1  ...  9  10  11  12  13  14  ...  18  |   Order by default

Mar 17, 2003, 3:47am

One problem might be tho that tourists are not allowed into that many
worlds. How is it with AWDebate ?
Furthemore, to me it seems some people cannot see the difference between and
argument, conversation and fight.
If one want, one can "fight" about anything. Nice weather today, sun is
shining :) . I hate sunshine.....

Drac
binarybud <leo at realPANTStourvision.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e71efee$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> The Gate is a special place for helping newbies and others learn the
software and what AW is all about.
> People need to understand this....the Gate is NOT for debates of any kind.
It disrupts. What i do not understand is why people insist on gathering
there for their debates and harrassment of people.....then when they get
disiplinied they scream censorship....
> People just nee to learn the rules and learn what AWGate is for. After
that is real simple....EJECT!
> If you do not want to play by the rules of the gate then ejection is way
to easy to make ou comply.
> REMEBMER this If you have a hard time with authority then the gate is not
for you....because authority is what is needed at the gate in order for it
to run smoothly. There are hundreds of other worlds you can do what you
want in just leave the Gate alone.
>
> Leo :) aka BinaryBud
>
[View Quote]

Mar 18, 2003, 1:52am

He kind of has, that is the sad part. He is the president of the most
powefull country and acts as a role model for many.
Power also brings responsibility and by setting a bad example one shows it
is ok to break rules and laws.

Drac
ryan jacob <ryan_jacob at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e75cdca at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Bush has nothing to do with AW.
>
> End of THAT conversation.
>
[View Quote]

Mar 18, 2003, 4:36am

Sorry. Not that I know why I should stay on topic, if i do not feel so and
I am just learning that one do not need to follow rules if one do not wish
to :)

Drac

Mar 18, 2003, 2:04pm

First of all I said sorry, I noticed I was replying in another thread I
thought it was.
Secondly, I do not hate America or americans. It is nothing specific towards
that country. If any other country would act as USA does, I would dislike
that also/instead.
I know many american people are against the politic of Bush; and all credit
to them.
Why repeat it over and over again, maybe for same reason some preachers
preach and preach beliving they might save a soul.

We cannot be 100% sure that Bush do not read this NG ( assuming he knows how
to read), but I would not be surprised if CIA, FBI or some other instance
would keep on eye on what is written in NGs ( maybe not in AW tho).

I am glad you have done something to let your goverment know you dislike
their actions. I am aware that if one or 2 people protest it will make no
difference, but if 20 million do it, they might have to start listening. And
if my preaching even open the eyes of one person I concider it a winning. I
am also aware that I piss off a lot of people, but I have been silent for
some 30 years, never said anything bad to anyone and what do I have ?
Nothing.

I have never claimed I know anything better than anyone else, actually I am
just a dumb fuck, but still I belive I should have the right to have an
opinion, even a strong one. Sometimes one needs to excaggerate (spellcheck)
to get something started.

What comes to the war itself, it is not the war that is my biggest concern,
but the total ignorance toward UN. I am just scared it will set an bad
example for other countries. The war again will not be over in 3 days, it
will take much longer, there will be oilfields burning and both people and
nature suffering; but worst of all will be the revenge attacks that will
mostly hurt the american civilianz. You can call me anti-american if you
want, but I just would not like to see civilianz get killed in Iraq nor in
USA. So my reason for beeing against Bush and those supporting him, is
actually not the fact I would hate USA, but because i like the people in
USA.

I have written e-mails to our goverment in matters that are important for
me, I can write an e-mail to Bush also, but I doubt he will read it and
contact me for consultation *g*. If Bush had some brains he would not turn
USA against Europe, but it almost seems he want USA ( those supporting the
war) to hate both Germany and France.

