prev <-> next
[2001-04-04 01:41:00] - See, you have to be wrong about this Miguel, you have Josh agreeing with you
-paul[2001-04-04 01:40:00] - mig: i agree. you can only get but so complex. we don't want supercomputers figuring out each person's individual wages based on their economic status , race, religion, gender, yadayadayada -jdb
[2001-04-04 01:40:00] - However, going by Aaron's definition, it would have to vary depending on where you live. Therefore making minimum wage a ludicrous idea -paul
[2001-04-04 01:39:00] - i know, i was just pointing out why making minimum wage different depedning on where you live is ludricous. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:38:00] - hmmm, there is a truth in this world: life ain't fair. -jdb
[2001-04-04 01:38:00] - Besides, where did that come from? I wasn't advocating that, just pointing out that a national minimum wage is ludicrous -paul
[2001-04-04 01:37:00] - So is the way people are admitted to college. The people with bad GPAs or without wealthy parents are being discriminated against -paul
[2001-04-04 01:35:00] - well it is a form of discrimination. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:34:00] - i was just pointing out something about your last statement. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:34:00] - I mean, I assume it's true that some people get paid more for the same job depending on where they live, or is that illegal? -paul
[2001-04-04 01:34:00] - I'm confused, what does that have to do with anything? -paul
[2001-04-04 01:32:00] - paul: what about jobs that are equal? there are 7-11s nationwide, yes? then you have people working at the same job but getting less or more because of where they live. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:25:00] - yay! asktog rules! -jdb
[2001-04-04 01:24:00] - http://www.asktog.com/limit.html - mig
[2001-04-04 01:22:00] - kris: in response to http://aporter.dhs.org/?a=2&d=50#12623 -- they are called "strips" according to my staple box. -jdb
[2001-04-04 01:19:00] - Granted, but the minimum income necessary to survive in New York is very different from the income needed to survive in Nowheresville Alabama -paul
[2001-04-04 01:17:00] - i mean, it wasn't just an arbitrary number. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:17:00] - well, i think they did take a lot of things into consideration when they did decide mininum wage. they just don't adjust it for things like inflation. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:13:00] - Because that varies wildly depending on your situation and where you live -paul
[2001-04-04 01:13:00] - I guess the biggest thing is that it is impossible for the government to pick an arbitrary number and call it the minimum you can survive off of -paul
[2001-04-04 01:12:00] - It may not be harmful, but it doesn't help the people it is suppose to help in the end -paul
[2001-04-04 01:10:00] - http://www.freespeling.com/ -jdb
[2001-04-04 01:10:00] - it all boils down to opinion though. you say it's harmful and i don't think it is. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:09:00] - You guys are also assuming we're talking about single people here, what about families? What if the wife and husband want to work? Then one of them can make less then minimum wage. What about students? -paul
[2001-04-04 01:07:00] - Hell, even living with parents or borrowing money until brighter prospects come along -paul
[2001-04-04 01:07:00] - Like I said before, working longer hours, sharing an apartment with someone else to reduce financial burden... -paul
[2001-04-04 01:06:00] - But the falacy is saying that earning less then minimum wage results in death. There are ways around that -paul
[2001-04-04 01:05:00] - just one thing i had to add. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:05:00] - well, paul, if you got less than minimum wage, and then you die because you didn't earn enough to live, it's still the same result as not working. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:04:00] - i would of course argue. but i believe paul and i stalemated last time we did this. so it would be fruitless to come in. - mig
[2001-04-04 01:04:00] - Goodnight -paul
[2001-04-04 01:03:00] - But see, you can't just say that earning less then minimum wage means you are just as well off not working, because that's not true -paul
[2001-04-04 01:02:00] - now this has been "fun" but i don't think we're getting anywhere and i have a fossil test tomorrow and it's really early so niters - aaron
[2001-04-04 01:02:00] - Meaning, if you make any less per hour, you can not survive. if you make more, you will be hungry and miserable, but you will survive - aaron
[2001-04-04 01:01:00] - It is if minimum wage is perfectly set at the minimum amount to survive - aaron
[2001-04-04 01:01:00] - You are trying to argue that earning anything less then minimum wage is equivalent to being unemployed, which is untrue -paul
[2001-04-04 01:00:00] - maximum work per day? 16 hours. I don't know. Ask the leaders of the perfect government, when it gets created - aaron
[2001-04-04 01:00:00] - That's true, but that's because it's impossible to argue within the real world, there's too many variables and it's not easy to test things out. it's better to start simple - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:59:00] - What is the maximum work per day? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:59:00] - Working 2 jobs (unless you mean, at the same time) should not really affect the equation, it should just affect how the government decides minimum wage - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:59:00] - you are trying to oversimplify this -paul
