 | | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) None of what I said was real, I don't actually think Jude's page was bad, frankly I don't have an opinion of it either way. I used it to prove a point though. My point is that there are people in the Lego community who although put on a (...) (24 years ago, 17-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Pot, kettle, black. (URL)If you have issue with the way (...) POT, KETTLE, BLACK! (URL)Believing we're right (...) So if I disrespect something of yours you will blindly and automatically disrepect me in ways that are 10 times as bad? (...) (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) What an immature thing to do, seriously. If you have issue with the way people think, post just that - don't make up something that's going to piss people off. If you have issue with specific people, take it to them in person. We weren't out (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) You (...) all. I don't see your point, in fact you are belittled even more in my mind now. And yes, I even hit REFRESH. Do us all a favor, pull you lip over your head, and swallow. -Tim (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) And so that justified having the entire group attack me, of course, you see I already know all about how the Lego community works. RTL introduced me to the way most of you think some three years ago. (...) Consider it a payback for a really (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Heck, I wasn't especially impressed by the little teaser...but then again, it's getting harder and harder to impress me with all the great stuff that people have built to compare to. It was the rude and un-called-for way in which you stated (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) the (...) Let me type this again to really get the meaning of it. "My point is that there are people in the Lego community who although put on a smiling face are willing to try to completely destroy a person for the sheer satisfaction of (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) That's not what I did. I needed proof to make a point, I could have simply stated my feeling about the Lego Community, but then I wouldn't have expected anyone to believe me if I had no proof. Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not proud of (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) A couple years ago, someone in RTL was crowing one day that they had switched price tag stickers on a LEGO set at Wal*Mart and had gotten away with a steal. When people came down hard on him and called him dishonest, deceitful, etc., he came (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Well that's kinda cool, cheating the system that tries to cheat you. Ever work in price management for a company Todd? There are legal, as well as allowed ways of "stealing". I remember when I got two huge boxes of Power Aid at 8 cents a (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Actually, the incident I was referring to above wasn't you -- it was someone else. But anyway... (...) I don't think I participated in that discussion. I pretty much stopped posting to RTL after 1998. I do remember reading parts of it, though. (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) It's not always important that everyone agrees with you, you've just got to be careful about whether the really important people disagree with you. Like the police for instance. (...) Seems awfully strange to mention the police at a time like (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Matthew, darlin, get a grip. I'm sorry, but you do realize that it was *obviously* not just what you said to Jude that got everyone here riled up. You said yourself that you made up that whole discussion on your site. That it's not your (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Matthew's posting privileges are now disabled (to all groups) after the past round of abusive messages he posted. Lord knows if he's the same person who identified himself/herself at "Madhatter" in RTL last year, but there's been plenty enough (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) alt.usenet.kooks? (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) AUK = alt.usenet.kooks, in my 'net experience. it's a newsgroup used mostly for flaming/trolling, and it's where people like Matthew end up. some of the regulars there are bad news. (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Fells like that? whoa... Thank you Todd, I feel like you shouldn't wait this much..:-) I personally believe that if I can't find anything to say for an individual's behavior other than "what kind of an *** **** are you?" (I know much better (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) AUK is defintely alt.usenet.kooks. I have spent some time there myself, it is definitely a flame group. The entire purpose of the group is to ridicule, well, "usenet kooks". People that post there generally get there in one of two ways- either (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) D'oh! I forgot my own footnote. [1] I was there to flame. I enjoy flaming people. I don't think it's a big crime, especially if you keep it to places where it's appropriate, such as alt.usenet.kooks, alt.flame, ne.internet.services (circa (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) That's ok then. (...) Perhaps that it is not a good thing? Scott A (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) is (...) It is not what you consider to be a flame which is important - do you agree? (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) In all seriousness, I don't understand your question, mostly because if it were communicated verbally, there would have been emphasis on one word or another to give me a clue what you meant. I'll assume what you meant is: "It's not what *you* (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) No, it's unfortunate. (...) Goes without saying. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) would (...) agree? (...) were (...) another to (...) *You* must find it *really* hard to read books if there are *no* pointers to the *important* words in the sentences? Perhaps *your* mother underlines them for *you*? :-) (...) you (...) (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) No, most writers can manage to get their point across clearly without the need for emphasis, because they know that the written word doesn't carry any. (...) You responded to my post, pretty much as I predicted you would. (...) You're right. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) I'm not sure what you mean by this? Are you saying you are some sort of martyr for all of LUGNET versus me? (...) As you are a member of society. You have a obligation to think of others, and generally be a nice guy. You don't have to (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) Certainly not, I apologise for not being clear. What I meant was, when I said I had not personally insulted you, you took umbrage because the conversation was suddenly about you and I- I meant only to widen the scope of my statements, ie, "I (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: My point.
|
|
(...) This old one? (URL) was just one year ago. And you still havn't learn... (...) Please... (24 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
