 | | Re: Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
(...) Hah! I judge people by their cars. With some heavy ground effects, some nice rims... no, nevermind, not gonna happen. Let the head-stepping commence. C'mon people, think before you post. <<KM>> <I know, I didn't think before this post> (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Big ugly trolls (was Re: New stuff on my webpage ...)
|
|
(...) Richard, a post with this level of brainlessness deserves some serious head- stepping. It's true that a mental image of someone can be very different from the reality. It's amazing that anyone could think that their poorly educated and (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
(...) Me either :^) (...) I think a lot of time is wasted disputing points (eg fossils) rather than more general arguments (eg whether scientific observation of Evolution is based on faith or theory). The misleading distortions of the Creationists (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
(...) One of these days I really must read this play, since it is significant to me on many fronts. The play is definitely a commentary on the US, but is also an interesting window into my own faith of Unitarian Universalist as both Thoreau and (...) (24 years ago, 28-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
|
Hey guys, I'm enclosing something I wrote for my English class, just a little food for thought. It was to be based on a play, "The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail", which I actually really liked (which, unfortunately, is a rarity for class reading (...) (24 years ago, 28-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | URLs without trailing slashes
|
|
(...) counterintuitive relative to most sites is precisely because of the above. (...) "Wrong"? LOL. (...) It's just a different way of naming pages. --Todd (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
Sorry, your choices are the counterintuitive ones. 1) I don't know what universe you live in, but in MINE, the bulk of sites on the web translate (URL) to (URL) Member pages are the obvious problem here - you designed them wrong from the start, and (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) I don't think it's about being "right" or "wrong." The reason that it's "counterintuitive" relative to the rest of the Internet is that 99.999999% of websites don't let you create non-index webpages that don't use filename extensions. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) But as Larry has argued before, whether YOU think you are in the right or not, you are going counterintuitive to the vast majority of the Internet. There ARE times where you should just get off the high horse and do something for the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) But why? Is there a load on the server which makes trailing slashless URLs incredibly inefficient? I find that what is in place to stop those slashless URLs from being forwarded is quite a significant irritation (and others have told me that (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) I've been thinking along those lines too due to this thread, and recalled a "Raft" by Stephen Baxter in which gravity is much stronger than in our universe. If I remember correctly it was quite a good read, although I'm not a good enough (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
|
(...) You mean there are webservers that don't automatically forward trailing- slashless URLs to trailing-slashed URLs by default, and have a configurable error page? (...) I thought basically all webservers did that automatically. That's why I had (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) The Creationist movement is primarily U.S. Protestant driven. Not exclusively, of course. Perhaps it's part of the insular nature of the U.S., especially the interior of the country. Europe has been through this all before. Bruce (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) You're right. *Now* I know what I dislike about all of them! Thanks! I have the overweening pride to prefer eternal damnation to groveling to a god that is not worthy of me. (...) It's indeed irrefutable for an all powerful/creator of the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Point taken but to continue splitting this particular hair, I agree with "everything" but not "creation" except inasmuch as the explanation is "god created (the starting point of) the universe", which is fine, since it's no better or worse an (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Credibility... (Was: Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"))
|
|
(...) BS ECSE '85, Meng ECSE '89. Looks like we just missed... FUT: lugnet.people Frank (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Well, there you have it, straight from the great Lar's keyboard. And remember, Lar never makes misteaks... Frank (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
(...) It's often very helpful to watch a debate before joining in, just to get a feel for the dynamics of the group, if not just the subject matter. And sometimes it's amazing how much it changes when you actually are the one who's in the limelight. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 'Will ship to United States only - Oi!
|
|
(...) Ugh! Those forms!!! So many times (when I *was* selling internationally), I'd be asked to put "gift" and value of $20 on $60 order. I did it, but hated it, and generally felt pretty icky about doing it. I ditto the points Dan, Maggie and Mark (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shipping)
|
| |
| | Re: 'Will ship to United States only - Oi!
|
|
Ronan & All, (...) Well, I am fed up with many things as well, it is understandable, but there are reasons for this. (...) This is on the borderline of good taste, and I think if you want people to consider shipping to other places than just the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shipping)
|
