (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) That's a good point. Maybe we should put forth a comic strip wherein Lucas is made to pay for Jar Jar's stupidity--after all, George *did* choose to make Jar Jar goofy. Dave! FUT off-topic.fun (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) May the group please pardon a "Me too" post, but I have to heartily agrew with you Larry, and I believe that it was something that needed to be said. The comic stip was absolutely fantastic - beautifully done, but the Jar Jar incident was (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G3G5H4.4yy@lugnet.com... (...) "Stick in the mud"? Have to learn more english ;-) (...) that. I also laughted a lot, until i reached to the pictures of brutal violence. It was to (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Something not right about Captain Ahnee and the Dipwads?
|
|
(...) Call me a stick in the mud, and this may be an unpopular viewpoint. I looked at this, and I looked at the earlier "Mark goes for donuts". I laughed a lot, both times. (I laughed at the E! jarjar mockumentary too.) LOTS of talent went into (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) No, but if you can give me an ldraw part number and sets that contain it I'll keep an eye out for them. :) (...) Not really any different, though, than what your bank does with putting a hold on deposits, right? I agree, it is a pain, but a (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) ... (...) Why are you WIRING them money? If you verify a checking account with them, they will make a draft withdrawal from your checking account (and I have yet to hear of a bank charging for that). They also place a hold on your credit card (...) (24 years ago, 3-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Can we all agree to do eCheck payments with Paypal and not CC?
|
|
(...) More like Lar wants to go home and play with his Lego :) James (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: small black cat
|
|
(...) Especially if you consider with a view toward "what if this happened in real life?". Chopping off someone's head is OK in a movie, but would (hopefully) get you tossed in prison for a very long time in real life. Graphic sex is verboten in (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are you paying attention, LEGO?
|
|
(...) Heh! That's a good point about free time. Every week there are reports about the rising trend of mandatory overtime on Dateline, 20/20, and the like. I'll come clean as well--I haven't read Toffler in a few years either. I remember, though, (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: small black cat
|
|
(...) It's on pay cable, and only fairly late at nite (9 PM on) as it is considered quite risque. US attitudes can be summarized as "prudish", we have a big profanity, and especially nudity, hangup. OTOH, violence seems to be OK. Seems a bit messed (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: small black cat
|
|
(...) Some Australian films are having problems with classification in the US, mostly to do with language. 'The Dish' is one example, which only uses a four letter word once (apparently). Thanks to our Tasmanian senator, even Triple-J (publicly (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: small black cat
|
|
(...) Okay, I don't have/want a cat so it wasn't until Pete started making his warm and toasty references that I figured out that the censored word in Kevin's post was "Heat", making the phrase in question, "Cat in Heat". At least that makes more (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are you paying attention, LEGO?
|
|
Hi Dave, I remember reading an article about Dell in the 80s, and it was that reporter that cited Toffler as the visionary on customization of mass production. I don't recall Toffler even mentioning computers. And the spoon example is telling--the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are you paying attention, LEGO?
|
|
(...) Toffler's example was a little different from the Dell incarnation, though, and not just in the nature of the product. The manufacturing of spoons piece-by-piece to be different from one's neighbors entails a manipulation of each item in (...) (24 years ago, 1-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
I'm one of the more prolific hackers (at least, I think I am...) First off...on tubing...it is SUPPOSED to be cut (I use 1/8" Vinal tubing, for longer runs...much cheaper than the Lego tubing) Painting-some very specific parts. I did the wheel rims (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
I tend to lean towards the "modifying is bad, mmmmkay?" camp, though I have done some in the past. I've used paper to reinforce the joints of a mech, and I've removed the cross from a 24 tooth gear on one of my technic projects, but those were both (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
I, for one, am an extreme purist, in that I never modify, paint, carve, decorate, or do anything else to my pieces. I don't even like to glue the pieces together (an only do so when shipping large models to clients, where the glue is necessary for (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) I'm against it, but to fulfill the request Reasons For a Flame Group 1) Could be the "Soup of the Day" in terms of hot topics 2) You could really hurt someone if you wanted to 3) Good place to send the undesireables Reasons Against a Flame (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
(...) No, I knew it was you, I just didn't want to make it a personal thing, so I didn't see the need to mention you by name. (...) No, what it does is make a new, non-LEGO created piece. Yes, this part seems as though it's going to be available in (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) That was me. Didja forget? ;^) (...) No, what it does in this particular instance is, it makes a single use SPUD, the thrower arm, useful in a multitude of ways because it can now interface with anything that accepts a technic (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
(...) I'm with you on this. Except for string, and for DCC if and when it becomes available, oh, and couplers. I do cut tubing, but then the instructions sometimes tell you to. (...) Yep. Except what about defacing a common piece to make a rare one (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
Well, Dave, now you've gone and opened up a big bag o' worms. :D I think you'll find that everyone's level of "purity" is a different one. Personally, I think that purposely changing a LEGO piece in any way is just not right. I guess that puts me on (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different: (wasRe: By the way... I got my shirt.
|
|
This is the very thing I'm talking about. Thanks for posting that, Lar. ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Modifications okay?
|
|
Ok, well, here's my $.02: I only mod bricks if the end result makes them *more* functional. F'r instance: I cut off one o' them ThrowBot thower-arms so I ended up with a ball joint with an axle on it... I could then use it for other things. LEGO has (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | And now for something completely different: (wasRe: By the way... I got my shirt.
