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

Feb 6, 2003, 4:10pm

Reality changes fast, just think of WW II, one day we fought with the
germans the next day against them. German was an anemy to USA, now they are
a memeber of Nato. Countries from former Warzava pact are now memebers of
Nato. USA used to support Saddam when Iran was they empire of evil, how is
it now?

Drac
baron sweetman <petrossadeletethis at msn.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:Xns9319CEE7AFB9Fpetrossa at 64.94.241.201...
> yeah right, come on and get a grip on reality
>
> "count dracula" <dracula at netsonic.fi> wrote in
> news:3e40e470$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com:
>

Feb 6, 2003, 4:13pm

I am not saying Iraque do not have these weapons, but what happened to
innocent until proven quilty?
EMPTY warheads do not sound so dangerous to me. About 10 years ago when USA
last bombed Iraque, a lot was destroyed, many war shelters become a mess, so
it is actually possible it is hard to make a list of everything .
If you was asked to make a list of all items you own, could it happen you
would miss some?

Drac
bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e41104a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
shut
read
going
which
course
>
> Please. I'll say this again, if you don't take risks, something worse
could happen.
> The UN doesn't do squat, they found empty shells that weren't declared in
the weapons
> report. Why would you not put empty shells on the weapon report? Well
obviously you
> could load warheads into there. It makes you wonder what he _did_ lie
about. Gee
> could maybe he have some other empty shells that, just happenstancely, a
nuclear
> warhead fell into it; or maybe a botulism toxin warhead?
>
> --Bowen--
>
>

Feb 6, 2003, 5:12pm

Maybe that excatly was the reason, it was empty and they thought it is not
important ?

Drac
bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42ad7d at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2003, 2:04pm

As long as it is a supposed attacke, I see no reason. I cannot go and kill
my neighbour just because he has a gun and could harm me. UN was founded to
help keep the peace, and yes if there is proof Iraque is going, is in
progress of attacking ANY country , UN needs to take action. So far we have
the word of USA against the word of Iraque. I have not seen one missile
flying towards USA yet.

Drac
sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42b321$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Give me one reason why you think Iraq's supposed plans to attack America
is
> the only reason the international forces are going to attack?
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2003, 2:07pm

Yes Iraquan shias and kurds most ceratinly yes, the militray no. But sure,
if the majority is dancing I will send you 50 dollar LOL

Drac
sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42b381$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I'll bet you $50 you will see Iraqis dancing in the street after Baghdad
is
> liberated. I'm 100% serious.
>
> You want to take that bet?
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 12:06pm

goober king <gooberking at utn.cjb.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3E3EF3F7.4020007 at utn.cjb.net...
> Seeing as how it's apparently ineffective to counteract each whiner one
> at a time, I'll do it en masse in a new thread:

Well, I guess I am the whiner number one here , so i will answer your
questions
>
> Let me just ask you all one question: Where were you when memorials
> started sprouting up like wildfire after 9/11? It didn't seem to bother
> you that all these people from AW, many of whom didn't know anyone who
> died in the disaster, were paying tribute to 3,000+ people, so why
> should it bother you if these same people pay tribute to 7? How many
> people need to die before a memorial becomes legit in your eyes?

I was in AW when it happened, in AW was several people who knew someone who
got killed in that tradegy.
If the memorials helped those friends and family cope with their sorrow, why
should I start yelling, dont build memorials?
The attack in NY was an attack against not only USA, but the entire western
civilation, it was a terrible thing because of it widness . It is something
that could happen anywhere, and will if we do not stop pissing off the
islamic world it will happen again and again. With great sadness I see
Europe dividing into 2 groups, those who want to attack Iraque and those who
do not want to. In the eyes of the islamic world, we are one evil
"community", it wont make no difference if french was against the attack and
british for, to them we hurt them as a group, and we will all be suffering
from the revench.

Much before the attack in NY I talked about that something like that will
happen, I could not imagine something this big tho. I thought maybe some
bombs in a few essential places , maybe some poison gas. Did anyone take me
serious then? No, one laughed at me, called me a pessimist . Does anyone
listen to me now when I am trying to paint up some horror scenariaes; no.