[2001-04-04 00:59:00] - minimum wage should represent the minimum required to live. meaning if you work the maximum work per day, you can make the minimum to live - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:58:00] - And like I said a zillion times, you can live off of less then minimum wage if you think about more then just that one job -paul
[2001-04-04 00:58:00] - obviously you can have stupid governments where minimum wage would be way too high and everybody would go bankrupt - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:57:00] - They can always get a second job -paul
[2001-04-04 00:57:00] - Like I said a zillion times. If minimum wage accurately represents the minimum required to live, then minimum wage is a great thing - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:57:00] - You assume that hiring 5 people at $4 will cause them all to starve, it won't -paul
[2001-04-04 00:56:00] - If $4 an hour is less than needed to survive, than those 100 people are dead either way. It's lose/lose - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:56:00] - You would hire 4 people at $5 and hour rather then the 5 at $4 an hour? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:56:00] - I would say the latter. Less people at a greater wage. One person starves instead of 5 people starving. - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:55:00] - Ok then, let's say the company can open a new factory and hire 100 people at $4 an hour, but anymore and the factory will be unprofitable to maintain. You are saying those 100 people should be unemployed? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:55:00] - How about, a company wants to spend $20 an hour on a janitorial staff. Would I rather they hire 5 people at $4 an hour, or 4 people at $5 an hour (if $5 is minimum wage) - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:54:00] - Even assuming the minimum wage chosen by the government is accurate (which I maintain it isn't), a minimum wage doesn't help the economy -paul
[2001-04-04 00:54:00] - Countries aren't made up of just 1 person - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:54:00] - I mean, no sense - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:54:00] - When you say 1 person, then minimum wage makes more sense
[2001-04-04 00:53:00] - Because that is what minimum wage does, it takes away jobs and increases inflation -paul
[2001-04-04 00:52:00] - Ok, let me present this to you then. A company wants to hire a janitor, but can only afford to pay him $4 an hour. You would rather a person go unemployed then give him that job? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:52:00] - That was my argument - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:52:00] - I mean, are you agreeing that if the minimum wage chosen by the gov't is accurate, that a minimum wage would be good? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:51:00] - People can work two jobs at once, I did it over the summer once and it's not too terribly hard. There are also plenty of ways to survive off of less then minimum wage -paul
[2001-04-04 00:51:00] - If the government doesn't choose minimum wage well, then that's a different problem - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:50:00] - minimum wage -paul
[2001-04-04 00:50:00] - Except you are making two faulty assumptions here. One is that the minimum wage is exactly what is needed to survive (it's not, it's what the government picks and it's often wrong) and that people can not survive at all off of anything less then
[2001-04-04 00:48:00] - Yes. I would prefer the former - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:48:00] - "making good money" = making minimum wage, or exactly enough money to survive, and "making money" = making less than minimum wage, or not enough to survive? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:47:00] - So you are saying you would rather have 250 people making good money and 250 people unemployed then 500 people working and making money? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:46:00] - So it obviously helps those 250 people, silly - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:46:00] - I'm not saying I'm smart, but I refuse to answer such an obviously unrelated question -paul
[2001-04-04 00:46:00] - it unbalances the resources so instead of a company having 500 underpaying jobs, you have 250 higher-paying jobs - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:45:00] - You aren't listening though, Aaron. The minimum wage doesn't help anybody -paul
[2001-04-04 00:45:00] - you seem to think it's better to distribute resources evenly among the poor, so that nobody has enough to survive. i think it's better to give a fraction of them enough to survive - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:44:00] - Yeah, um, way to dodge the question, you're so smart. ahem - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:44:00] - I would import food for the other 500 people -paul
[2001-04-04 00:43:00] - If you accept minimum wage as the bare minimum to live on, it doesn't make any sense to pay anybody less. - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:43:00] - Exactly, and minimum wage is an unnatural change in the natural flow of capitalism, it messes up the economy -paul
[2001-04-04 00:43:00] - If a country has 1,000 people, but exactly enough food for 500 people, which would you rather do? Feed 500 with enough to survive, or feed 1,000 with half as much food needed to survive? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:42:00] - A change in minimum wage has to be accompanied by a change in amount of people hired or cost of product in order to offset losses or else the company will go bankrupt -paul