Drac
carolann <carolannh at charter.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e76c32b at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> You know what? If you want to vent your spleen on what should be the
object
> of your hate, get out a paper and pen and write to the president and major
> leaders of the US. I did it, I wasn't pleasant, (it was only related to
the
> war, I still love my country) and guess what? They still haven't arrested
> me. I'm sure they didn't say, "Oh oh, CarolAnn says no to war, lets call
it
> off!" but I still added my feelings to those of millions of others. I
guess
> we can do that here. Do you think it won't do any good or won't make you
> feel as good? What good is saying the same thing over and over and over
> again in here? By now, there isn't an AW newsgroup reader who doesn't know
> that you hate Americans, America or at least everything American no matter
> what they do, think or say. It has to be directed at us because I'm sure
> Bush doesn't read these posts. If that isn't true, then why keep saying
the
> same thing over and over again? Say it once, say it twice, even say it 3
> times but not every other post in every topic. If it changed things
globally
> I'd back you up-but it hasn't. Even in the USA we don't directly make
those
> decisions. Do you know of a country that allows individuals to call a halt
> to these kind of actions because they learned it was wrong by reading a
> bunch of internet news group postings? Your point has been made and hasn't
> done a thing but insult a lot of people with many different view points,
> maybe even some in agreement with your war views, but probably not your
> limited views on the US in general. You apparently know more than our
> government, our news services, (the ones that many heads of state (etc etc
> etc) from around the world have no problems speaking with, stupid morons I
> guess), and you apparently know more and are wiser than 285,000,000
American
> citizens. Why waste your time trying to teach the naive and evil masses?
Go
> right to the source and leave us to our wicked ways.
>
[View Quote]

Mar 19, 2003, 7:05am

Useless to go on since we are no lawyers, but an attack is an attack.
Especially if the Un "troops" (inspectors) has to flee an attack because one
country is about to attack, even tho the security council has not given
permission.

Drac
binarybud <leo at realPANTStourvision.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e775365$3 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Drac get your head out of the sand.... if you keep shouting this
stance for the world to see....they will truly see who you are......No Laws
are being broken by Bush.....read the reslolutions your refering to.....they
have a statement that allows use of force on Iraq upon
noncompliance.....we(the US) are the only ones with balls enough to make
Iraq own up to it's ways..... i know i know it's hard for you to
swallow but try it'll make you feel better about yourself. lol
>
> LOL
>
>
[View Quote]

Mar 20, 2003, 4:06am

Well, it is not totally off-topic, since the thread was about censorship.
But I already admitted I did a wrong thing because I did not notice this was
in worldbuilders and I said sorry for that. Not sure if there is so much
more I can do.

Drac
shred <shred at myrealbox.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e78a601 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> 1. This idiocy belongs in general.discussion
> 2. Stop steering topics in directions that are totally unrelated to the
subject at hand.
> 3. There are already enough threads to filter in enough groups to go
around for everyone. Don't turn this thread into yet another one.
>
> If you (or others - I am not focusing this post at only you) feel that you
must contaminate Community with your political hogwash, then E N Z O should
just kill this thread before it gets out of hand.
>
> They spread like a damned virus...
>
[View Quote]

Mar 25, 2003, 8:30am

Not going to comment on this, but I would not mind seeing some of that
terrible material.

Drac
wings0nite <irene at ischaft.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e7fec4a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

Apr 3, 2003, 6:21am

Well whatever, once we get there and if we do not find any, we will plant
one and then call for the press .

Drac
e n z o <enzo at activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e8af2d8$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Read my lips " we do not have weapons of mass destruction, what you saw
was
> Venus"
>
> E
>
>
[View Quote]

Apr 26, 2003, 7:15am

One of the rare occasions I agree with Bowen LOL

Drac
bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3ea9a531 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> *grabs head and screams* SHUT UP
>
>

Jul 5, 2003, 4:54pm

I agree on the point that tourist should be known by some system, because as
it is now tourists cannot be traced and citizens can.
I disagree heavily on the point not allowing tourists to visit. Not many
peopel pay for someting they do not know what it is, and only way to learn
is to explore. With your logic people should not be allowed to visit
webpages unless they have a server of they own ?

