1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  18  |   Order by default

Jul 8, 2004, 10:35pm

Well, maybe it was not a wish but an inquery to the community about how
usefull people would find such a feature?

D
"eep" <no at spam.com> kirjoitti viestissä news:40ED91EF.34995BF0 at spam.com...
> Wrong newsgroup; use news://news.activeworlds.com/wishlist
>
[View Quote]

Feb 8, 2002, 7:37pm

Mar 6, 2002, 2:23am

Mar 14, 2002, 2:27am

Well,for some ppl the internet can open new doors to listen to a radio..if I
open up the "normal" radio,I got a selection on about 6 stations,of which 3
are pretty similiar.
The thing I do not understand in this matter is;why are music companies
worried that it would sell less records if the radio stations play the
music? Atleast for me it works the other way around,I hear something I like
on the radio,then I go out and buy the record.It used to be so that,the more
your music was played on radio,the more was the record sold.

Drac


kellee <kellee at my.activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3c900076 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I just have one question and I know that I'll get yelled at....but so
what?
> I just cant understand why ppl use their computers to listen to radio or
> play music. It is totally beyond me why you just dont turn a REAL radio on
> and not slow down your PC with noise thats not even good quality.
>
>
>
[View Quote]

Apr 14, 2002, 9:09pm

Hi,if you do not need a huge webspace,I could provide you with it.No banners
no pop-ups,just a bit cumbersome url,unless you have a domain.

Count Dracula
nornny11 <Nornny1 at attbi.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cb9c2dd$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> As an individual ActiveWorldsophile, I don't have much to contribute to
the
> community except my love for replicating reality-television series.
> Sorry, I've been cursed with bad genetics. :P There's been so much change
> and chaos to
> the AW community in just the past months, I really wanted to bring back
> some semi-old times. That, my friends, would be Newsgroup Survivor, where
> all the contestants are loony, and flaming is required! >:) I know some
> oldies
> are leaving very soon, and some newbies are joining the community ranks,
and
> then there's my pile of people who were unfortunately not casted for the
> first season, who all have seen the game and are ready to make this second
> cast and win THE BIG PRIZE...
>
> Yes, there will be a big prize (*makes mental note to get big prize*), or
at
> least a very expensive one, considering how much citizenships sell for
these
> days. :) The location
> for this season will be in the infamously off-topic general.disscussion
> newsgroup. Where anything goes, and bashing someone else's momma will only
> bring you praise. I know some of you are saying "Hey, this is cool, but
> I don't think I'll last a minute." You'd be surprised how lucky this game
> can get, just ride the waves. :)
>
> This Newsgroup Survivor, most likely, will be my last. My citizenship
> expires next January early in the month, and I'll be moving on with my
real
> life through a torturously challenging senior year as I head into the home
> stretch to another virtual life, college. :) So, as you are slowly wiping
> away your tears of sympathy, I urge you to apply for this game. You're
> almost guaranteed a spot in the Sweet 16 that will compete in the same old
> Survivor, with PLENTY of new twists (I can name at least three that will
> blow everyone away). In the proccess, you might be eligible to win a
variety
> of rewards throughout the game besides the big prize.
>
> Everyone here has a unique personality and attitude that I want for the
> game. Almost all of you have the level of commitment (yes, it's that
> minimal) to play the game. If you're going to be here over the summer for
16
> weeks in front of the computer reading the newsgroup, on the web playing
> games, and in Activeworlds doing something, then you're qualified!!! Sign
> up!! :)) This season, the game will take place on all aspects of the web,
> survivors will compete in real time, in fake time, even in VRT time. ;)
> Tribal councils will be held live (to spark better drive in winning
> competitions so you don't have to waste an hour of your weekend in AW
being
> voted off). Challenges will be web based games like the first season, but
> also new games in AW itself, providing actual avatarian contact. And don't
> get me started on what will happen to the game itself.
>
> I've created a signup page at http://ngsurvivor.bravepages.com/signup.html
> Yes, that is a preview of the new Survivor site too (thanks to Elated, no
> more basic HTML stuff). It's totally preliminary and will only take 1
minute
> (it's only 3 questions). More questions will come later. :))
>
> So, get ready for the adventure of an AW lifetime. The competition for
> Newsgroup Survivor 2: General.Discussion is about to begin! *blows the
> opening theme to Survivor in a conch shell*
>
> Nornny
>
> PS. If anyone is willing to share some webspace that are pop-up ads-less,
> it'd be much appreciated. Banners, to me, are no problem at all, but
pop-up
> ads are the worse (especially on my IE browser which can't even display
> opened new windows in the first place). They tend to hurt people from
> visiting the site, and in this game, the website is really crucial. :)
Thnx
> in advance.
>
>