As I also said in one posting, if even one person who knew anyone of the
crew is in AW, the memorial has a place IF it will help the friend family
cope with the sorrow. Otherwise I still consider it as not neccesary. This
was not an attack against anyone, it was an accident. Someone screwed up.
NASA was warned last summer about that the ship(s) are old and not in a very
good condition anymore, yet they choose to fly.

Has it ever occured to you, how do the family and friends feel? Has anyone
ever asked them, do you want everyone to go nuts and start to erect
monuments, do you want to see your husband been blown to pieces in Tv each
night, or do you want to be in peace and quiet with close friends and
family?

>
> Simple answer: It doesn't matter. If people feel the need to erect
> memorials to these people, then let them. If you don't think it's
> necessary, then don't make one and keep your inconsiderate pieholes
> shut. Let those who feel the need to pay tribute do so in peace.

Go and erect as much you want, actually I do not give a shit. I was simply
trying to think , how do those feels who it REALLY touched. Have you ever
thought it might be inconsiderate to go and erect in all places?
>
> --
> Goober King
> So proud to be a member of the human race right now :P

Drac, ashamed to be a member of the human race, the most discusting creature
on earth, the race that will eventually destroy all life on this planet
.....
> gooberking at utn.cjb.net
>

Feb 4, 2003, 12:14pm

For the love of Ugrrl, I was not dictating, I simply tried to say, I do not
like them as you now are saying you like them. This hole shit got quite out
of proposition.

Well, has you asked a familymemeber of someone in the crew, if they want
these monuments? Have you ever thought that these monumnets might be
something they do not want? Who are you to tell either what they want and
what is disrespecting and what not?
If I choose to pay respect by giving the family and friends pecae, and be
aviable if THEY want me, why is that so terrible wrong? Should I also
compete in how big memorial I will build, will I be a better person if I
have a bigger memorial?

I know from my own experience, when i lost a close friend. I wanted peace
and quiet. I wanted my friends to be there when I needed them, and what i
hated most was people pushing themselves close to me and feeling sorry for
me.

Drac
lioness. <nobody at nowhere.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e3f0e46 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Thank you for verbalizing what I have agonized over since reading all
those
> complaints about all the monuments/memorials in AW. You have eloquently
> expressed exactly what I felt. I was ticked off when I read those
> complaints. Since when does ANYBODY have the right to dictate whether or
not
> to make any kind of memorial/monument or how to pay respects???? Does it
> REALLY matter what nationality, religion, political or ethnic background
the
> victims of a tragedy are???? Or the people who want to show their
> respects??? If those astronauts were Palestinian, French, Russian, British
> or Iraqi, there would still be people who would want to pay their
respects.
> And who are WE to say there aren't any people in AW who don't know family
or
> friends of the deceased???? They might be tourists in AW or citizens. We
> should respect those who want to pay respects to a tragedy, whether we
agree
> or not with their monuments. Just because the deceased doesn't represent
> your particular country or political views, their death and the respect
> shown them should not be belittled. ;-"/
>
>
>
>
[View Quote]

Feb 4, 2003, 12:15pm

Excatly! So if you do, I wish you would speak up now. And if I have been
wrong, I will shut up about this matter and start pissing off dogowners and
BMW drivers next.

Drac
lioness. <nobody at nowhere.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e3f1160 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> I think what bugs me the most (as an afterthought), is that all the
whining
> and bickering that is going on about all this in the ngs.... have we
> considered, even for a moment.... that perhaps one of their friends or
> family is also reading all this and how it is making them feel????????
> ;-"<
>
>

Feb 6, 2003, 4:18pm

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=68&ncid=68&e=16&u=/nyt/2003
0203/ts_nyt/nasa_dismissed_advisers_who_warned_about_safety

For example.