Drac
codewarrior <pete at accelr8r.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3f071447$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'm a newbie to AW, but as a world owner, I have no interest whatsoever in
> allowing *totally anonymous* people to enter my world for any reason.
>
> I dont' care one whit wether they paid or not. Give them free accounts..
> whatever.... the economics of it are up to AWI, but noone comes into my
> world with a cit number of '0'.... period.
>
> No sane website will allow you to post without *verifying* your email
> address, but anyone can come into AW and cause trouble by supplying a fake
> email address and I just won't have that.
>
> Yes.. I was a tourist too once, but I gave a valid email address and would
> have quite happily waited to reply to a confirmation emal before trying
out
> the AW software.
>
> The concept of tourists is a good one, but the way it is implemented (i.e.
> you can't tell tourists apart) could use a fresh look.
>
>

Jul 6, 2003, 9:08am

Yes, if you cought the tourist while beeing there, but finding builds
vandalized or rude signs. It is not so easy to track who did what.

Drac
strike rapier <strike at rapiercom.freeserve.co.uk> kirjoitti
viestissä:3f0720cf$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Ud be suprised, IPs and reverse DNS can work well some times
>
> - Mark
>
[View Quote]

May 3, 2003, 7:25am

Sunds like part of this pre-emtive hysteria going on "over ther". Since
users has the capability of typing and most likely know others than G-rated
words, they become a threat to a G-rated enviroment. Even if the users are
using only G-rated words it is safer to eject him/her before he/she might
say something "bad" ( like Bowen in gate). A good reason for banning people
is also if they use words that you do not understand; like foreign foods
might be some cover up antrax anyway) , chicken breasts ( might offend
vegetarians) etc.

Yes, better warn everyone. Dont trust anyone. The potential evilness is
lurking everywhere. "God bless OUR country ( screw the others) and long live
paranoia!

Drac
strike rapier <strike at rapiercom.freeserve.co.uk> kirjoitti
viestissä:3eb2a890 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Okay I have no idea who did this but someone really really REALLY lost the
> plot BIG TIME with this welcome message. Its ridiculous, no offence to
> whoever did it but its absolutely stupidity.
>
> Are you trying to loose the majority of the customer base? You have no way
> of even checking if someone has permission, this does nothing but makes
> everyone run, Im trying my best to develop AWTeen, idiotic messages like
> this completely wreck my efforts.
>
> Will someone please find whoever wrote this, tie them to a chair and learn
> what an initial disclaimer is for and WHAT IN GODS NAME IS GOOD FOR
> BUSINESS!!!
>
> Immigration Officer: Welcome to Active Worlds. Most of the content in
Active
> Worlds is user generated and may not be suitable for person's under the
age
> of 18, parent's permission MUST be obtained before visiting Active Worlds.
> We welcome you to the AWGateway : )
>
> FIX IT!!!
>
> - Mark
> Why am I surrounded by fools? Yes no doubt this phrase was possibly put up
> by a good friend in AWC, sorry if it is you will just have to take the
flack
> this time :(
>
>

May 9, 2003, 8:12am

"suitable for all ages". That is pretty much a cultural thing. Does it
actually mean " suitable for all ages in USA" ?

Drac
alphabit phalpha <alphabit at swbell.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3eb525b4$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Any participating and awarded world must be suitable for all ages.
> A person who owns or plays in higher rated worlds is NOT disqualified, but
> their entry must be in a world rated for all ages.
> For instance, if a person created an avater or object in an adult rated
> world that was suitable for all ages, they could place that avatar in a
> friends world or we could possibly see about getting a "display" world to
> place it, or have a world owner out there donate some of thier area for
> displaying avs or objects....(oooooo idea!....exposure for a world
owner!).
> If ya'll need some explanations as to why...please holler:)
>
>
>
[View Quote]

May 9, 2003, 8:14am

Kind of funny. I know people who are 17 and married and even has a child of
their own. I guess they are suppoed to ask permission from mom if they can
go to AW and chat *G*