Apr 18, 2002, 12:40am

This is the reason why I hate all religions,jewish,islam,christian etc..the
religions are just something that is made up to brainwash people,preventing
them from thinking logically,the root of all evil.I am sure there would not
be a single war in the world if we had not religions;if people was allowed
to use logic instead.

Drac
swe <m_swehli at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cbd9895 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> just thought id show this to the rest of u... dont anyone even think bout
> flaming me, cuz i warned yall bout the pictures...
>
>
>
>
> First they arrest Moh'd Saleh, a Plastinian aged 23. So far nothing is
> wrong with the picture!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Then they pin Moh'd on the floor suspecting he had bombs attached to him.
> Still nothing out of the ordinary?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> They have him on the floor still, and they try to question a second
> Plastinian on the scence. They seem to have definitly overpowerd him and
> have full control over the suitation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> That's not enough? OK!! Now they have to strip him to make sure he
doesn't
> really have any bombs on him. AS we can see he is almost naked on the
> floor, (at least they had the decency to keep his underwear on), he is
> obviously overpowerd and unarmed, there is no sign of a bomb or any
> resistant. So what would a democratic country such as Isreal, a county
> which claims to respect human digintiy and life do??? Take him to prison??
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The picture speaks for itself !?!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The least you can while sitting in the comfort of your home is forward
this
> pictures to as many people as possible espically westerns so they can have
a
> glimse of what Plastinians go through!!
>
>
>
>

Apr 18, 2002, 8:45pm

I guess I have to clear myself a bit,I am not blaming any gods for the
wars,no,but the people who do it in the name of their gods.How could I blame
the wars on something I do not feel excist?I am just trying to say that
religions are scary,because they promise you eternal life if you do this and
that.Why cannot people just accept the fact that once we die we are dead,it
is is over.I just think it is sad that wars and cruelties are made in the
name of a religion,therefore I belive that if no religions would excist
atleast that could not be used as a reason for doing unhuman
things.Nazis,yes it is not generally considered as a religion,but it can be
compared to one,,and the people nazis mostly hated were jews (that is a
religion),so if no religions would excist how would the naziis have picked
their victims?It just scares the shit out of me when people take for granted
that something is right or wrong just because a religion,law or tradition
says so.I wish people would would start questioning things more instead of
taking everything for granted.
I agree that no religion is meant to be cruel.But it still seems the best
way to brainwash people into doing irrational things.Palestinainas and jews
are not actually fighting because they hate eachother personally,but because
their leaders has thought them to hate eachother because the other part
belive in a different god.Would it not be logically for them to live side by
side in the same area? would not the quality of their lives be better if
they not had the burden of religion?Now they are just fighting and fighting
..They are told it is glorious to die in a terrorist attack and they will get
a "good" position in their heaven.Everything this do not fit into my sense
of logic.
The saddest part is when religion becomes law,I think religion should be
something personal between you and your god.Many people do not actually
think of it how much the law of the "western world" also is infected by
christianity.Small irritating things we have written in our laws that are
not based on logic but on what some guy has said god knows how long ago ,and
we still just consider it right without questioning it.Example: When we go
swimming we have to use a bathingsuite or we might get arrested.Why? I mean
it has no logical reason,it is not warmer to swim nor it is more
hygienic.Yes,because sometimes long ago someone decided that we ought to be
ashamed of our body,and they choosed to which parts also..just imagine if we
instead would have to cover up our noses.Yes sounds funny,but if it had been
decided a long time ago that we ought to do it,everyone would walk around
with their noses covered up without questioning it.