[2001-04-04 00:42:00] - Well obviously, that's how capitalism works, and the whole class system works. - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:41:00] - It's simple economics, companies can't hire the same amount of people for more and still sell products for the same price -paul
[2001-04-04 00:41:00] - Either that or those poor people will earn more, but have to pay more for everything else, meaning that wage increase is meaningless -paul
[2001-04-04 00:40:00] - Yes, yes. But for every poor person that earns minimum wage, another poor person doesn't have a job because of it Aaron -paul
[2001-04-04 00:39:00] - Sure it does, a poor person who makes minimum wage will be able to survive by the governments standards, paul - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:39:00] - Poverty levels all across the united states have been increasing pretty steadily for a long time, minimum wage isn't helping that -paul
[2001-04-04 00:38:00] - or if not half, it is a fraction, you have to at least accept that - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:38:00] - So in essence, a minimum wage does absolutely nothing to help the poor, and in fact may hurt them more since inflation and unemployment increase -paul
[2001-04-04 00:38:00] - http://aporter.dhs.org/?a=4&d=poo
[2001-04-04 00:37:00] - So you think without a minimum wage, everyone gets half of what is necessary to live? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:37:00] - Right, okay, i'll accept that. It's like squeezing a balloon or something. - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:36:00] - Enacting a minimum wage means that companies have to offset the money they lose from paying people more money by either hiring less (more unemployment) or charging more (higher inflation I think is the term) -paul
[2001-04-04 00:35:00] - Here's roughly the way I interpret it: Minimum wage = %50 of people get minimum to live. No minimum wage = %100 of the people get half the minimum to live - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:35:00] - I didn't work 8 hours a day, it was a part time job -paul
[2001-04-04 00:34:00] - In fact, the minimum wage has actually gone down in value compared to inflation over the years -paul
[2001-04-04 00:33:00] - $11,000 a year, if you made $5.50 an hour for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:33:00] - Enacting a minimum wage does not help the poor and middle class though -paul
[2001-04-04 00:33:00] - I wish I made $11,000 from Giant -paul
[2001-04-04 00:33:00] - right okay that's good. thank you for at least granting me that - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:32:00] - Minimum wage should be defined as what the government approximates as the lowest amount somebody can live off of -paul
[2001-04-04 00:32:00] - i think you could live on $11,000 if you had to, paul - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:30:00] - so if you accept my definition of a sweatshop, and that minimum wage should be (approximately) the lowest amount one can live on, then to pay one less than that would be to be operating a sweatshop - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:29:00] - Giant paid me less money then what is possible to live on, is it a sweatshop? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:29:00] - Because if you don't give your money to senior citizens, then you don't want them to have money, and hence you want them to starve and die -paul
[2001-04-04 00:29:00] - sweatshops are places which pay people less than what is possible to live on... i think the government decides every few years what they think is the lowest amount to live on... that becomes minimum wage - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:28:00] - Going by your logic, I could say not giving all your money to senior citizens means you support euthenasia -paul
[2001-04-04 00:28:00] - I don't understand your leap from saying not having a minimum wage means supporting sweatshops -paul
[2001-04-04 00:27:00] - Communism is government control of economy. Minimum Wage is government telling companies what to pay people. Sweatshops are vaguely defined -paul
[2001-04-04 00:26:00] - Where did I say, "perfectly" - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:26:00] - "what? no, i think things are pretty good the way they are now - aaron" - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:26:00] - that's a pretty big leap, i'm not sure i understand it - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:26:00] - Well, you said you were perfectly happy with the way things were so I assumed you meant what you said, sorry for making an unfair assumption -paul
[2001-04-04 00:26:00] - hurting... the poor and middle class... is communism? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:25:00] - my point was that when I said "things are pretty good the way they are now" I thought it was silly for you to assume I meant I was perfectly happy with absolutely everything - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:25:00] - so no, I don't really think there is a difference between communism and a minimum wage -paul
[2001-04-04 00:24:00] - Minimum wage causes companies to either hire fewer employees or increase the cost of their product, either way it hurts the poor and middle class in the end -paul
[2001-04-04 00:23:00] - And excellent idea, I suggest we also tax 100% of income over $100,000 and eliminate the senate -paul
