 | | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Selçuk (...) (23 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) People initiate topics all the time. Initiating a topic is, by nature, unbidden, except perhaps in the larger context of the events of the day raising awareness. So, then, any topic that is initiated by anyone can then be labeled spam by any (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The purpose of lugnet.off-topic.debate (was Re: What is spam?)
|
|
(...) Man, you're just lookin' for a debate (any debate!) today, aren't ya'? 8?D I know I'll likley break my own word at some time in the future, and probably get lambasted then for doing so, but here goes: <way too rightous for my own good> I read (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The purpose of lugnet.off-topic.debate (was Re: What is spam?)
|
|
(...) That wasn't Todd's intent, read the intro post he made that shows the charter. You are more than welcome not to participate. It would be too bad if you didn't, unlike some current participants we'd be better off without, but there is no one (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The purpose of lugnet.off-topic.debate (was Re: What is spam?)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Matthew Gerber writes: <snip> (...) You've got a point, but it's not directed at the right group. *All* the off-topic groups are meant to discuss *non*-lego things, which is why (well... sorta (1)) they are on the default (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The purpose of lugnet.off-topic.debate (was Re: What is spam?)
|
|
(...) Blasphemy!!! And I was just getting to like you!! (...) Hmmmph. You dunno what yer missin! ROSCO (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) How right you are. But pasting all this LP crap into LUGNET is one step away from pasting adds for chocalte bars or cars. There are real issue out their which are worth talking about - your selfish breed of politics is not. It often surprises (...) (23 years ago, 9-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) (sic) (...) Loss of first amendment rights (while the populace cheers on the loss) in the US *is* a real issue, whether you like it or not. In fact, whether you *understand* it or not, actually, since you have demonstrated with your slurring (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Separation of Church and State?
|
|
(...) How about: (URL) you want your tax dollars going to a religious organization? -Duane (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) I do not think I have metioned child in this thread... but you are correct, I do not understand it. Do you support child pornography? What about child prositution? (...) Is this the best you can do? (...) Ah. It is my fault. I see. I should (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Alarm as Bush plans health cover for unborn
|
|
(...) This, for some reason reminded me of this: (URL) para: "In a country where 40m people have no health insurance, the Bush administration is planning to offer publicly funded medical coverage to foetuses, in a move which pro-choice activists (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) I think he was referring to your efforts to veer the debate in an attempt to make First Amendment = Child Pornography. Granted, there's room for a .debate there, but that's not the crux of the matter (nor, technically, is it a problem with the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) I did not say that in this thread. I cannot remember ever saying it? (...) This is because, generally, I do not view .debate as a place where debates should start (am I the only one which thinks this?). I view it as a place where debates which (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Why is it illegal? Is it because the majority find it offensive, or because of the exploitation/harm to children? Perhaps both? If no exploitation/harm to childrenwas involved in any way, should it be available in a free society? Should the (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
I know this was a troll, but I thought I'd bite. (...) Certainly we tell ourselves that the children involved are deeply damaged by the experience. I'm not so sure that it's just our squicky puritanical knee-jerk doing that rationalizing sometimes. (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) A good question. If it is publically avaible it could include all 3. But I see your point. But lets leave the marginal side of kiddy porn aside for now. (...) My view would be that individuals who use this material may need help in some way. (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) But what is marginal? And I disagree that all three could be included. I can envision a gallery selling 20x24" matted prints of a naked six year old and his dog playing in a sprinkler. Would that under any reasonable set of circumstances be (...) (23 years ago, 12-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Not to mention that a dictatorship is often more easily changed than a democracy - you only generally have to get rid of one person (and maybe some key henchmen). (...) It certainly would free up a lot of money wasted on jails and the court (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Who said unfettered? (...) Perhaps you should move to Cuba? (...) Sometimes you surprise me... but not this time! Scott A (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Oh, you mean like Jiang Zemin or perhaps Augusto Pinochet? :) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) I really don't agree. In a country like mine, you can't go fully democratic since there is no common sense majority that prevent the population from total collapse into some stupid "islamic republic" thing, just like in Iran. In a (...) (23 years ago, 15-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) I still can (although it is not a "top 4 list"). The fact is that Turkey is an oppressive country which is, as you say, "trying to imitate playing in the first league". I think it is important that everyone knows what sort of place Turkey is (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) total (...) distorted, (...) you (...) state (...) current (...) stupid (...) Are you cluless or what? Yeah I'm really meaning it. I know what sort of place Turkey is, but do you really? For your information, political islam is very strong (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) Unlike the media in many other countries, some of the media in the UK really is independant. Independent even of corporate advertising. Before I posted the message I had replied to, I read this article about how visitors to Turkey had been (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) (URL) (...) the (...) whole (...) the (...) popular (...) which (...) clearly (...) place (...) is (...) or (...) ask for their papers, and went back when they refused to show. I can't see any problem here. Maybe you just can't imagine in your (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
|
|
(...) "make trouble"? Were they stealing cars? Were they breaking into shops? What was this "trouble"? (...) In the UK it would be called harrasment. (...) Perhaps not. (...) I have no probelm with that site. (...) The issue is bigger than the dam. (...) (23 years ago, 20-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