Drac


carolann <carolannh at charter.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cbf104f$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> If it is religion that starts or fuels (some) wars, it is man's doing, not
> God's. If you don't believe in God anyway then you already know that,
right?
> If you do believe in God then you know that it is the interpretation that
> some men have, not God himself, that makes men war. And often religion is
> just an excuse to take what they want. We in the US have been told over
and
> over again not to blame all Muslims for the recent events in the US
because
> it was not the religion of Islam that brought this about but the extremist
> followers of a group of men using that religion as the reason for their
> idiocy. How can anyone blame religion for the lunacy of people who use
death
> and destruction as a means to get what they want when the majority of the
> world's believers use their religion as a source of peace and comfort in
> these times? The numbers of those who turn to their God dramatically
> increased these last months, as they always do in times of war. Using you
> theory it would follow then that in my small town of extremely diverse
> faiths we would be constantly at war with one another but instead have
just
> passed the 75th year of celebrating Holy days together in each other's
> houses of worship. This practice we have is not unique in the US either.
> True followers recognize that they might have different views and are
> tolerant of that and work with, not against, each other for the good of
> their fellow man. The people who cause these problems are extremely
> misguided and use "religion" to do whatever they want, they hide behind
it.
> (and what about WW2? You certainly don't mean the nazi's persecution of
the
> Jewish people?) Those who blame religion for the world's ills are
certainly
> not the ones who know and study it. They are also the minority of
followers,
> so please don't say that religion causes the worlds wars, but tell it like
> it is and blame fanatics when "religion" is the cause at all as was the
case
> on September 11, 2001. It's like the fat person blaming food for their
size,
> not their use or misuse of it.
>
[View Quote]

Apr 19, 2002, 2:26am

Yes I think we could have an intersting conversation some day.I am sure that
we wont agree on anything tho.I guess we wish the same things pretty much
although we have different reasons for beliving in what is right or wrong.
A question I have been wondering over tho,and I do not mean to ask you
personally this,but in general,,but since you brought it up:) When people
say they know God excist,is that not based on what they have been told? I
cannot imagine that an indian in the rainforrest that has never seen a white
man,suddendly gets an aha experience like: I suddenly realized that God
created the world,he created the man and out of his ribbon the woman.From
now on I am not allowed to work on a Sunday and I have to start wearing
clothes,My point with this is,are people who has never heard of God (as
christian ppl know him) automatically condemed to hell?Another thing I have
problems with is,how can anyone in modern sociaty actually belive the things
said in the bible that are against any common sence,like this Noa dude who
built a boat and took 2 of each animals with him and where did all the water
come from?
Finally one thing I do not understand is; catholics,ortodox,lutheran,jehovas
witness,amish etc all belive in the same god,but yet their belives varies a
lot.I am just wondering who has read the bible right,I guess it depends on
whom you ask.So if amish people are right that it is against the bible to
have buttons on your clothes,does it make all other christian ppl
wrong?.Does not some groups allow several wifes when most allow only
one?Jehovas witness do not celebrate birthdays or christmas.What I am trying
to say is,if something is said in the bible,should it not be followed and
not just take parts of it that suites oneself best?Earlier a woman could not
become a priest,but the pressurees of equality between sexes has made it so
that we have female priests here now.What does the bible actually say about
it,it say yes or no? If it say no,but we have changed that rule,is it ok to
also change other guidelines so that they fit our needs,like you shall not
steal,if we feel it is neccesary for us to steal.