Drac
strike rapier <strike at rapiercom.freeserve.co.uk> kirjoitti
viestissä:3eb2a890 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Okay I have no idea who did this but someone really really REALLY lost the
> plot BIG TIME with this welcome message. Its ridiculous, no offence to
> whoever did it but its absolutely stupidity.
>
> Are you trying to loose the majority of the customer base? You have no way
> of even checking if someone has permission, this does nothing but makes
> everyone run, Im trying my best to develop AWTeen, idiotic messages like
> this completely wreck my efforts.
>
> Will someone please find whoever wrote this, tie them to a chair and learn
> what an initial disclaimer is for and WHAT IN GODS NAME IS GOOD FOR
> BUSINESS!!!
>
> Immigration Officer: Welcome to Active Worlds. Most of the content in
Active
> Worlds is user generated and may not be suitable for person's under the
age
> of 18, parent's permission MUST be obtained before visiting Active Worlds.
> We welcome you to the AWGateway : )
>
> FIX IT!!!
>
> - Mark
> Why am I surrounded by fools? Yes no doubt this phrase was possibly put up
> by a good friend in AWC, sorry if it is you will just have to take the
flack
> this time :(
>
>

May 10, 2003, 6:34am

Yep, just what I meant. There is nothing such as "suitable for all ages"
that would be international. Guess we can be glad AW is not an Iranian
company, but only hosted in about the second most "srict" part of the world;
it will atleast not make us cover up the faces of the avatars, only some
other, in my opinion, innocent parts of the "body". I guess nobody will ever
be able to give me a logical explanation why we are supposed to cover up
genitals, and even worst breasts. Funny thing is also that men are allowed
to be topless but not female. I think this is something that feminists
should start bitching about. It cannot be right that women are not given the
same " rights" as men? The funny part is that for example the nipples on a
man and a woman are basically the same. When an unborn baby is developed all
get the same nipples, and only after that the sex is determinated; that is
the reason why men has nipples in the first place. ( Everyone actually
starts as female). I wonder how for example shemales are are considered.
They are legally men but have breasts; are they allowed to walk around
topless without getting in problem with the law? Can I have a topless
shemale in my G-rated world?

Drac

alphabit phalpha <alphabit at swbell.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3ebbb5b1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Well...seeing's how AW AND myself are in the USA, we need to follow USA
laws
> and regulations.
> Working on the new cy pages now and I'll have more info on the rules page.
> They should be up by then end of the weekend:)
> BTW....they will be rated "F" for Fun!.....idea gratis Binary Bud:)
>
[View Quote]

May 10, 2003, 3:28pm

Well they would if they was pro equality for sexes ;-)
I have neither heard them ever complain of how relativly small amount of
women are involved in the garbage collecting system, the car repairing
business; neither do I hear any complains that there are to less men as
beauticians.

Drac
swe <swe at swe-e.com> kirjoitti viestissä:3ebcbba2 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> lol! would be nice if the feminists start bitchin about being allowed to
> walk around topless wouldn't it? :D
>
> -SWE
>
[View Quote]

May 10, 2003, 3:32pm

Yes it is funny that is has to be some weird carneval to be allowed to do a
natural thing.
Yeah, lets play Mardi Gras, turn on your webcam and show me your tits and I
will throw candy at the screen....

Drac
alphabit phalpha <alphabit at swbell.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3ebce3b7$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Ummm...they have here in Austin during Mardi Gras:)
> And...they won:)
> It's a tradition that gals bare there top part of their bodies in exchange
> for colorful plastic bead necklaces.
> Sheesh...and all this time I have been getting gratis from restaurants:)
>
>

May 6, 2003, 10:28am

Hmm, not sure I quite understand this though. So you have placed 2 signs in
the middle of nowhere with no plans of adding anything else? Are those 2
signs really so important that they cannot be removed or is it more a
principal question for you?
Maybe you have the right to have 2 signs anywhere you want, but if they are
in the way of maybe something nice someone has started to build, I think you
should consider removing them, if not for else but as a friendly gesture.

Drac
the lady <thelady263414 at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3eb42922 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> A PK threatening to write me up because I won't remove two signs that were
> there before anyone else was in the first place AND were there to be of
help
> to a new builder!
>
> This is unfair peacekeeing practices and should be stopped immediately.
> Fairness and equality should be the strengths of the peacekeeping
> organization.
>
>

May 7, 2003, 6:09am

Personal attacks are part of the human nature.
If one person constantly "attacks" the community in the NGs, I think it is
more or less a natural reflex that the community strikes back.