[2001-04-04 00:23:00] - So no, I don't really think there is a difference between not supporting minimum wage and supporting sweatshops - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:23:00] - I don't understand what a minimum wage does which is bad, other than preventing companies from paying employees less than is needed to survive on - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:22:00] - Oh, pfft. Yeah, well also Tom Green isn't on MTV enough, and tmbg haven't had an album for 4 years. let's legalize third trimester abortions and instate a wage gap! - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:21:00] - And there is a difference between not supporting minimum wage and supporting sweatshops. What's your point? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:21:00] - Well, let me ask you this, how would raising the minimum wage help? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:21:00] - government control of economy = communism? There's a difference between government trying to prevent companies from discriminating, and the government seizing all capitol from all companies - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:20:00] - Minimum wages do not correlate to prison populations, you said you were happy with the way things are now and I pointed out what I am unhappy about with the world -paul
[2001-04-04 00:20:00] - Wow okay, that's interesting. Guess I never knew that. That's too bad. How would eliminating minimum wage help that though? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:19:00] - Government control of economy = communism. Makes sense to me -paul
[2001-04-04 00:19:00] - "35.8 million Americans live in extreme poverty, a figure which accounts for 13.3 per cent of the total population" -paul
[2001-04-04 00:18:00] - And how do minimum wages correlate to prison populations? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:16:00] - no minimum wage = lower wages for blue collar wages, which is pretty much what sweatshops are all about, made sense to me - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:16:00] - Lots? Express that as a percentage and perhaps I would be convinced. Being raised in northern virginia, I didn't see very much of that - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:15:00] - How do you assume I like sweatshops and seeing people make nothing because I don't like minimum wage? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:14:00] - Things are pretty good now eh? So you like the fact we have a huge prison population and that lots of people living in poverty and without health insurance? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:14:00] - How do you assume that, because I want a minimum wage, and laws about how companies assign equal employees equal wages, that I support communism? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:13:00] - Or we could force disney to not build their factories overseas, so that those people won't have any jobs at all so they can starve to death! Hurray! -paul
[2001-04-04 00:13:00] - What? No, I think things are pretty good the way they are now - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:13:00] - I suppose you want a communism where everyone is happy because the perfect government makes everyone happy? -paul
[2001-04-04 00:12:00] - And finally having sweatshops would be legal, disney could save thousands of dollars on having to ship to places like korea to get their work done - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:11:00] - Hooray it would be just like in the 20's, with unlimited wage competition, and blue-collar workers making next to nothing and such! That sounds like a dream. - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:10:00] - I don't think a minimum wage is right, but I also think it hurts the economy more then it helps it -paul
[2001-04-04 00:09:00] - So minimum wage or not? - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:08:00] - I think companies should decide what to pay people, if they discriminate against people, then they can reap the rewards and face the drawbacks -paul
[2001-04-04 00:06:00] - Or for example if the boss happens to just plain not like black people, it should be up to him, and hopefully people will just not support his company if he is a racist - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:06:00] - So it should be okay for the company to pay a bachelor less than a married man, for example, because he has less things to buy - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:04:00] - I personally think that it should be up to companies how much people are paid, but that's just me -paul
[2001-04-04 00:02:00] - Yes exactly. I think that if wage discrimination is already illegal, though, that kind of thing should just be settled on a case-by-case basis - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:01:00] - Or for example we learned in Psych that people who weigh more make more than thin people... it's not like there's weight discrimination though. interesting statistic, i thought - aaron
[2001-04-04 00:01:00] - Agreed, but I think they claim that women are making less for doing the same job, although I'm not sure how they figure that out -paul
[2001-04-04 00:00:00] - I mean you could likewise say that 30-year-olds make $10,000 less per year than 40-year-olds, but that doesn't mean that they would be payed different amounts for doing the same job - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:59:00] - Oh okay. Well that's defeinitely illegal, but I mean if you get a statistic like "Women are making $4,000 less per year than men", that's kind of useless, you know?