Drac

carolann <carolannh at charter.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cbf7f17 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I think I understood what you meant and I didn't take offense to it
because
> I know you to be a decent man though our views on religion are far
> different. I sure wouldn't debate why I know (and I am not being
> disrespectful to other views here, it's just my own personal viewpoint)
that
> God is real, but would sure talk with you one on one about it anytime.
It's
> not a "feeling" or a "hope" or a "I'm pretty sure", it just IS as sure as
I
> know that (presently at least) my blood is flowing through my veins, yet I
> can't see it. Simplistic yes, won't hold up for comparison but that's not
> for this place. My main point, and I can't imagine an argument against it,
> is man will war as long as there is more than one still alive.and you know
> he will, if not about religion then about whatever there can be two
opinions
> about. One reason religion is an easy target is because it is so important
> to people but take it away and there won't be any less war. At least
> religion puts guidelines on some things, like murder, thievery, even doing
> bad things to your fellow man, and that has kept some people going on the
> right path. The others.would do their evil because of, in spite of, or
even
> if there were nothing like religion in the world. Just like you think some
> people need the promise of an afterlife to keep them going here on earth,
so
> do some people need an excuse for their evil deeds, and what better excuse
> than "God told me to do it"? You know drugs and money and even sex cause a
> great deal of evil to happen in the world, all over, every day, in
everyone'
> s neighborhood, yet everyone knows they have a viable place when used as
> they should be so it's just when they are used in a criminal way that they
> are looked down upon. We don't say the world would be a better place
without
> sex (we wouldn't be around to pat each other on the back for getting rid
of
> it in the next century anyway), or money or drugs (usually but not always
in
> the form of medicine), so why, of all things that can be used in the name
of
> evil, is religion the one thing we should do away with entirely? And we
can
> all be comforted by our faith if we have it, even in a prison cell.not so
of
> the other three. (well, I HAVE heard stories...)
>
[View Quote]

Apr 25, 2002, 6:21am

As far as I know idiocy is not partculart bound to nay race or culture,but
one run into it in all races,cultures .It somehow seems tho that some
partiucular "groups" has more representatives of idiots than other;I cannot
go into it here tho,because then I would be a racist.
One thing I have been wondering about tho.The black people in America wants
them to be called african-american,,I mean could they not choose any longer
and more completed name,,what is wrong with negro?So i started to speculate
a bit on this matter.Should the white people be refered to as
europen-americans and people from asia as asian-americans.And what about a
child that has a african-american mother and an european-amercian
father,,would he/she be african-european-american?
and imagine the person who is african-asian-american and marry a
european-australian-american,then they move to Europe and have
children,,what are these children then?
african-asian-australian-american-european?
My point is..why do some words meaning one thing suddenly become bad and we
have to invent new ones?Why do two or several words meaning the excatly same
thing has such a huge status difference.One word is acceptable to say and
the other not,although they both take your thought to excatly the same
thing.

Drac
silenced <nospam at privacy.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cc77f0c$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Can someone tell me how saying idiocy is a racial remark? Just need
> confirmation that idiocy means that the said action is stupid. Unless I
> missed something and it's somehow related to a racial remark in some odd
> negated alternate universe where idiots are a race.
>
> --Bowen--
>
> Have $3... want a website?
> http://www.smartpenguin.com/affiliate.php?id=12
>
>
>

May 4, 2002, 6:58am

Yes,is it not an absurd world we are living in,,where even a hug is
copywrited.

Drac
alphabit phalpha <alphabit at swbell.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3cd1f5af$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> The hug sequence in Cy Awards world was generously donated by Casay and
> Credo Software for the Cy Awards. I believe thier hug sequence is only
> otainable when you purchase thier avatars or software? You would have to
ask
> them for the particulars.
> Please don't take that sequence from your Cyawards world cache folder.
> Thank you:)
> AlphaBit:)
>
>

May 17, 2002, 7:26am

http://www.bettybowers.com/bible.html

a1cttourist5 <pineriver at thenett.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3ce3fa91$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Now I could get into quoting what God said about this, but this is a
> general.discussion newsgroup for info on AW. I just wanted to let ppl know
> that there is another way besides what agentfoxmulder at shaw.ca posted.
>
[View Quote]

Jun 14, 2002, 8:30am

I belive Marvin lives in Vendetta.

