 | | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I would like to be the judge of that. (...) Hmm. So you are keeping a count? What sort of a person would do that? It is not a thing I worry about. (...) Not much more. I have been to 1 fest. I think the makeup was ~10-20% scottish, and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I *don't care* what the makeup of LUGNET or the hobby is. I never said I did. I just said it wasn't the same as the overall population. When you challenged me I went off and counted noses at that point in order to see if my hunch was right. It (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I did not challenge you. This is all noise, BUT saying "I count noses in fest pictures" make it sound like you do it all the time. I'm glad you don't. (...) This is all noise, BUT where did you get the averages from? (...) It does for the LP (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Dave voiced some concerns, which I addressed. Your contribution, on the other hand, consists of "why why why why why why". I had a 3 year old who did that, but he grew out of it. ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) You don't know the answer to his/her questions either? tut. tut. You are full of opinion, but you seldom wish to justify it. Perhaps you need to think a little deeper, rather that doing a simple cut 'n' paste with LP dogma? Answer my points (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Let's start with an very very easy one: From: (URL) It was, at least for the 20+ fests, meetings, events, (...) Scott: This is all noise, BUT where did you get the averages from? =*= Next we will do a very easy one. Scott A (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Not going to play this game any more, sorry. I've justified my assertion that LUGNET members are more white and more male than the averages to my satisfaction, and surely to the satisfaction of any reasonable person. If it's not to *your* (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Why does LUGNET (in general) attract well educated white males? From my observations, Larry is right. LUGNET does not represent the statistical make-up of the countries in which it resides. Is this due to education? Economical status? (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Like I say Larry, you are full of opinion which you just cannot justify. All I am asking for, on this one, is a simple reference – but you are simply unable to mange it. (...) ...another insult - how adult. (...) I think it is a fair question (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) It may be that that is the adult lego market? (...) Indeed. I think that starting point for looking at the background of the users of Lugnet is to look at the users on the internet and of Lego. Looking at Lugnet alone is useless in my opinion. (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Are you implying a causative relation between higher education and some realization that the Libertarian Party is the "correct" path? I'm not trying to misread you, but I want to understand if this is what you're asserting. Regardless (and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) No, I'm just alluding to the fact that certain individuals are attracted to certain types of groups. Nothing more. (...) I can't debate anything regarding the LP. I'm largely ignorant to it's political agenda and demographic, which seem to be (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Oh, I'm able, all right. I could just go to the UN site or wherever and quote demographics. I'm just unwilling to continue to spar with you about the assertion that LUGNET is demographically more white and more male than the norm because it's (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) \ (...) Water vapor. Bruce (we'll skip the dicussion on light absorbtion and leave it for some anal-retentive type) :-) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) One thing that I saw as interesting, though I haven't explored the meaning completely, but the chair of the North Carolina Libertarian Party is a woman. She was also their candidate for governor. Of course in the picture on this page: (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) So what you are saying is that someone of one ethnicity can't think up ideas that benefit people outside of that ethnicity? Scott, THINK about what you type before you do so, this is making you look extremely stupid. (...) You haven't (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Um, who would that be? We don't have any of *those* here, do we? :-) PS, I think you spelled absorption wrong. :-) ++Lar (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Allow me to elucidate: the LP claims that it aims to help all society, yet the overwhelming majority of LP members are middle class white males. If, as has been asserted, the LP really is (or will be at some indeterminate future time) for the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) I in no way, shape, or form was lumping you in with Scott. I would never do that to you, Scott is in a class all by himself. (...) Retract away, Dave! (see, I can pull a ++Lar too!) Scott seems to want to state that a predominantly white male (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Nice! Anyone can use Dave! in a sentence--the real art comes in making it appear that my ! naturally wound up at the end! (...) Well, in that case, you're a big silly doofus-head. See? I can be inflammatory, too! 8^) (I think I've over-stepped (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Um, that's not a Lar (0) I don't think, as while there ARE Doubting Thomases (1) I don't know of any Retracting Daves (2). 