[2001-04-03 23:55:00] - Problems 7.25, 7.58, 7.61, and 7.70.
[2001-04-03 23:54:00] - The problem isn't women being forced to take lower paying jobs (I don't think), the problem is women are getting paid less for the same job -paul
[2001-04-03 23:52:00] - It wouldn't make sense to, for example, pay women %30 more for all jobs or something, that would be clearly unfair towards men - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:52:00] - Right. The above, women being payed (paid?) less for the same job seems illegal. Women being forced to take lower paying jobs is just something not easy to fix - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:51:00] - As opposed to, for example, women being payed less than men for the same job - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:51:00] - There already is a bill that says wage discrimination is illegal -paul
[2001-04-03 23:51:00] - I mean I'm not completely educated on the subject but it would seem to me that unequal average wages would be the result of women being forced to take lower paying jobs - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:50:00] - And I'm all for equality, but what kind of a bill would rectify the problem of unequal average wages for woman and men? - aaron
[2001-04-03 23:44:00] - Hey that's kind of like Mindit
[2001-04-03 23:17:00] - Indeed we do -paul
[2001-04-03 23:12:00] - http://www.spyonit.com/sdk/browser.jsp <-- the spyonit thing that i love so. -jdb
[2001-04-03 23:11:00] - it's ok, we disagree on plenty of other things
-jdb[2001-04-03 23:11:00] - Really? I think you're the first person I have found who agrees with me then... -paul
[2001-04-03 23:10:00] - i'm being 100% serious! -jdb
[2001-04-03 23:09:00] - sarcastic? -jdb
[2001-04-03 23:09:00] - No need to be sarcastic
-paul[2001-04-03 23:06:00] - and as much of a linux geek i am, i think IE is the absolute best browser out there! -jdb
[2001-04-03 23:04:00] - I approve
-paul[2001-04-03 23:02:00] - + lots of bookmarklets
-jdb[2001-04-03 23:01:00] - IE5.5sp1 + google toolbar + e-quill 3.0
-jdb[2001-04-03 22:59:00] - What internet browser do you use then Josh? -paul
[2001-04-03 22:58:00] - a: i don't use netscape 6 (i don't have any "netscape" installed), but i test things out with mozilla on a regular basis. -jdb
[2001-04-03 22:55:00] - sory josh, i forgot it was today. - mig
[2001-04-03 22:22:00] - does anyone besides miguel use netscape 6? ~a
[2001-04-03 22:13:00] - http://www.easylife.org/386dx/ -jdb
[2001-04-03 21:50:00] - it's ok aba
-jdb[2001-04-03 21:46:00] - it was my birthday. i am sorry. cliff and sarah said it was ok.