Drac
ananas <vha at oct31.de> kirjoitti viestissä:3D065FAB.E114732E at oct31.de...
> Marvin has been forgotten alone on a planet, he was
> very depressed after the long time. I think that's
> even worse than beeing sold. And I'm sure he would
> agree, if he wasn't too depressed to agree.
>
[View Quote]

Jun 16, 2002, 8:22pm

sheridan <motleymouse at worldnet.att.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d0ba183 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Whenever a new world is entered 98% of the time the default avatar is
male.
> Normally this wouldn't bother me, however for years now I have scramble
> frantically, sometimes straining to resize my windows, struggling to get
> into a skirt. I say ENOUGH! Women of AW unite! Let the men - those
> persons that spout they are the stronger gender - struggle from now on!
>
<clip>

I know quite a few worlds that has a female default avatar, but I
personally think I look kind of cute as a princess *g*
I guess the order is based on the bible (as much is even if we do not think
of it ) ,,did it not say that first a man was created and from his ribbon a
woman ? (or something like that )

Drac

Jun 17, 2002, 4:45am

Genesis 2:21

"And the LORD God caused a sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and he
took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof. And the rib,
which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman ..."

sorry english is not my main language.It was rib, not ribbon .

Drac

lioness e <nobody at nowhere.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d0d76d0 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> LMAO!!! a ribbon?
>
>
>
[View Quote]

Jun 27, 2002, 10:07am

just in <Justin at nomail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d1adc91 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Seeing Insanity falsely and unjustly discredited only highlights how some
> love to continue witchhunts based on their perceived understanding of
> things. Understandings that invariably turn out to be incorrect.
>
> This leads me to the never ending trash that I and OneSummer have to
endure
> at the hands of a few who happen to wield some influence, albeit
> dwindling...
>
> There are signs posted at the GZ of worlds America and Y2000 headed with
> "Warning to World Owners" which continues on to say that myself and
> OneSummer are banned, apparently using the excuse of us stealing avatars
> from their worlds.
>
> Truth is neither of us have stolen anything. Truth leads to OneSummer's
> good faith and trust in one person who had access to her object path in
> BluPearl world who loaded a total of two avatars onto her path, declaring
> them to be a gifts to her. As soon as it was confirmed that each were in
> fact stolen they were removed - and we would have thought it would be the
> end of the matter.
>
> Now here is the real truth. America world currently has over 300 objects
> and textures that I created on its paths. Evidence of this is proven by
> going to http://www.myactiveworlds.com/~america/ls.php? and listing either
> the Models or Textures path and counting up the objects and textures
> beginning with "ju_". I have never given permission for my creations to
be
> on America's paths and hence we discover who the real theives are. I'm
> still mulling over whether I should register the copyrights on my
creations
> and enforce my legal rights.
>
> The whole thing is a perpetuation of the Just In - Broadway vs FriendPa -
> NewYork "fued", which I wish could just be buried and forgotten.
> Unfortunately those signs do nothing to allow me and the others concerned
to
> forget it. And my creations on America's path only adds insult to injury.
>
> If Posh or Jetta lewis wish to ban me from their worlds, so be it - I
> couldn't care less. But their false accusations and discredit of mine and
> OneSummer's name is intolerable. I am unable to resolve this because AW
has
> refused to help, and both Jetta and Posh have filtered out my telegrams.
If
> you can telegram or speak to Jetta or Posh about removing the signs I
would
> appreciate it.
>
> Regards, Justin
>

To all that this matter may concerne,

I just decided to write a short answer here since myactiveworlds.com popped
up. I do not know what the "fight" is about and I wish to take no part. In
general I just think it is sad that people have to fight and argue in such a
small community as AW. Personally I have tried to enjoy my time in AW and
avoid all kind of fights as far as possible. I have been blueyed and
uploaded things to my personal object path that people has given to me as
their own; later I have found out they have not had the right to share them
and I have removed them. The object path that myactiveworlds.com provides I
have only uploaded regular aw objects (including megapath) , freebies I have
found on various sites and objects I or my close friends has made. Whatever
customers uploads to their own object paths we cannot monitor (except size
and file types) and we are not even interestind in snooping around in
peoples personal belongings. We wish though the everyone would respect
copyright laws and such.
If I can assist in any way to solve this matter between you, I am more than
glad to help, since I have no personal interest in this matter,well except
for I would wish for peace.