Not sure, but I think personal attacks should be allowed in the general
discussion, since it is an off topic group, and there should anyone be able
to post whatever cross his/her mind; may it then be christan/muslimic
propaganda, praise of North-Korea or trying to explain the nazis and
republicans actually are nice people.

Drac
e n z o <enzo at activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3eb8003c$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> There have been numerous threads lately involving personal attacks on at
> least one of our citizens. While we might not agree with every opinion or
> even the length of posts (and some people may not be very "savvy"
regarding
> nettiquete or AW issues/history) we should find other ways to ignore
people
> (without attacking them). Look under TOOLS or OPTIONS or HELP in your
> newsreader.
>
> Personal attacks will not be tolerated and will be deleted when found.
>
> Please refrain?
>
> At least three late threads are now deleted... please do not start them up
> again or continue them. If this continues we may have no choice but to
> block posters or close the NG.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> E
>
>
>
>

May 10, 2003, 3:18pm

I never said I am pro-attacks, just that people do them. Not sure how it is
in other countries, but atleast here when for example people go to
restaurants, quite often fights break out. Every time someone hit me I take
it quite personal.
I have heard that on many streets in big cities you are not supposed to go
for a walk alone in dark streets. Getting killed in an attack is quite a
personal thing.
You are right people are desperate, I guess we could discuss the resons here
forever. Another thing combinated with desperation is paranoia. This is a
lethal combination unfortunatly. I guess all these "personal attacks" are a
sign that our "society" is not healthy.
I have personally tried to avoid personal attacks, maybe I occasionally say
something ironical to someone, often tho after I have recived a similar
comment.

I have noticed for example each time I "attack" the US goverment, the
israelian goverment or the goverment of some other undiplomatical country,
people tend to take it extremely personal. I have been called a terrorist,
anti-christ, USA hater and god knows what ( especially in those hate letters
I have recived in my personal mail). I do not see why the AW community
should be any different. If someone says something "bad" about the community
here, people react the same way.
I am usually just amused when I get these letters and name-calling. To a
certain point I think personal attacks can even be funny and amusing as long
as they are done in a mutual understanding.

Drac
goober king <gooberking at utn.cjb.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3EB8ECAA.3070005 at utn.cjb.net...
> Umm, no Drac. Personal attacks are the weapons of desperate people. If
> you can't carry an intelligent debate without attacking your "opponent",
> especially here in the newsgroups where people are allowed the luxury of
> spending time to think out their responses carefully and considerately,
> then perhaps you need to step away from the computer until you're ready
> to act more civilly.
>
> Attacking ideas and policies is one thing, but when you attack the
> person you're arguing with, that's when it becomes... well, personal.
>
[View Quote]

May 20, 2003, 3:32pm

Yes, but I only tried to say that in some cases personal attacks can be
amusing, like what KAH and Bowen are doing in this thread. I just hope the
person who monitors has the capabilty to separte attacks in god will and
mutual agreement from those offending either part. Otherwise we might end up
like in the gate where you are banned as a pre-emtive action or as a result
if the person monitoring having a limited understanding of things.

Drac
goober king <gooberking at utn.cjb.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3EBDA281.5000703 at utn.cjb.net...
> That's part of my point, Drac. In a text-based environment, mutual
> understanding is very hard to come by. And besides, just because people
> do personal attacks doesn't mean we should condone or encourage that
> sort of behavior. It's like saying we should allow theft just because
> everyone's done it in some form or another already. :P
>
[View Quote]

Jun 13, 2003, 8:31am

The problem with evilness is that it is so relative. What I might consider
evil, might be the ultimatum good for another and vice versa. I will not
give examples here so I will not get the ultra-nationalistic idiots all over
me again.
Other problem is, that I do not belive anything/anyone is 100% evil or good.
Every person has his/her good and evil sides, and when we know evil is a
relative concept; in the end we will have severe problems knowing if someone
is evil or good.