I have never tried to stop anyome from building memorials, I just said I do
not like them, sheesh lol

Drac
maxsilver <maxsilver at email.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e419eae at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
> " NASA was warned last summer about that the ship(s) are old and not in a
> very
> good condition anymore, yet they choose to fly."
>
> - Count Dracula.
>
> I think you got your facts wrong. Space shuttles are made to last 100
> flights, and 100 re-entries to the earth. Columbia only had about 30.
Plus,
> NASA had just finished replaceing tins of parts on the shuttle. Also, they
> most probably cause of this accident, and yes, it is an accident, was the
> picece of insulation hitting the wing. Why you must attempt to NASA, i
dont
> know. But i can assure you that they take every concievable measure to
keep
> the shuttles safe. This is space travel, a dangerous, vastly unexplored
> area. NASA could not have seen this coming and to blame them for an
accident
> is plain and simple wrong.
>
> As to the memorials, some people express there feelings in different ways.
> If people wish to build memorials , then noone should be attempting to
stop
> them. There is plenty of space in the AW universe for everyone to build
> anything they wish.
>
>
>
>
>
[View Quote]

Feb 5, 2003, 8:29am

Freedom of man (and women)...yeah what a a cliché lol.
We live in a society where they more and more can controll you, by all kind
of electrican cards, mobile phones and surveillance. New laws are made every
day telling you what you cannot do. Religions has told us for ageses what is
apropiate to do. They call it protection, I call it control. We are not
supposed to think ourselves, goverments and media is doing it for us.
So what to fight for? Maybe the right to have an alternative thinking, it
may be totally crazy, but it will be your own.
Maybe fight against authorities and everything considered apropiate by
religions and traditions, but things that are obviusly against logic..heck I
do not know, it will not lead to anything else than you will end up having a
lot of people hating you, but sometimes one can notice someone actually will
understand your alternative thinking ( as many refer to as stupidity).

Drac

sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e404a60$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Well?
>
> Chris
>
>

Feb 6, 2003, 4:29pm

Yeah, I am a smoker, but I am a moron also, so it kind of suites me .
I am a smoker becuase I hated tobacco smoke, I started to smoke cigars to
piss off the tobacco smokers, who mostly hate cigar smoke. I wanted them to
feel how it feels when irritating smoke is comming in your eyes, so now both
smokers and non-smokers hate me lol.
Second reason was because we got a quite strict smoking law, I belive only
California has a more strict one. That alone would have made me a smoker,
because I cannot stand when goverments are telling us what is good for us
and how we should live.

Now our goverment is planning to make it illegal to buy sex-services, so I
might soon have to start using prostitues also, feel free to donate money to
may paypal account.

Drac
yeti <ryangene at sbcglobal.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e41bde6$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Ah hahahahaha, stupid smoker. shouldn't be smoking anyway. It makes your
> lungs black, you find yourself getting sick more often, and makes you
> impotent. shouldn't be smoking anyway. All smokers are evil >_<. they
can't
> even take care of themselves, what makes you think they can take care of
> other people?
[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2003, 2:22pm

I have nothing against a law like that as long as you can choose. I think it
should have been made so that the restaurant can choose if it is a
non-smoking or smoking place. Now there have to be a non-smokers side in
each nightclub and bar, this result that it is a hell of a crowd in the
smoking side and the non-smoking is empty, until ppl do not fit into the
smokers side anymore. Then the smokers little by little take over the
non-smoking side. But even if they would not smoke in the non-smoking side
the smoke gets there anyway. The law just require a certain percentage of
tables to be for non-smokers.

When I worked at the filling ststion I smoked in there, if I was alone, or
had a smoking co-worker- If I had a non-smoking co-worker I did not smoke
inside. Customers came into pay their gasoline and spent in general about 50
seconds inside, I doubt if they get a little bit smoke or can smell a bit
tobacco smoke for 2 times in week for 50 secs, that will not kill them. It
is different if you have to be in the smoke for longer periods.
I understand thet smoking is a healthdanger for example restaurantworkers,
if they have to be in the smoke for several hours each day. That is why
there should be a way to choose. Do I have a smokers or non-smokers place?

I know ppl who have smoked for 50 years withouth getting sick, I know of ppl
who has never smoked and yet died in lung cancer. I guess the point is, one
could se common sense in these kind of issues, insted of banning everything
There is also one law saying you cannot smoke in schoolareas, fine with
me,BUT when i went to eveningschool at 7pm and we smoked in the yard, some
bitch came and told us it was illegal. I would not stand and smoke there if
there is children around me, but we were all adults, no children present.
There was once a market and the beertent was placed on the schoolground ( it
was out of schooltime of course) then one could smoke there. I just wonder
what made that so special that nobody bothered protesting then? Maybe
because finns are kind of stubborn when drunk. I personally thought it was a
bad placement of the tent, although school was over, but children was
present, seeing smoking drunk ppl in schoolarea.

