 | | Re: Theory vs. practice (was Re: Polyamory
|
|
(...) Is it necessary to make this a conditional promise? Can't each involved party rise to the moral high ground and ignore the other? (...) That comes from driving on the wrong side of the road and using that crazy metric system of yours. 8^) (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Theory vs. practice (was Re: Polyamory
|
|
(...) As he enjoys playing to the crowd. (...) I _feel_ the contrary. I have promised many times to leave LP alone - if he does the same with me. However, I feel he just can't resist taking a shot at me. Look at this thread – the message he just (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Things are worse than I thought in the US. "blacks" have been out of the closet here for a long time. Scott A (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Theory vs. practice (was Re: Polyamory
|
|
(...) Wrong again. See: (URL) (...) Very interesting, but none of that answered my point: "In many ways, our rights are stronger than your own" I note that I was talking about actuality - not theory. But, again, you chose to squirm. Despite that, (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Theory vs. practice (was Re: Polyamory
|
|
(...) Balance snipped. Out of curiousity, Larry, do you think anyone other than you or Scott really cares about any of this? If it is all plowed ground, why post it all again? Is it so necessary for you to feel good about your debating technique (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) The specifics of evolutionary theory are under constant attack, as is appropriate for any branch of science. However, evolution itself is universally accepted among the serious scientific community; it's simply the details that are in dispute. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Theory vs. practice (was Re: Polyamory
|
|
All of what I say below is plowed ground, stuff I and others have said before, so those that pay attention are invited to skip this entire post. They already know this stuff. Scott, though, might want to pay attention, for once. I won't hold my (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
Snippety snip (...) If you *seriously* don't believe in survival of the fittest, I invite you to use plain old penicillin the next time you have a serious infection. We'll then see evolution in action. Two ways for the price of one! 1 - *the bugs* (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) First things first. The basics. Humans exist now. There's no record of humans existing over X million years ago. (No, I'm not a natural historian, I don't know the dates). There are records of species that aren't alive today. Like trilobites (...) (24 years ago, 16-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I was being brief, generalizing and sarcastic - I'll be more specific. (...) I challenge you to show me ANY scientific evidence supporting the current theory. It would probably be best to start by attempting to answer any of the (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) From what I recall of history, the Zulus led by Shaka were anything but ragtag; they were an extremely well trained, organised and disciplined army consisting of men who had been taken into the army as boys and brought up in a military and (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Indeed. So what is the point of your system, if your "god given" rights can be removed the government? Are they only fair weather rights? (...) I know of no UK school which has a "whites only" policy in the last century. I know of no UK (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote: <Junk Science> (...) In this neck of the woods one will more often hear a reference to "pseudoscience" or perhaps even sophistry; that is, arguments which generally appear reasonably plausable, logical or convincing at a (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Oh...well if that's all it takes, then I can dispel your assertions by mentioning that there are a few blacks at the highest levels of US government too. Great. (...) them? Their rights did protect them. But bad men in the government -- the (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Is that like Lar += 2? :) --Todd (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) I am not sure if it is what you are after, but if you scroll down to "THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN THE COURTS" at (URL) find: "Since Miller, the Supreme Court has addressed the Second Amendment twice more, upholding New Jersey’s strict gun control (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Well what was a "militia" back then? Let's start here: =+= When the U.S. Constitution was adopted, each of the states had its own "militia" -- a military force comprised of ordinary citizens serving as part-time soldiers. The militia was (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) No. (...) Asked and answered. The very text you cite goes on to shred that argument. But you didn't cite that part, did you? This subthread is about the difference between description and argument. Either *admit* your bumpersticker snipe was (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) You make good points, both for the importance of meaning and the difficulty of determining intent. As I understand it, the term "militia" as it applies to the 2nd has never come before the Supreme Court, so there is no "final" definition to be (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) I tend to view my dictionary in the context of the English language. If you do consider it in the context of your constitution - did not some states/real real militia back then? Was a militia then not more like my dictionary describes? (...) (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) Your dictionary is wrong, when viewed in the context of the US constitution. Words change meanings, but to understand the 2nd, you have to know what militia meant to the founding fathers, and what they meant when they said it. Intent is (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Well, I suppose guns are necessary for an insurgency to be armed. They may not be the only effective means of achieving substantial political change; cf feminism for another example. (...) Not necessarily, but that's not my point. Gandhi's (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) The keyword is militia. My dictionary says: militia a military force which only operates for some of the time and whose members often have other jobs, used either instead of or to support the official army. I’d hate to get involved in (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) As does most of the world, up until a few years ago many still viewed this homosexuality as a medical condition. Thankfully, those days have mostly passed - so much so that homosexuality is not an