 | | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) Because at that point only he and I were technically "involved," so I didn't feel things were out of control--merely misunderstood. Thus I answered with a bit more explanation, as it was my post to which he was responding. When your post came (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) My point exactly. (...) Absolutely. The differences are carefully selected, but this two-party tyranny has blandified elections. On too many issues I couldn't tell Cheney from Lieberman from Dubya from Gore. (...) Again, my point exactly. (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) Did just that. Bruce (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Sanburn writes: <snip> My peeve with this thread is that some in it perpetuate the "right == Republican" and "left==Democrat" mythos. As you know, I feel the political spectrum is not one dimensional. Not hardly. (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) Bruce: This comment isn't specifically about you, and I mean nothing personal, but why not take the flame-fests off-line? These grudge-matches that flare up come across as really childish. james (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Censoring Unpopular Speech? (Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!))
|
|
(...) Whether the warning was mandatory or voluntary, I do not know; assuming it was voluntary, it was a) because of government strong-arming, or b) because of private-interest strong-arming. (...) Point well-taken. People who engage in dangerous (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Music while building
|
|
(...) I think your above point pretty much nails it: bands that consciously try to imitate the sound/success of others usually are 1) not very good, and 2) always lagging behind the market. As you said, bands that are just themselves regardless of (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) No, you love to shoot off your mouth about politics (in inappropriate areas) but can't stand it when someone calls you on it. That you don't care for me simply because I pointed out an inaccuracy is par for the course for you. Anything you (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Censoring Unpopular Speech? (Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!))
|
|
(...) Out of curiosity, were the warnings broadcast by government decree or by voluntary (perhaps preemptive) participation of the station? (...) Maybe it should have played continuously on a looping subliminal track! 8^) Seriously, I would think (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) . Or ".monty-python"... Why didn't you post this after Scott's post? It was the usual Scott trick where he makes his political statement in the fun area, and only when he gets called on it does he get in his last word in the same area (so he (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
Bruce and all, ruce, I don't like off.topic.debate, I don't like talking about politics here, and I don't really pacticularlly care for you, for that matter. Anyway, (...) Look at his voting record, he is not conservative. It is not inaccurate, his (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Good news for collectors (was Re: 1593 box photos!)
|
|
(...) Death to political discussion in .fun! Death to it! Death! Death! With nasty sharp pointy teeth! love and rockets, LFB FUT->.o-t.debate (actually, responding to what I wrote might qualify it for ".fun" again. Or ".monty-python"... (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
I (...) Thanks for correcting me. I am sorely lacking in knowledge of early manga and anime but felt moved to try and clarify the argument. I have seen quotes where disney animators professed awe for Tezuka's work so its a shame that the disney (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
(...) Kimba the White Lion (Jungle Taitei) was created by the undisputed "God of Manga," Osamu Tezuka. He single-handedly changed the course of the Manga industry when he released a comic book in 1947 that was novel length and had the first (...) (24 years ago, 23-Mar-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
(...) The Big M has had fast food franchising (burgers) to themselves in Australia. So the Big Mac is the Big Mac. Only recently have Burger King started expansion. But I believe someone local had rights to the franchise name 'Burger King'. When (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What's in a name? ( Potter, Plagiarism, and Trademark)
|
|
(...) Or, for example, a boy wizard and a boy wizard? 8^) Dave! (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
(...) Actually, the story I heard was that as Fast food McDonald's moved into England and Scotland, the found a small restaurant near one of the desired sites named McDonalds. It wasn't too large or high class (I'll get to that later) but I also (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
(...) Same here. I'm really just intrigued by the whole thing, since it's a nifty string of coincidences even if no plagiarism is involved. No slur intended toward either author, of course! (...) Yeah, that assertion is pretty hard to refute! 8^) (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What's in a name? ( Potter, Plagiarism, and Trademark)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: If the word exists, that's one thing, but (...) Yes, Lego would have a case because it would create confusion in the public's mind. Less clear cut would be a recording company and a computer (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Disney actually did this with "Lion King"
|
|
(...) As noted above, "perhaps she has a case, perhaps she doesn't." I'm just not going to condemn Rowling based on what Stouffer had to say. Plagiarism, which is what Stouffer is implying to get public sympathy and promote herself, and trademark (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