I guess the problem with laws often are that things are so or so, nothing in
between. It is not allowed to use common sense.

Drac
artifex <rymonday at hotmail.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42d4bc$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Count did you ever think... That the government is not telling whats good
> for us but instead watching out for the general healths of other people? I
> am not a smoker and i live in California Im glad they did enforce those
> rules now i can go to a resturaunt or a club and not be gagged by the
smoke,
> instead have a good time... Its a fact second hand smoke does kill, and
the
> government is doing such rules to insure that peoples health isnt
infrenged
> by others stupid decsions...
>
>
> -Ryan Monday
>
>

Feb 7, 2003, 2:32pm

Most our laws are based on religion. We cannot walk nude if we want to
because bible/ koran teach us we are to be ashemed of our bodies, especailly
some parts of it. We cannot have several wifes, husbands (although I belive
some have read the bible in another way a have), and marriage is a
"religious" thing. Atleast here in Finaland it was not permitted to have
the nightclubs open on christams day. Adultery was(is?) a reason for
divorce. In court of law you are swearing to tell the truth with hand on
bible ( even if you are not christian ?.) and so on...

Drac
bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42d67a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2003, 5:28pm

bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e43e314 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote] I seriously doubt that you are correct now, maybe you could test it for me?
>
belive
have
>
> You're certainly allowed to have several wifes or husbands... that's a
personel thing
> as well. Adultery is a reason for divorce here though. We don't have to
put our
> hand on the bible.

You mean bigamy (spellcheck) is not a crime in USA ? I thought they held a
bible infront you in courtroom, and the senetence ended something like "..so
help me God". Maybe that is only on TV then.
>
> Maybe Europe is more religious than America; the irony.
>
> --Bowen--
>
>

Feb 8, 2003, 9:38am

When I was in Floida I remember seeing signs on the beach that one have to
wear a swimmingsuite, not that one can choose to or is entitled to , but
have to. We have the same on our public beaches also. I am also quite sure
if I one day decided to go shopping in the nude, the police would arrest me
, if not for else, then "just in case".

I have no plans of having several wives, I do not even seem to get one LOL.
I must say it was new to me that one actually can have several wives if one
wish to. In Finland you are not allowed to marry unless you get a license to
do so, and you will not get one if you already are married. I wonder how the
inheritage is taken care of if someone had several wives.
I also wonder how come feminists do not bitch about tha wrongness that
mormon men can have several wives but mormon women not several husbands; it
is obviusly not equal for both sexes; then again feminists are not pro
equality between sexes, but pro superiority of women. Funny is they dress
and look like men in their suits, wanting to be lawyers and bankers..they
behave and do things themseleves , the same as the hate men of. This
reminded me I need to start a new thred directed to feminists LOL.

But basically our law is based on the 10 commands ( which are mostly ok of
course), but it is all the "decensy" and " moral" laws that piss me off.
Laws that are not based on logic, but belives (often started some 1000-2000
years ago).
One of these are the swimmimng suite law for example. Nobody has yet been
able to tell me a logical reason to it, not even a practical. Do you feel
warmer when swimming clothed? Is it more hygienic?

Drac
johnny b <jbitt2ATjunoDOTcom> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e44364b at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Most all communities have 'public indecency' laws on the books, and have
for hundreds of years....... it most certainly IS illegal
> to walk around nude in public, unless in a designated area, such as a nude
beach, resort, etc....... ask a cop sometime.... my best
> friend happens to be one...
> And bigamy also definitely is a crime.. albeit rarely prosecuted
against...... but then not many ppl actually TRY to have more than
> one wife...... (aint one MORE than enough ? ) ;O)
> the only exception being, that I'm aware of, is if you're a professed and
practicing member of the mormon church (Jesus Christ of
> latter day saints) They are by tradition of their religious beliefs,
allowed to take more than one wife.... altough women may only
> have one husband......BUT, even they rarely do such... It just isnt
practiced anymore. More or less a dead tradition, so to
> speak.... bit out of date. But still legal.....
> So move to Utah, if you want yerself some more wives :OD Just watch out
for Donny and Marie, they'll make ya nuts ! hahaha
>
> JB
>
>
[View Quote]