Best Regards Mikael Jansson aka Count Dracula ,myactiveworlds.com

Jul 6, 2002, 2:58pm

I was out worldhopping today , I decided to take a look in worlds that has
people in them. Many worlds showed one person so I went there to explore; I
like visiting worlds when owner is there, because then one can ask questions
and owners are often willing to show you around.
I went to a world named "FemaleAW" and the welcome message said " Welcome
to FemaleAW, a World where women can relax and talk about anything they
wish. Sorry, no men. " and the owner (I belive it was) said immediatly : "hi
Count Dracula, sorry men arent allowed :(" . I do not quite understand the
logic in this, I mean why add a ": (" after saying that, like beeing sorry
for the fact that men are not allowed, if the owner is sad about that, why
do not change the policy?

So now I was wondering: is it ok to discriminate people based on their sex?
(or anything else).
How long would AW let me run a world that would not allow women to enter,
before they would close it down as sexistic?
Can I make a world that say: " sorry, no balck people", "sorry, no whites",
"sorry, no gays", "sorry, no heteros" or "sorry, no Ford owners" ?
The owner did not consider her world discriminating in any way, but I bet if
I ejected her from my world because she is a women, there would be A LOT
bitching and every single feminist in AW would attack me.

Maybe men should also found chauvinist organizations to work "against" the
feminist organistations , to keep a balance.
As we all probably know feminist are not pro equality, but want women to be
"better" than men. They want to see women in so called men jobs, but by no
mean all jobs, only the high payed. Or when have you heard a feminist beeing
worried abot that there is too less women driving garbage trucks?
I am pro equality among all people, regardless sex, religion, race etc.

Count Dracula , obviously born in the wrong body to be accepted in all
worlds.

Jul 6, 2002, 6:07pm

Yes I went to an other place, I do not care about their rules, I do not want
to go to worlds I am not welcomed to.It is a matter of principe to me; I
mean where do we draw a line who we allowed in and who not. Personally I
think worlds that want only certain persons to enter should be "red". I had
understand it if they had been having a meeting and I had disturbed, but
there was only one person except me, so I cannot understand what one person
was doing that me beeing present had disturbed.
So you mean I can make any rules for my worlds, no matter if and how
racistic they are ?

Drac
sw comit <swcomit at swcity.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d274526 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> There's over a thousand other words out there bud, go somewhere else then.
> They bought the world, let them place whatever rules they want. It's like
a
> guy trying to get into the girl scouts =\
>
[View Quote]

Jul 6, 2002, 6:11pm

alphabit phalpha <alphabit at swbell.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d274c11 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I think the only way you could logically restrict males from a world is if
> you named it "Ladys Showers" or something.
> But then there would be a ton of male "ejections"....LOL
>
Yes but in virtual, what difference would it make? I know in RL people feel
uncomfortable about nudity, but virtually that should not be a prblem.The
funny part was when I asked or said something like, if I log in with another
account and use a female name ,I am welcomed then? The owner said yes if
that is what you want. The point here is that on-line we are more or less
sexless or multisex capable if we want, so our sex should not be a problem.

Drac

Jul 6, 2002, 6:49pm

Not necceraly, it would be discriminating if a dog wanted to vote but we
would not let it. As far as I know no dog has ever insisted it wants to
vote.

Drac
dion <Dion at digevo.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d27559c$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> sounds idiotic, but it's discrimination nonetheless
>
[View Quote]

Jul 7, 2002, 6:11am

The job you have and your IQ has seldom anything to do with eachother. The
highest IQ's has been mesured in mental institutions. What comes to garbage
truck drivers they are not at all badly paid here, they make about same as a
proffesor in an univerisity (my estimate). Without garbage truck drivers we
would drown in shit, so actually it is a highly important job also, yet it
is not well respected.