issue. Indeed, there are a few at the highest (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) I happen to feel connected to this particular fight since I'm from the US, but it's really not my favorite of these examples. I prefer the one where Shaka, using nothing but spears and genius, routed the British army in Zululand (South (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: May I? (...) Yes. And to compare, how is the history of British society and homosexuals? It's not exactly a political freedom, but it's similar, and your record sucks. (...) We did. (...) Evolution is (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Me for one. :) (...) Yes - but that is illegal. (...) It really is a worry. Neadless to say, some of your civilian countrymen have a history of exporting these weapons to murderers across the globe. (...) Tell that to the Kurds. Tell that to (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) You had a Scottish culture... and gave it up! Now I know why you all eat such crap food - we still do so too. :-) Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Who is it that you think is out of shape and middle aged? Similarly, who is it that you think only has pistols? In the US, it is easy to acquire military ordnance that "fell of a truck." While I have never engaged in such transactions, of (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) The problem may be that you view gun ownership, perhaps, as an inalienable “god given” freedom. I’d argue that I feel freer because my society is, relatively, free of guns. I am not restricted by a fear of suffering armed oppression from my (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) They are necessary for an armed insurgency. Revolution is a messy term because it has so many contextual meanings. (...) And you would claim that these two nations are exemplars of successful national organization? (...) I'm pretty sure that (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Where did that cultural difference come from? 225 years ago we were one culture (basically). My culture splintered off from yours and we were able to do so because "we" had guns. I think the current state of things in both nations is based on (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Larry, reply to my whole message please. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) It is a simple observation. (...) You are a little wrong here about the UK. But I think, overall, we have mixed well - given that most immigrants arrived here post WW2. As far as I know we have never had legal segregation in the UK. (...) I (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) I agree. (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) First, with out defining it crisply, you do (sort of) know what I mean and agree that it's a good idea to avoid it, right? Can I take the "I know it when I see it" cop out? :-) Kidding aside, I would tend to define it along the lines of the (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Question: What's "junk science"? Probably important to define it/back it up before requesting that it's not used by Steve.... Is there another thread one might use for reference of such a definition? DaveE (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes: <snip> (...) Me too. Let's see if it can be done without "junk science". I have my doubts. (...) This isn't a viewpoint I agree with, but it's one that is a lot more to my liking than strict creationism. (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Is it your assertion then, that the changes in government in states such as the DDR, Poland, Czechoslovokia, Hungary, etc. had nothing whatever to do with guns, that is, that they were completely non violent, and no guns or weapons anywhere in (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Description vs. argument
|
|
(...) This can be taken many ways. If intended as a slur about our arts/literature/media, etc... it's irrelevant, and untrue. If intended as a comment on melting pots vs. many separate cultures, it's also untrue. The US has more of a unified culture (...) (24 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) I think you underestimate what someone who REALLY believes they are right, and are REALLY willing to die for their cause is capable of doing. Governments have been doing this for over 200 years (that underestimation is what lost the American (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) If we have so little culture then why are US movies and TV shows so popular around the world? Now I grant that most movies and TV shows aren't terribly refined, but then most enetertainment for the masses isn't. I think there is just as much (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Very true. I’d like to add to the list much of the eastern European states which have “come in from the cold”. It is a gross generalisation, and I hope I do not offend anyone, but much of these popular uprising have been against oppressive / (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) There are those who say the US has no culture. (...) Larry I have questioned your "freedoms" many times - and each time you fail to answer me. Until you are willing to answer those points, keep you vague assertions to yourself. :-) (...) There (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) There is so much that is wrong in this statement I hardly know where to start. Perhaps I should say that if people feel "creationism vs evolution" is ground ploughed to desert, I'll leave my contribution at this one post. To focus the debate (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Are guns necessary for a revolution? Perhaps non-violent movements can more effectively create social change: Gandhi and post-colonial India, South Africa in the past decade. Interestingly both these countries have examples that show how a (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) time I promise) (URL) -TiM NB, CA (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Sorry to reply to my own message, but I found this interesting page: (URL) -TiM NB, CA (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Well seeing as we have such interesting diversified money you can't expect me to keep track of all of it :)...dumb yankees have to actually look at their money and half the time you don't even know what you've got at a glance at your wallet. (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) Indeed there is. We have a culture of freedom, or did, in the US. (...) And some of us think that to be willing to go along (with majorities, with tyrannical laws, etc..) instead of *want* that freedom is, in turn, a little crazy. Actually, (...) (24 years ago, 14-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) There is a cultural difference between us which makes you think this is a logical mindset, but, at the same time, makes me believe you are a little crazy. :-) Scott A (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