Feb 11, 2003, 9:35am

Rather that than a goverment puppeteer ;-

Drac
sw chris <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e485b57$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Give it up. He's a closet-anarchist. :P
>
> Chris
>
[View Quote]

Feb 7, 2003, 2:37pm

Not arguing my friend, discussing things and having different point of
views.
Everyone in this world do not agree on everything, it does not mean arguing
or fightig, just changing point of wievs.

Drac, moron number 1 :-)

john <john at 3d-reality.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e42d7ba at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> WILL EVERYBODY SHUT UP WITH YOUR STUPID LITTLE ARGUMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE
DYING
> AND THAT "WHY SHOULD WE BUILD A MEMORIAL FOR 7 PEOPLE" AND WARS AND STUFF.
>
> WHY DO YOU ALL NEED TO ARGUE? WHAT IS IT... THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
WILLING/ABLE
> TO PAY FOR CITS STILL ARE A LOAD OF ARGUING, IRRITATING MORONS?
>
>

Feb 9, 2003, 2:05pm

Argh, now you started it again, just as I had managed to make ppl hate me
LOL

Drac
jstone2004 <j at jlife.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e444d2f$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> lol, compared to the huge Cy Awards fight that went on a few months ago,
the
> NG's are neutral nowadays :P
>
> J
>
[View Quote]

Feb 10, 2003, 2:54pm

As far as I know the general discussion is meant for not AW-realted things.
Ppl also seem to call it fighting easily when 2 person has a different point
of view; I usually refer to it as discussing. Last fight I saw there was
some blood involved.
I admit I made one post in the wrong newsgroup, which started a long thread
there. It should have been in general discussion instead, so I am aplogizing
for that.
One sometimes also need to be a bit "radical" to start an discussion,
sometimes even say something one do not stand behind. I just think it is
interesting to see how things develop after that.

Drac
neocube a <majmatrixx at excite.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e467683 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Everyday that I go and "attemp" to read the NG's I come across a
> question that I keep asking myself. That is... "Why do I keep reading
> the NG's?". I still think it is because I will read something worth
> reading. With so many immature people here it has come across to me that
> maybe spending more time... even more than I do already in Peace City
> helps me get away from AW's bullshit. There is no one moderating this NG
> or any other AW NG for that matter and all this crap is making me sick.
>
> Mentioned before someone had commented on how certian people that run
> Peace City are young and immature. Well I am part of the Peace City
> staff and I am a lil bit older than some and being part of Peace City
> (PC) I have seen that maybe young as some are there... do not compare to
> the 30-40 year olds that argue in here like babies. Christ do any of you
> have any clue?
>
> My invitation to everyone here...
>
> Please come and check out PC. I am not saying just throw away AW but the
> people there seem much... what should I say... much more inviting. Yes
> there is an occasional problem but hey perhaps some will like it more.
> If anyone is interested go to http://www.peacecity1.com/3dhelp and click
> the download button...
>
> ...one more thing btw... Grow up! Those who I am talking about know who
> I am talking about. One day your threats will be heard by the wrong
> person and you will regret it.
>
> ~Neocube a~
>

Feb 11, 2003, 9:55am

I have been wondering what the policy of AW is based on?
Do you organize competitions of who has the worst ideas and then inforce
them?

At several occasion I asked to see the policy, when i had trouble with my
world name. I never get to see it, the world was just taken away from me.
But that is not importnat now.

I would like to hear who came up with the brialliant idea of banning
tourists in the first place? And what possible could have been the arguments
for doing this?
Did it ever occured to this moron that tourists are potential citizens
read paying customers)?

Since it looks like AW is slowly killing itself; workers reduced, software
development is not much to cheer for and the most important issue; customers
leaving.
Would it just not be best to close it down and say Fu** it all ! It hurts me
so much to see something I love suffer and beeing slowly killed. I guess it
is no use of even trying to give you any advice, since only the worst ideas
leading to a death of AW is taken in consideration.

