 | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Why? I don't object to people wearing a crucifix as jewellry, how is this different? Your answer might possibly need to veer off into off-topic.debate, I leave it to you to decide. (...) Is one supposed to use SNOT merely for its own sake? I (...) (20 years ago, 2-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | (...) I object to both (...) Debates take too long. I'd like to leave it here (...) I have nothing against people not using SNOT, and on second thoughts, this model did use it anyway. I guess I meant to point at the fact that this model has a bit of (...) (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Allister McLaren
|
| | | | (...) I smell a challenge. Who can make the most boring ship? A (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Bob Parker
|
| | | | | (...) IIRC, that red 2x4 brick that was entered in the Galaxy Enforcer contest should definately take the title of Most Boring Ship - although at least it was not made with an all SNOT technique. ;-) Bob (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Adrian Drake
|
| | | | | | (...) Sure it was. The picture was just taken upside down :) Adrian (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand! —Richie Dulin
|
| | | | (...) I may have something of an unfair advantage: I'm a trained and qualified (though, fortunately, not practising) accountant. ;-) Cheers Richie Dulin (URL) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| | | | |