So I wonder how one should be accepted to the club. The Lady should make a
test of everyone wanting to join, and the result would show how many percent
evil one is according to her standards, and everyone who would reach a
certain percentage would be accepted. Then again people change their
opinions so the test should be renewed on a regular basis. It would also be
possible thet The Lady changed her opinion, that would cause an instant test
according to the new standards of evil; it might even result in a suspension
of a majority in the club....

Drac
imagine <imagines at joimail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3ee90d93 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> We could start a evil people's club. The only restriction to get in is,
you
> have to be deemed evil by the lady :) Oh what evil we could do if only the
> lady would deem us so. lol
>
> Imagine
>
[View Quote]

Jun 17, 2003, 7:36am

Yes, it has happened and is still happening; people kill others usung
religion, nationalsim ( national security) or whatever reason to do it. It
seems to be ok to have a relative moral if a nation has it, but not on an
individual basis.
I am not pro a freedoom where people could go out and kill someone just if
it feels morally right; but I think one should be allowed to think
teoretically that killing someone would be moraly right.
I belive in a freedoom where you can think anything you want and do anything
you wish as long as you do not harm anyone else.
As for your question if it would be ok to kill if it feels morally right.
One example is the Iraque war and what happened before. I do NOT wish to
start a new fight over it, I just use this as an example withouth taking any
parts. Saddam killed a lot of people; maybe he thought it was morally right
or even in the interest of the national security. Bush send his troops to
Iraque and killed iraquean peopel, I am sure Mr Bush also thought it was
morally right. In the end what makes one killer more morally right than
another?

Drac
goober king <awnews at awnews.org> kirjoitti
viestissä:3EE9E743.9030402 at awnews.org...
> The problem with moral relativism is that if everyone were to follow it,
> the world would be a place of total chaos. Just think: If someone
> started a killing spree against gays or blacks or abortionists or any of
> the other persecuted groups, using the excuse that they are morally
> justified in ridding the world of these people, then, in a morally
> relative world, no one could do anything to stop that person. Since he
> believes that he is morally just in his actions, that must mean it's ok,
> right? :P
>
[View Quote]

Jun 17, 2003, 2:24pm

Yes, I know there is no right or wrong when it comes to belives and actions,
only opinions.
What comes to beeing more or less morally right or wrong; I can think of a
situation where you have to chose from two to you wrong options. You would
have to start thinking which is less wrong. I think a moral absolutist
should never stop asking the question " are my believes right, and why?",
because otherwise one start taking things for granted without seeing the
options. When this happens we end with stupid laws and tradiotions that are
not based on logic, but on something someone once said, because he thought
it was right.

Drac
goober king <awnews at awnews.org> kirjoitti
viestissä:3EEF282A.7000700 at awnews.org...
> And therein lies the problem. To the moral absolutist, there is no such
> thing as being "more morally right or wrong". You're either morally
> right, or you're morally wrong, end of story.
>
> Continuing with your Iraq example, Saddam killed Iraqis to prevent
> uprisings and maintain his leadership position. Saddam was definitely a
> relativist, as he felt he was morally justified in maintaining his grip
> on the country. Bush also subscribes to a form of moral relativism, as
> he felt justified in getting rid of Saddam by any means necessary,
> including war. However, the rest of the world seems to subscribe to a
> more absolutist policy, as they were both against Saddam's actions and
> the war.
>
> Being a moral relativist or absolutist is fine when all you do is
> contemplate moral theory. But when it comes down to brass tacks and you
> have to act on your beliefs, there doesn't seem to be any right or wrong
> answer and this argument will continue for ages.
>
[View Quote]

Jun 24, 2003, 4:02pm

Good luck Builderz :-)

Drac

builderz <builderz at vastnexus.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3EF7A684.523703C1 at vastnexus.com...
> This is a message for those interested in AW hosting (it isn't meant as
> spam). I used to host bots and worlds in the past under the Stuff-X
> brand name. Now I've launched a new AW hosting service called 3D Host.
> Bot, world, object path, and Web site hosting are all available. So, if
> you are seeking AW hosting, please stop by:
>
> http://www.3dhost.net
>
> While the color scheme of our site may not be the best, our hosting
> can't be beat. :P Thanks.
>
> -Builderz

Jun 30, 2003, 3:52pm

Re: they crossed the line.I guess I missing the place in the chat where
someone is trying to justify the actions of Hitler. Talking about history do
not make anyone a nazi. Many people talk about other murderers like Stalin,
Bush , Sharon and Gadaffi also without beeing ejected, I do not see why
Hitler would be moore of a taboo.