Drac

dion <Dion at digevo.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d27cbb1$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> well generally, if you're pretty smart you get a job that pays more.
>
[View Quote]

Jul 8, 2002, 1:50pm

Hmm I forgot to check that out, maybe I have to go again LOL
Yes they can keep their club, I do not care. It is just the common attitude
that if a man says something "bad" about a woman or a women is not
"approved" for something, the hell breakes out. All kind of ombudsmen and
feminist attack you and make sure you feel you are the most guilty person on
earth. Then again it seems to be ok if the "discrimination" is towards men;
the attitude is like well try to live with it, no big deal.
In our TV we had 2 commercials, one was a paint commercial, where a
"biglunged" women dressed in a top was presenting paint, the other was a
furniture commercial where furnitures was presented by the former Miss
Finland in a bikini. Both commercials were forbidden because they was
considred sexcist or degrading of women.Both the women acting in these
commercial was there volentary and got paid for it ans were upset about the
decission to ban their commercials. At the same time in another paint
commercial one top athletic (male) was presenting the paint topless and the
camera zoomed in on his butt. Nobody has considered this sexcistic. So I
cannot help wondering why sexy women on TV are "bad" but sexy males are
totally ok.
I might just for the fun of it, not that I stand for it, found a male world
where women are not allowed, just to see how long it is allowed to excist
;-)

Drac
sheridan <motleymouse at worldnet.att.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d2991a4 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Was their default av female? *grins*
>
> It's true, reverse discrimination is not pretty. But think of it as a
club
> and it is easier to swallow. It really isn't the first world with limits
> set, usually they are based on age and whether you are open minded or not.
> As a community we can choose to ignore them, or we can set up a petition
to
> dis-allow them....but isn't that a form of discrimination itself?
>
[View Quote]

Aug 13, 2002, 12:05pm

kit <dominicl at clear.net.nz> kirjoitti
viestissä:3D577F9E.188660AB at clear.net.nz...
> That was a stylish exit I must say!! (laughs uproariously)
> And your form is consistent with past posts too. Lol. Still slinging
epithets.
>
[View Quote] Drac

Sep 7, 2002, 2:43pm

geez, very likely that a country "on the other side" of the world will
attack. But it is typical USA thinking; lets fight our wars as far away as
possible from our ground (like Viatnam, Korea, Iraque).
If USA stopped acting like the "police of the world" I bet other countries
would not feel so hostile against it either.

Drac
dion <Dion at digevo.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d79ff9a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> or we can just let Iraq blow us apart *shrug*
>
[View Quote]

Sep 7, 2002, 3:52pm

Well teoretically USA can blow us away any time also (as can many other
countries like Russia, China and India), but we have not decided to attack
them just in case yet.
And Cris it is not defense if USA (with help of UK and maybe some other
countries )attack Iraque, it is defense if Iraque attacks first. Or could I
go and hit someone on the street just because he might have the intension of
hurting me, and say I did it in selfdefense?

Drac
sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d7a3a05 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Actually it's purely a defensive measure. There's lots of evidence that
> Iraq can blow us away from where its sitting on the "other side" of the
> world.
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

Sep 8, 2002, 7:08am

Teoretically we are (at least used to be under the scope of both USA and
Russia). I am even sure that some missiles are still pointed at our capital
city. Is there ANY proof that Saddam is planning an attack towards USA ?
What I do not understand is: Why is US and Russia supposed to be allowed to
have nuclear weapons but no islamic country?
I am not saying Saddam Hussein is a nice guy, but I just think pissing him
off will not improve anything.
What if USA manage to kill Saddam, would that not make him a martyr in his
country? Maybe next ruler will be even more negative towards the nation that
attacked them. I just do not think that war solve anything, it will probably
only make things worse. When the "western world" turns against the east with
full power, they might loose that battle, but it makes a good soil for the
holy war, that is mostly terrorism. Terrorism because that is the only way a
smaller group can fight something that has more power (ETA,IRA etc).
In whole, I just do not like the way of thinking that our western
"christian-capitalist-hypohcritism" is the only right way.
Next 9/11 might happen in my country, to me. If that is to happen it
happens, I do not see any reason why we should start killing those that
could be potential terrorists though, because then we are not any better
than the terrorists themselves.