- aba[2001-04-03 21:26:00] - josh: i had a late lab, and then i fell asleep
i wanted to go. - katie[2001-04-03 21:19:00] - hmmm... how come nobody showed up to free@vt meeting this week? -jdb
[2001-04-03 20:16:00] - That article makes it sound like Bush is single-handedly responsible for the wage gap in genders and they try to make it out as if he is trying to make it worse -paul
[2001-04-03 20:15:00] - Bush has done absolutely nothing to make the gender-gap any worse, and I am pretty sure Clinton didn't do anything in his first few months in office to improve this, if he even did anything at all -paul
[2001-04-03 20:12:00] - The gender-gap in what people are getting paid was there long before Bush took office. We had Clinton in office for 8 years, why didn't he do anything about this? -paul
[2001-04-03 20:06:00] - Ugh, I can't believe people actually believe the stuff in that URL. I'm sorry Aparna, but that's got to be one of the most misleading and skewed things I have ever read -paul
[2001-04-03 19:02:00] - i don't know. it's a good idea i guess. - mig
[2001-04-03 18:53:00] - http://www.democrats.org/gopwatch/women/states/equalpay.html another reason for me to think that bush is a totally sucky president. - aba
[2001-04-03 18:46:00] - katie: things worked exactly the same at all of my schools. -jdb
[2001-04-03 18:02:00] - my elementary, middle, and high school had been doing that for ages, except instead of it being done electronically, they had secretaries who did it. i was never one to cut school, so it was really no big deal to me. - katie
[2001-04-03 17:31:00] - http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010403/od/school_dc_1.html do you guys think this is a good or bad idea? - aba
[2001-04-03 16:10:00] - doesn't make much sense for mtv to play rap though, since they censor out 50% of the song most of the time - mig
[2001-04-03 16:08:00] - ... and i never understood mtv's new dedication to rap. isn't that what they have bet for? - mig
[2001-04-03 16:06:00] - i like behind the music, though, but i have to agree that vh1 shows that way too much. you can only see the same btm of motley crue and vanilla ice only so many times. - mig
[2001-04-03 16:02:00] - that is quite possibly the most awesome thing i have ever seen. - mig
[2001-04-03 15:45:00] - http://www.we-deliver.tv/index.html <-- this is crazy, read the "how can we get away with this?" section
-jdb[2001-04-03 14:22:00] - yay, EQuill 3.0 is now available! http://www.equill.com/markup -jdb
[2001-04-03 14:21:00] - Great, AIM is being buggy yet again. -- Xpovos
[2001-04-03 13:47:00] - I just got turned off by MTV's 95% rap blocks during my peak viewing time and VH1's lack of music videos to do specials like "Behind the Music" or "Save the Music" or "Movies that Rocked." -- Xpovos
[2001-04-03 13:26:00] - and their nazi censorship. - mig
[2001-04-03 13:24:00] - what really pissed me off about mtv was getting rid of their rock show and replacing it with their crap mandy moore and sisqo shows. - mig
[2001-04-03 11:59:00] - http://www.systemexperts.com/tutors/HardenW2K101.pdf -jdb
[2001-04-03 11:44:00] - Oh, humph.... I guess that doesn't work either. Does your board support font tags Adrian? -paul
[2001-04-03 11:43:00] - Try using quotation marks like <font color="#00FF00">this</font> -paul
[2001-04-03 11:38:00] - tom <font color=ff0000>greeeeeeeen</font> - aaron
[2001-04-03 11:37:00] - i can't anymore. ~a
[2001-04-03 11:36:00] - unbreak my font tag! - aaron
[2001-04-03 11:36:00] - tom <font color=#00FF00>green?</font> - aaron
[2001-04-03 11:32:00] - tom green
[2001-04-03 11:32:00] - tom green is very funny, but i can never find it anymore. celebrity deathmatch is funny sometimes. - aaron
[2001-04-03 11:31:00] - MTV has had way better shows though. remember trashed? liquid television? cartoon sushi? aeon flux? they used to be so much cooler.... - aaron
[2001-04-03 11:18:00] - http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/04/03/china.aircollision.02/index.html -jdb
[2001-04-03 07:48:00] - celebrity deathmatch is good, and tom green is on mtv!!! ~a
[2001-04-03 07:31:00] - Remember "Remote Control"? - aaron
[2001-04-03 01:34:00] - lisa matthews
[2001-04-03 01:27:00] - oftentimes I like them more than the music shows (Say What Karaoke is the DEVIL, albeit a poser devil with a bad voice) - boing