|
|
OK, here's something I ran across with the perspective that companies getting "too" tight with trade marks and trade dress control are doing themselves a disservice.... maybe I'm wrong on this (IANAL) and TLC hands are *not* tied or at least are (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) I hate to say it, but that's YOUR shortcoming (ignoring whether what the other person said was proof a shortcoming or not). I also take things personally....for a while. Usually a very short while. Rarely a very long time. I don't think (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) Ditto - I think I've used the web interface to post ONCE (while I was in a class with only web access). I don't find any of the "whizbang" web news interface stuff very useful, considering I almost never see it. -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
I'll support this - generally, when someone posts about their new MOCs, I don't immediately go to the site. I wait for comments from others, and if it sounds interesting, THEN I go. Especially since people don't post very many details about their (...) (24 years ago, 30-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and the Palestinians
|
|
(...) _can_ harass? the police here, in the US, _can_ harass anyone walking down the street. Doesn't mean they do, or that it's allowed, right? (...) the story does imply that, without any sort of reasoning. "... I cannot think he was acting without (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: By the way... I got my shirt.
|
|
(...) Yeah, it's too bad they are concerned about stopping anyone who would assist them in becoming the most recognizable name in children's toys by the year 2005. Oops...that's exactly what they wanted, now wasn't it? <rant> It's sad when a company (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
IMO, Lugnet is a mirror of our inner child - a safe harbor for sharing the mutual appreciation of an imagination-enabling toy. With reagard to Lugnet.vent, Lugnet.darkside or whatever we may call it, I believe it is a recipe for disaster. Doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) Okay, I read it and left it for a few days. I'll be honest that I didn't really think about it that much in that time. But here's my thoughts. (...) Nothing wrong with being "too nice". But there is also nothing wrong with being politely (...) (24 years ago, 29-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
This seems like as good a place as any to hang my hat on this thread. I find the question horrifying. From the analogies offered about condoms in schools and needle parks, might not the question be rephrased "Are we all too drug-free?" (or the other (...) (24 years ago, 28-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and the Palestinians
|
|
(...) To begin to explain, "rule of law" refers to the Enlightment concept "a government of laws rather than men." It means impartial enforcement of the law without the enforcers favoring their own friends, relatives, etc. (Another question is the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) This is absolutely true. If you write that (or worse) to/about me, I won't forget it and you will basically forever count as worthless in my book. And I won't ever seperate that from other contributions that you might make. I think this is the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
<snip an interesting idea> Well, here's my $.02. I think there are enough catagories/groups already. I don't see how another one will do any good. How does *.debate not fulfill this already? Want to put flamewars in perspective? Try the forums over (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and the Palestinians
|
|
(...) From my experience of living in Israel for most of my life, I think Israel is ruled by law. Explain why it's the "weak link"? (...) what about the recent history of Lebanon? I've served there in the army, and feel that we did what was needed (...) (24 years ago, 25-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure I understand... such a "vent" group would be like any other newsgroup - you only read it if and when you want... moreso, it will not appear in any of the brief views, and cannot be xposted to or from... if it bothers people, they (...) (24 years ago, 26-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice? (new name)
|
|
(...) View supported. My suggestion is to perhaps create the following new groups... In the lugnet.lego.direct hirearchy. lugnet.lego.direct.complaints ( Polite complaints reagarding The Lego groups,products, services or bussiness practices..) (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | ratings vs. feedback (was Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
This is a digression about ratings and feedback, not on topic for the "too nice" question per se. (...) I'm not sure I totally agree. Call me elitist, but a "hey that's cool!" from Karim Nasser for a spaceship I built would mean MUCH more to me than (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) <snip> I've been hanging around RTL and Lugnet for years now. When I first heard about Todd's plan to create Lugnet I was extreemly happy, thinking foolishly that the kind of flamewars people engaged in would stay out of this place. Sadly, I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) First I should clarify that while I used creative works as an example I did say in my post that it can apply to different aspects of LUGNET. (...) Well I would suggest, as has been stated earlier, that is what the article highlighting is for. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) A counterpoint on this is that there are people who spar pretty hard in .debate who otherwise are the best of friends. Of course there is a difference in that the culture of .debate encourages attempting to stay above the muck and _debate_ not (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice? (new name)
|
|
(...) Ooh, I'd really rather not see such venting in .general. Keep it in .dear-lego (and I'd actually like to see separate groups .dear-lego.vent and .dear-lego.constructive (for constructive criticism or suggestions). I'd really like to see the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) Not true. I do a lot of my reading from nntp. I don't see the ratings (nor can I make them). I pretty much ignore the rating system (I haven't seen any proposals of how it would be used which would really be effective, one problem is not (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) Actually, I'd argue against that idea. There are ways which comments which don't suggest change can be good: - Positive re-inforcement. If your idea is good, and you are complemented, you are encouraged to keep doing more. If you get no (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> Todd, of course you have the rule, and it will be your decision at the end but since you asked for opinions, I go for a very strong NO! You have reasons to consider for doing such a thing but I don't believe it (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Are we all too nice?
|
|
(...) OK, I have given this a while to percolate. I admit I am ambivalent. There are good (but not stunningly great) arguments advanced for, and against, the idea of a ventilation group. I won't do the three reasons exercise as I think all of mine (...) (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: There's a traffic jam in Mudville.
|
|
(...) I carrot stop, I tell ya! (oh gosh its late) (...) Um..yeah...just keep on thinkin that ;-) (...) Here we go again. -Tim (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: There's a traffic jam in Mudville.
|
|
Pease, no more puns! "Bring your kiddies, bring your wife; Guaranteed to have the time of your life because the Mets are really sockin' the ball; knockin' those home runs over the wall!" Sigh... (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: There's a traffic jam in Mudville.
|
|
(...) Beantown..I'm a lentil bit unfamiliar with that term... :, -Tim (24 years ago, 27-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