Love, peace & understanding , Drac

sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d7a8d5e$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Well, that's easy for you to say. You're not sitting under the sniper
> scope. :)
>
> Part of the reason why the United States is acting like this is because of
> World War 2. The last time we waiting for our enemy to hit us was then,
and
> by the time that they did, it was almost too late for many Jews,
Catholics,
> and Irish among others living under Hitler's rule.
>
> So, are you going to let a crazy with designs to take over the middle east
> do whatever he wants until it satisifies you that he's going just a little
> too far over the line between just "crazy" and "insanity", or are you
going
> to take him AND ONLY HIM out and stop a firestorm before it begins?
That's
> what you're looking at here.
>
> The United States is not going to make a mess out of things like they did
> with other things in the past. They have learned from those mistakes. It
> does not make any sense to wait until Hussein kills someone before you
> decide to say, "Oh, well he's not very nice."
>
> If I'm not mistaken, that's why 9/11 happened. When's the next one going
to
> be? In your country, perhaps?
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

Sep 9, 2002, 6:59am

Yes, but now this is what USA is planning to do, go to Iraque and nuke out a
part of it. I do not see how that can be more justified. I have seen none
proof of Saddam planning to nuke USA. The fact that he hates it does not
make it a plan to nuke it.
Personally I think one could reach much more with diplomacy, but seems the
president of USA has none such skills. One can just wonder if Bush has been
screwing some secretary on the table of the white house and now it has to be
covered up; and what would be better than to start a small war someplace as
far as possible from home, to get some distraction. If you need to fight,
fight with the canadians or mexicans, that would make more sense, but on the
other hand you cannot do that because then you might have to spill some
blood on your own ground.
I can almost hear Bush sitting at his ranch: I'm bored, I'm bored let's go
and nuke some small country in the east, who knows what those beduins are up
to...

Drac
athnex <awnews at athnex.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d7c0d3f at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Its not like saddam is a nice sane guy who if he did have nuclear weapons
> wouldent use them unless he was attacked. I think if he got some.. he
would
> stick them on a boat and drive it 5 miles from the beach/bay of some huge
> town and blow it up.. would kill millions. If the guy was nice and wasnt
out
> to destroy america like he is now. We probably just make a big deal out of
> it and not do anything.
>
[View Quote]

Sep 15, 2002, 7:30am

So what? Tourists should not have been even banned in the first place. I
would rather ban narrowminded people who thinks black-and-white.(All hackers
are bad, All Iraques are bad. lets bomb them,Western culture is the only
right one etc)..I really wish people would learn to look at things from
different points of wievs, also points that are in conflict with own
belives.
As far as I know Sleepy has never caused any problems to anyone. He tests
things out of curiousity (I belive) and to help AW find bugs and security
risks. I prefer Sleepy to do this testing , rather than some "evil hacker" .

Drac
linn <ironhead at digitalpassage.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d822b66 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> yes I know too he was going into worlds that do not allow tourists
> as a tourist?? not a good thing
[View Quote]

Oct 7, 2002, 1:27pm

Kind of funny; that wav was originally made to be a human imitation of a
Trabant..but I guess the joke wont work if you are not familiar with
Trabants , Wartburgs or other 2-stroked cars, and if you are not familiar
with the superioty of Ferrari in F1.

Drac
the derek <imthederek at yahoo.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3d9fa676 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> http://www.vickysjokes.com/funny/insanity.asp
>
>

Nov 28, 2002, 11:49pm

Kind of sad to see that my current computer fits into the historical part

Drac
orb <Sharon at my.activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3de3e12e at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> The Age of the computer.
>
> http://library.thinkquest.org/22522/
>
> ORB
>
>

Nov 28, 2002, 11:46pm

I am also wondering when I will get the world won in Bingo, sometimes in
August....

Drac
builderz <sawran at yahoo.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3DE637E9.256FD67C at yahoo.com...
> I've telegrammed and sent him an e-mail over a week ago and have yet
> received no reply. He owes me a P-50 world. Anyone know where I can
> reach him?
>
> -Builderz

1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  18  |   Order by default