[2001-04-03 01:26:00] - i know lisa really likes MTV, and I have to confess that I occasionally like one or two of their non-music shows (jackass can be funny, so can celebrity deathmatch) - boing
[2001-04-03 00:09:00] - and if aol doesn't do the nazi censorship that mtv does, it's definitely one notch better right there. - mig
[2001-04-03 00:08:00] - yeah, too bad they don't do stuff like that anymore. - mig
[2001-04-03 00:05:00] - Those little mtv cartoons were so cool! kind if like how cartoon network is now - aaron
[2001-04-03 00:05:00] - Like a baby going into one end of a tube, or something, and you hear screams and grinding sounds and then they come out on the other side but turn into the MTV logo, with baby parts sticking out - aaron
[2001-04-03 00:05:00] - maybe, but i still got my finger's crossed. - mig
[2001-04-03 00:04:00] - I remember! They also used to have super-funny 10-second ads which would have really messed up stuff. - aaron
[2001-04-03 00:03:00] - there are people who remember when mtv used to be more music video oriented, instead of playing all this crap like real world, road rules, and undressed. - mig
[2001-04-03 00:03:00] - I guess we'll see, but I'm not gonna bet on AOL -paul
[2001-04-03 00:02:00] - it boils down to the people who watch mtv now and the people who remember what mtv used to be. - mig
[2001-04-03 00:01:00] - and i disagree with them. - mig
[2001-04-02 23:49:00] - You know, everyone always says that MTV is a crappy channel and everything, and they might be right (I don't know because I don't watch) but I think you would be surprised by the number of people who think MTV is a good channel -paul
[2001-04-02 23:45:00] - mayeb not vh1, but i've got bets they can topple mtv, or at worst, force mtv to improve it's shitty channel. -mig
[2001-04-02 23:42:00] - We shall see, but I highly doubt they'll be able to topple MTV and VH1 -paul
[2001-04-02 23:41:00] - and believe me, it's not that difficult a task to make a music channel better than mtv. - mig
[2001-04-02 23:38:00] - and let's not forget microsoft, which has even lower standards. - mig
[2001-04-02 23:35:00] - AOL Miguel, the same company that bought netscape, they have low standards
-paul[2001-04-02 23:33:00] - all they have to do is just not come up with dumb shows like mtv and it will be better. - mig
[2001-04-02 23:29:00] - I wouldn't bet on it, it's by AOL after all -paul
[2001-04-02 23:23:00] - i think it is, but i'm crossing my fingers that it's going to be better than mtv. - mig
[2001-04-02 23:22:00] - AOL music? Please don't tell me that is going to be the name -paul
[2001-04-02 23:18:00] - http://www.antimusic.com/news/2001/march/item15.shtml hurray for competition! - mig
[2001-04-02 23:15:00] - It's a pretty accurate one. Nobody likes a hypocrite -paul
[2001-04-02 23:10:00] - that seems to be a pretty common criticism of the U.S. -jdb
[2001-04-02 22:23:00] - true. - mig
[2001-04-02 22:06:00] - Well, I think they're a bit pissed that we keep pointing out their problems without mentioning our own -paul
[2001-04-02 22:04:00] - does the embassy tell us something we don't already know? - mig
[2001-04-02 22:01:00] - Phew, that was long. But an interesting read. China makes a very good point -paul
[2001-04-02 21:41:00] - http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/7248.html -logan
[2001-04-02 21:03:00] - That doesn't sound right at all -paul
[2001-04-02 20:36:00] - I'm drinking you right now!
-logan[2001-04-02 20:11:00] - logan: lemon-lime, just like sprite!
-jdb[2001-04-02 19:50:00] - Josh, you look like a fruit now. -logan
[2001-04-02 18:29:00] - you can try to buy them at the door, but my roomate said that last time they had 100 people too many show up -dave
[2001-04-02 18:28:00] - Anyone wanna go to a choir concert friday night? need to know so as to get roomate to get tickets for us if you wanna go. -dave
[2001-04-02 17:18:00] - Tomorrow 12:30 Owens for lunch with Ping Pong afterwards -paul
[2001-04-02 16:58:00] - http://logosresourcepages.org/magic-g.html -jdb
[2001-04-02 16:57:00] - http://www.angelfire.com/film/mortis/AYB.html -jdb
[2001-04-02 16:55:00] - http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/gaybaby.htm -jdb
[2001-04-02 16:21:00] - http://www.wb.com/pages/shortfilms/britney2032/index.jsp -jdb
prev <-> next