Drac
iggythealleycat <arnoldlayn2005 at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:BB2618B2.896%arnoldlayn2005 at hotmail.com...
in article 3f003179$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com, binarybud at
leo at realPANTStourvision.com wrote on 6/30/03 3:47 PM:

here is the log:

<snip>

Jul 1, 2003, 3:24am

LOL.
I just meant one could talk about a world leader without it beeing
political; have they not heard of historical discussion?
On the other hand if chickenbreast is a "bad" word, I guess mentioning
Cleopatra or Mao, must be out of the queastion also.

Drac
bowen <Bowen at andras.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3f00b2f8$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
[View Quote]

Jul 1, 2003, 3:32am

I agree that the ejection of Iggy was wrong. I do not see the insulting part
of jewish people tho anywhere.
I think that black and jewish people these day are somehow in some special
position when it comes to political-correctness.

If I would hit someone white because I do not like him, it would be a fight,
maybe I would get a ticket; if I would hit a black person I would be guilty
of hate-crime and probably do time.
It seems that one is more or less required to only speak bad of Hitler, but
god forbid you to say anything bad about the israeli govermant who has
harassed the palestinian people for ageses.It is automaticly taken as
anti-semitic and that must be the worst thing you can do; so I think some
minorities "ride" on the history these days. They have been badly treaten in
the past so now everyone should not be allowed to say anything bad about
them.

Drac
..duo. <ncommons at comcast.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3f00ec91$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> He was insulting jewish people and not only did not stop when asked, but
was
> just really nasty. Nastier than I. Also, there is no indication of why
iggy
> was ejected, which is the whole point. Iggy was pointing out that someone
> was being semi-slanderous and not being ejected while the GK was ejecting
> iggy for NO apparent reason and without warning.
[View Quote]

Jul 1, 2003, 6:51pm

I understood what he said was; people were weak and stupid because the
followed a leader that was wrong.
Always when a country is in depression, it is easy to gain support by
populistic opinions, especially if you find someone to blame for why things
are wrong. Calling Hitler a fool and people who followed him weak, do not
sound as flattering him ,to me, nor as an anti-semitistic opionon.

Drac
iggythealleycat <arnoldlayn2005 at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:BB27528F.A61%arnoldlayn2005 at hotmail.com...
> in article 3f011d07 at server1.Activeworlds.com, count dracula at
> dracula at netsonic.fi wrote on 7/1/03 8:32 AM:
> hello again,
> what hearted me the most from vermin's sayings was:
>
> "Vermin2": No he was a fool who attached onto an idea.
> "Kevin": GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!
> IggyTheAlleayCat: vermin quit that ok take it to aw debate
> "Weird": Can you help me tigger
> Julionna K: *looks to Kevi and sees him growling and giggles*
> "Vermin2": And people followed him because they were weak of mind and
> soul.
>
> a. it's debating.
> b. this is where the roots of Holocaust denial starts,
> no one is realy responsable...
> i just read a book layely about a guy who said evry day he has to
> unroot baobab small plants so his planet wont turn to dust.
> this is the main reason i am posting this.
> i had many problems with GK's until now and their cliuge.
> but as i said,with that they have croessed my line.
> no way i would stay more than 5 minutes if that was the first chat i would
> practice here.
>
>
>
part
special
fight,
guilty
but
some
treaten in
but
someone
ejecting
where
why
>

Jul 2, 2003, 12:41pm

bowen <Bowen at andras.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3f01f4f0 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
[View Quote] If someone state something as an opinion or fact, it do not become a debate
unless someone other state and an opionion that is opposite. Example:

-Terrible weather today
-yes

-Terrible waether today
- No, I like rain

Drac

1  ...  9  10  11  12  13  14  ...  18  |   Order by default