|
(...) I _do_ live in a society where guns are not needed for defense. But luckily, they are an option. I know that's a bit obtuse, but I'll go on to an answer that you might like better... Sure. All things being equal, I'd rather that people not (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Well-- I guess my issues here are that in order to stay focused on a topic, one must often branch out to its extremities, implications, and more importantly, it's roots, no matter how vast. And further, it is often helpful to examine areas (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
We keep branching off into areas that could each entail lengthy discussion on their own. I'll try to provide only brief answers to your main points in the hopes of us staying focused. (...) Certainly scientific evidence is preferable to testimonial (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) <pulling out my wallet> $5 - Wilfred Laurier and a belted kingfisher $10 - John A. MacDonald and an osprey $20 - the Queen and a common loon $50 - now property of the casino $100 - Robert Borden she is on all the coins, however, IIRC. (24 years ago, 13-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jennifer Clark writes: (...) VERY important distinction, and one that I touched on a little, I think, but not very much... And on that note-- Steve, could you be a little (a lot, really) more specific on which you (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Would you mind if I clarified something here, as much for myself as anyone else? There frequently seems to be confusion between Evolution and the Theory of Evolution. Evolution, that is, the apparently directed or emergent change of species (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
I probably shouldn't even reply to this thread, but it just caused me to choke and spit Quaker oatmeal [1] at my Mac. three words: Ain't Gonna Happen But if it did, I can imagine... the news cameras surrounding us, microphones, a reporter screaming, (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) Don't be so negative Todd... that's my job here :-) Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) No, LEGO would just gives us a few silly words that only work in a few situations and expect us to create meaningful conversations with those words ;) Chris (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) I don't think it means very much to them. --Todd (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
|
|
(...) I'm a stubborn old goat, sometimes. Found the cite. --> You can have whatever opinions you want. It ain't my place (or anyone else's) to say otherwise. I will also make judgement calls (of others) based on my moral code - I just won't claim (...) (24 years ago, 12-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
Ok, I've been rather busy as of late, so back to the debate... :) (...) Ok. So we agree now? That our definitions of 'prove' differ? Right? (...) Aha!, would say I, are not testimonials subject to personal feelings or prejudices? Can you fully trust (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
The Queen is on every piece of Canadian currency I believe....on the opposite side of the beavers, birds, and leaves. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) Bad, methinks, for us LUGNETers. I think that the level of freedom and topic range would be more exposed to censor. I don't think that LUGNET should EVER be sold, and I'm willing to put my money forth just to keep it the way it is. LUGNET is (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) Well, one things for sure- If Lugnet bought TLC, we'd never again wonder what theme a given sub-theme was in, as the new nesting logos would clearly tell us where it belonged. eric (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
"Kevin Zwicker" <kevin1@netrover.com> wrote in message news:G708KC.J3B@lugnet.com... (...) I would be happier if Lugnet bought TLC Then at least we might seem some decent sets :-) regards lawrence (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
No, it means that they'd put Flash all over the site, and menus that loaded REAAAALLL slow, and generally muck up a perfectly good setup. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) Hmm. This would mean that there would be a large number of newsgroups, each specially designed for a specific purpose. Wait, we've already got that. Steve (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) (URL) suspect it got lost in the Christmas/NewYear holiday rush, as there was no reply to it. It's also possibile that David no longer wishes to continue the discussion - that it's run its course. I don't mind either continuing it or dropping (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
Kevin Zwicker wrote in message ... (...) Just to qualify this: LUGNET is the centre of the ADULT Lego community on the Web. In spite of what's said on here about Lego's own website, they get a very large number of hits and it's a very popular and (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) Yes but T&S would have to want to sell it. (...) knight. This is an interesting point. I wonder how much LUGNET is worth to TLC. I expect it increases sales in a small way - I wonder by how much though? Anyone any idea/willing to guess? (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) They could send us plane tickets along with the wedding invites to LLC. ;^) I think TLC would likely "Juniorize" the place. *shudder* ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) I would say Woo Hoo! for Todd and Suzanne!!! Then ask for a loan ;-). Hypothetically its a topic for discussion but realistically I doubt it would happen. The bad of course would be that LEGO would undoubtedly monitor, and censor, content so (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) If nothing changed, I would shrug, and go on with life. If there were any significant changes in design or policy, I'd probably regress to RTL, and wait for some AFOL with the time and resources to start up LUANET (or something). (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
(...) The first thing I would do is find a way to guilt them into picking up bar tabs from now on. But after that, I think my interest in Lugnet would remain about constant- as long as TLC was simply the monetary force behind Lugnet, and nothing (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
Why would they bother - it probably serves their purposes right now (remember TLC has given funds to LUGNET). If it were to become part of Lego.com, Lego would either have to moderate some of the views spouted here (about Lego and other matters), or (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What would happen if ... TLC bought Lugnet ?