Drac

Feb 13, 2003, 7:10pm

I am refering to the policy against world names starting with something else
than a letter. I signed up BEFORE that rule came, yet my world was taken
away from me. Tom told me some bullshit about if not starting with a letter
there will be problem in future realises of AW; yet AW itself has atleast
one world syarting with a " at ". There are also other worlds starting woth
others than a letter, so I am wondering ; how come a policy only concern
some of the customers?
Not long ago I spotted a new world starting with a "!" , I wrote Tom about
and and he said it was a mistake. I have not cheked if that world is still
running tho.

Drac
e n z o <enzo at activeworlds.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e4be00e$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> What policy do you want to see?
>
> E
>
>
[View Quote]

Feb 18, 2003, 10:32am

The question was more like; in the middle of my "rental agreement" my host
told me I cannot have visitors unless I pay for them. If it had costed 70$
from the day I signed up; fone then I could I have chosen, do I agree on it
or not, but when the host suddenly decide to start charging for something, I
cannot see that as a very fair thing.
How would you feel if the person you rent your flat from would suddenly come
and say: sorry you cannot have out of city guests unless you pay me 100$ ?
The resources you are talking about. AW do not loose anything on letting
tourist visit my world. It is MY bandwith ( eg the one hosting the OP and
world) that is getting used.

What comes to morons, I really thing one is entitled to call the person(s)
responsible for the marketing of AW a moron/morons. It is actually a quite
nice word, much nicer than he/she/they deserve.

Drac

king bluemax <kingbluemax at shucohome.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e51058a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Seems to me if you dont like the cost of something you just dont buy it. I
> paid 70 bucks to allow tourists and it seemed fair to me, after all, each
> presence in a world does eat up more resources. I also think that if
> tourists could see what they were missing by not getting a cit they would
be
> more likely to get one so they could build. If not then no space for them.
> So turning off tourist building allows for more enticing them to get a cit
> and less freeloading. If you want to play then youve got to pay. I suppose
> its all a matter of opinion and what you can afford. If I cant afford
> something I simply dont buy it. And ill bet that calling people morons
and
> such doesnt inspire them to answer you. KBM
>
>

Feb 19, 2003, 2:29pm

Hmm,,, I could maybe start the war, it seems I am pretty good at that these
days LOL...I just wonder what topic; USA, feminists, BMW-drivers, religious
people, republicans or something totally new this time like people who
cannot be without spitting every 3.5 sec or the empty bottle recycling
system in Germany ( that by all means are totally idiotic)

Drac

bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e52be8a$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

Feb 25, 2003, 11:30pm

(Not a reply to Binarybud in particular, but to the entire thread.)

Seems the CY-fighting has started early this year. I guess it is like
Christmas, ecah year the decorations comes earlier in shopwindows.

Last year it started during the CY and mostly after it, this year even long
before. Keep on fighting people, who knows you might win the CY-fight award
this year :-)

Drac

Feb 27, 2003, 2:36pm

goober king <gooberking at utn.cjb.net> kirjoitti
viestissä:3E5DA4D5.6010400 at utn.cjb.net...
> Actually, there *was* an X-rated film that won an Oscar (3 Oscars, in
> fact); Midnight Cowboy in 1969. :)
>
Oh yes I remember that movie, especially for one song that appeared in it. "
Everybody's talking ( but I cannot hear a word they're saying) by
Nilson),,,,somehow it fits in here also *lol*

Drac

Feb 27, 2003, 2:42pm

Reading all this arguing (once again) about the CYs, I really do not
understand what is the problem.
People seem to argue mostly about if worlds rated differently should be
allowed to compete in same category.

Maybe one could simple vote for best G-rated world, best PG-rated world etc?
Of course there are categories that do not require visiting any world, like
best bot, worst webapge, most hated person in NGs etc; in these everyone
would be allowed to participate.