0 - much less a ++Lar 1 - prominent Figures of Speech 2 - and the image there is one I'd just rather not get into, er, (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) That comment was bang on, as they say in the UK. Nicely worded, Dave! (...) Yes, what is it with you today? First the whole stoking a fire under the NEA without regard to which one, then this inflammatory thing? I'm burning to know what is (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) So where do Dave and I differ on this? How is there a class is difference between our views? (...) Where did I say that? Where? I think they are less likely too. I think any ideas they would have would be treated very sceptically. But I do not (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Actually... Although water and the sky appear blue for the same reason, it is not directly related to water itself (in vapour or liquid form). Oxygen, nitrogen, and water molecules are all approximately the same size, which happens to be just (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) "(we'll skip the dicussion on light absorbtion and leave it for some anal-retentive type)" (restored snip) I knew some anal-retentive type would take the bait.... :-) Bruce (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Wow. A delayed reaction insult. It was just sitting there saying "don't touch me". Scott A (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) ? But I didn't even mention absorption! Blathering on about absorption when discussing a phenomenon that is entirely due to scattering - now THAT would be anal-retentive. ;) Jeff J (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) All (...) Really? (...) I am not asking what you *could* do, I am asking what you *did* do. (...) Nope, this is an illustration of how hard it is to get you to justify yourself on an exceedingly minor (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is the sky blue in Libertopia
|
|
(...) You're only proving my point. :-) Beside, the sky isn't blue. Bruce (lost somewhere in the SoCal haze) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
Tom answered you quite adequately already. You, however, don't seem to grasp just how ridiculous you look for repeatedly asking me to justify my opinion that LUGNET is more white and more male than the averages when everyone else in the thread has (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Really? (...) I am not asking you to justify that - not even anything near that difficult. As I said before, I am only trying to get you to justify your statements. I have became tired of all your unsubstantiated facts and hollow opinion. (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda)
|
|
(...) Yep... the molecules in the atmosphere are the ones causing the sky's blue appearance. That's also why the sun appears yellow on the background of the sky (blue and yellow are complementary/opposite on the RGB scale, which is what our eyes (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Nor any drop to drink
|
|
(...) That's not at all true--there's a toilet down the hall with blue water, and it's indoors. (...) <cap ish> adj. of or pertaining to a cape Dave! (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nor any drop to drink
|
|
(...) LOL... I was gonna say something like "unless you have food coloring in *your* water"... I wouldn't drink anything that looked blue, but maybe Chris's dog would. I don't think it's good form to drink out of toilets, even for dogs! (...) (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Why the sky is blue (was: Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
(...) Well... the colour of the Sun will be subjective to how each individual perceives colour, but it's peak output definitely lies in the range that most people would call yellow. It is a whitish-yellow, because the Sun also radiates at all other (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the sky is blue (was: Re: Libertarian SPAM (Propaganda))
|
|
(...) Art 101: large bodies of water take on the color of the sky. If the sky is gray, the water is gray, not blue. Lemme see.... (URL) down a bit - they even use the gray sky/gray water in the example. Bruce (Arrr...rrrgh! I've become (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the sky is blue
|
|
(...) ... (...) ... This is off-topic for .debate! FUT .geek ++Lar (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the sky is blue
|
|
(...) That is misinformation! Water DOES have an intrinsic blue colour: (URL) Learning" indeed! However, I must apologise for my earlier starement that the bluish tinge of water is due to scattering. It is due to selective absorption (there's the (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the sky is blue
|
|
(...) "Why the *ocean* is blue" is not quite the same as the three sources you note, which all address "why *water* is blue". The phenomenom of the ocean taking on the color of the sky (in general) has been long observed and recorded by artists. (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the sky is blue
|
|
(...) I've done so on many occasions, seriously trying to answer this very question (is the ocean blue, or is it reflecting the sky?) for myself. One tends to do this sort of thing when studying atmospheric science at the graduate level. There are (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