|
|
Hello, **Warning: Hypothetical situation only!** I was speaking with a friend last night and we were wondering what would happen if TLC bought the rights to Lugnet? Given: 1. The recurring examples of TLC staff refering customers to Lugnet, 2. TLC (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: demographics - Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Assume you do not dispute the points I made which you snipped? (...) What do you think? Read the message header. Read the text I quoted. Read my argument. Draw your own conculsions. Key phrase of note: "they (guns) are most likely to belong to (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Don't worry about me, I'm pretty think skinned. I know Larry tries to wind me up at times; I don't mind as, in my eyes, it only makes him look silly. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) It is pretty much the same here - she only really acts on the advice of the privy council (politicians). If she ever where to speak on a political issue, I think she'd find her self out of a job. The closest we get the "Royals" medalling in (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Family values?
|
|
(...) Mostly. You may also have contractually obligated yourself to other limitations of behavior. If I agree with my wife that we won't sleep around, then violating that agreement is bad. Chris (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: demographics - Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Did you just use that for a demographic factoid, or do you agree with the conclusions the author draws? By the way, do you think this author's factoids are sufficiently vetted? Do you accept all of them, or just the ones that agree with your (...) (24 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) If you *are* making a further point, please make it. If you're *not*, say so. But if you just want to repeat the same point over and over after it's been acknowledged and after you've been asked what the further point is, I would submit that (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I hate to continue an argument when people start getting personally offended (a it seems you may be Scott), but I have to add my .02 to Larry here. What (I think) Larry is saying is that we've discussed the point that yes, bullets do ricochet, (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) You are completely correct; the notion that knowledge of a gun's usage and consequences will somehow lead inexorably to a gun's illegal use is simply falacious. A true awareness of the consequences of one's actions can only lead to an (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Free in the sense that we're a free nation free to do what we want without a monarch or dictator telling us what to do. The reason that Canada isn't actually technically free is because the Queen still has the power to have the last say in a (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) As I mentioned in a previous post, that's exactly what has to happen! If everyone would get over their unjustified fear that if child knows about or has an interest in guns that they'll grow up to be some crazy bank robber and realized that if (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) About 2 years ago, we (HMCS Algonquin) were tied up down where the old ferry (Klakala ?) is (I forget what pier it is now), and we were warned not to go into some areas of Seattle at night. I didn't find it that bad, but perhaps the warning (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | demographics - Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) There is no need, I found them: =+= OWNERSHIP OF guns is extraordinarily widespread in the United States, and has been for some time. Indeed, since the late 1950's, when surveys on this question were first done, the share of American (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Most people would describe it as a sword, but it is in fact a Bolo Knife (kind of a pointy Phillipines machete). Bruce (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I remember, a year or so ago, saying there was some sort of plan for an "electronc" child proof lock. Did anything ever come of that? Scott A (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) Hmm. 3ft. That'll be a sword. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) How macho. All this gun talk. Try to be constructive Larry. If you think I am not making a point, just leave me alone. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) They claim it is some sort of sinister media conspiracy. (...) "more concerned" does not mean were concerned. (...) Yet, I live in a society which is relatively free of guns... and I feel no need to carry any sort of weapon, or devise a tin (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) But they are more willing to do it with a gun. And if they want to knife fight, that's okay, my knife is three feet long! Crocodile Dundee, eat your heart out. Of course, I'd reach for the 12 gauge first... Bruce well-armed liberal :-) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
(...) I know what I meant. Scott A (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
|
Snipped again. (...) BTW.... You asked the wrong question. The correct question is not "Are you able to?", because I am, should I care to take the time. The correct question is "Do you want to?". And the answer in your *particular* case is "No". (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