Drac
cy awards <cyawards at awcommunity.org> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e568bf3$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Dear Activeworlds CommunitY,
>
> We have just uploaded the rules page for the Cy Awards.
> Please make sure you check them out before starting any builds for
this
> years entries.
> One major change is the world rating participation.
> Adult themed world owners, please check this out.
> We are sorry we have had to make a choice, and we truly hope there
will
> be no negative or disparaging comments towards the adult worlds.
> They are both beautiful and have wonderful folks in them:)
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> The Cy Awards:)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Feb 25, 2003, 6:52pm

*Turns this into political*

How typical ! Everyone else except those in your group shall be banned.
Group F is people who do not want to hear an alternative view of their own,
they want to protect themselves by demanding banning of people who they do
not agree with...blah.. bored, bored, for gods sake someone kill me...

Drac
john <john at 3d-reality.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e5ba103 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> Ya i say type d should be banned.. come to think of it so should B and C
>
> A should be left and E should be left (e being the people who post nice
> replies and don't flame.... i.e. me. I don't flame....tho I have yelled
at
> pplz in the past for arguing about irrelevant things)
>
[View Quote]

Feb 27, 2003, 2:30pm

Finland !

Lastutie 2
02520 Lapinkylä..

*waiting for SWE*

Drac
swe <swe at swe-e.com> kirjoitti viestissä:3e5e2620 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> ahhh, what the hell. *goes to that cold european country CD lives in
(poland
> or finland?) and kills CD :)
>
[View Quote]

Mar 7, 2003, 12:55am

Of all arguments trying to justify the war, this must be the most stupid.
I wish I had knewn this in school; whenever I did not know any question in a
test, I would have simply stated: I know the answer but I will not write it.
If I ever go to court, I will say: Yes I can prove it, but I will not, you
just have to trust me.

What hurts me most in this whole matter is the trying to jutify the war with
lies.
If only Bush would step up infront of the TV cameras and once be honest and
say something like:
" Hi, my name is George and I am an alchoholic. I have other problems also
like agressivity.
I am not very smart but I have a lot of power. I have decided that USA shall
bomb Iraque, because I do not like Saddam and I have a need of bombing
someone; he also happens to have a lot of oil in his land.
I do not give a fuck about UN and I do not even want to have a peacefull
solution. I will not either have a debate on TV with Saddam, because he is
probably much smarter than I am, and I would only look like a fool.
I do not either care about the sunnis, shias and kurds (some groups of
people someone has written down for George on a paper). I just need
something to bomb that is not to close of USA."

If he would be honest like this, I would not have such a big problem with
the war, because then we would know who is the attacking part. But trying to
brainwash people through media and claiming to have proofs, even trying to
make the war sound like a good thing, insults the inteligency of most
people. Furthemore some people seem to be upset that not all countries in
NATO is villing to help this maniac on his mission, when infact these
countries has understood what NATO is. It is a DEFENCE alliance not an
attack alliance. The action of USA (Bush) is very similar to skinheads,
nazis and other scumbags: If you are not on our side, you are against us.

Drac
binarybud <leo at realPANTStourvision.com> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e6793be$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
> the point most people are missing is that WE DO have evidence, but because
it will compromise our intelligence sources, we cannot show this undeniable
evidence right now. Someday the WORLD will understand why we have taken
this hard stance against Saddam. He NEEDS to go. And for now we are
strong enough to take the heat. Bu we must stand strong against Saddam, or
his neighbors will ALL pay the price...and we cannot afford to let that
happen..
>
> IMO
> Leo :)
>
>
[View Quote]

Mar 7, 2003, 1:20am

True it is like a poker game and Bush is bluffing, problem just is not so
many belives him *lol*
Of course it is compareble, if UN ask for proves that would "justify" a war,
but USA only say, we have but we will not tell. To me it seems someone is
bullshitting.

UN is like a courtroom of the world, where decisions are made. How can
someone refusing to present profs be taken seriously? We have to remember
that it is USA that is going to attack, not Iraque.
As I have stated earlier, when the first iraqi missile flies towards USA, I
will not object USA striking back, but as long USA is the only one wanting
war, I would like to see some hard evidence that would even make it a bit
more justified, not only a moron president on TV repeating himself, without
a single good reason for the war, just bullshit.

Drac
bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e680cbf$1 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote]

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