change to this forum
Posted by: Paul Stephenson on 10 August 2001
We will attempt to add some new features to the site this week-end.
It could all end in tears, we cannot just add the features without upgrading the whole forum, there is the catch.
Oh well as they say in for a penny! You might love it.......you might not..
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Arye_Gur
in the same way you are making changes with your stereo equipment,
I guess all will be happy here...
Arye
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
With the Forum we have very little control of how the thing works.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
Could be there is always a risk, should we shouldn't we.....
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Alex S.
I'm not sure who's sanity will snap first, Mike Hanson's or the rest of us, should he suddenly be denuded of some 1100 posts. But please press on and wipe out the potential of the "Mike Hanson Diaries - The Forum Years".
Make Sure You Keep Those Super Stars.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
I like that Alex, we should get you to do some copy writing.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Alex S.
Paul,
I fear I may not be expensive enough for you.
Alex.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Mike Hanson
Hopefully it's a good thing (or at least a better thing). Although I would be upset to lose my entire history, it wouldn't be the first time.
I just hope to god that you get proper message threading this time.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Rockingdoc
That would be which god with a small 'g'?
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
Don't believe the message (partial) threading (THEY SAY) is available with this update, its more smilies make a forum type stuff.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Mike Hanson
quote:
its more smilies make a forum type stuff.
Crap! It sounds like it's all about fluffy bells and whistles, with no real substance. I hope I don't have to revert to my old tagline.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Smilies do not a forum make!
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Mike Hanson
quote:
That would be which god with a small 'g'?
I'm actually somewhere between an atheist and an agnostic. IOW, a "god" might exist, but I'll believe it only when he/she/it proves it to me. In the meantime, I don't intend to live my life any differently.
Besides, I think I'm already "good enough" for god's satisfaction. 
If he/she/it exists, then he/she/it obviously made me to be this way, so it his/her/its own damn fault.
Therefore, the small "g" is ok by me, because there's no Respect or Fear complicating the issue.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
It does all the email notification stuff that many forum members wanted.I have not had the time to fool around with the bits, so we will all get a surprise together. Hey its only code!
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Andrew Randle
Paul,
Any chance of having an archive of messages from the old forum?
Andrew
Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
"from the old forum" you mean this old forum or the old old forum?
THe old old forum, Raul is still proving difficult to track but we are on it, honestly and we may be able to re-compile and use as reference via our web site rather than a forum.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Andrew Randle
The old old forum that time forgot!
Andrew
Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Paul Stephenson
Its Friday night.....Eastenders, somebody explain to Mike, they are all talking about it, not me, goin for a drink!
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Joe Petrik
Mike,
quote:
I'm actually somewhere between an atheist and an agnostic.
Please explain how you can be between atheism and agnosticism.
Joe
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Mick P
The week end is begining.......go home, eat yer dinner and sink a few malts.......let the bloody forum blow up if necessary......it will be there on Monday complete with all the moans about trees and smilees etc.
There are three certainties in this world......death....taxes....and whinging forum members.
Regards
Mick.......still playing the CDS2 and loving it.
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Mike Hanson
quote:
Please explain how you can be between atheism and agnosticism.
Thanks for making me look it up. I've always been under the impression that an agnostic believes in god, but doesn't adhere to any particular organized religion (rolls his own, in a sense). At least this is the way it was always explained to me.
Now that I've checked the dictionary, I've discovered that I'm an agnostic. There are two pertinent definitions:
- One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
- One who is sceptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
Both could easily apply to me. I would describe myself as "very sceptical", though, so I might still stick with the half-and-half stance (especially considering that so many seem to think that agnostics believe in some kind of god).
It's kind of like "hoi polloi", which is literally translated (from Greek IIRC) as "the masses". However, it sounds very fancy (somewhat reminiscent of "hoity-toity"), so the masses often misconstrue it as "elite". This means that you can't safely use the phrase, without providing strong contextual indications of its real meaning. Unfortunately, it might still cause confusion in the reader.
Isn't language a silly thing? 
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Greg Beatty
...if the previous posts were all lost, would be all be Junior Members again?
- GregB
Insert Witty Signature Line Here
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Joe Petrik
Mike,
quote:
I would describe myself as "very sceptical", though, so I might still stick with the half-and-half stance (especially considering that so many seem to think that agnostics believe in some kind of god).
The half-and-half stance is a logical contradiction. You can't both be one who is sceptical about the existence of God but not
profess true atheism and be an atheist.
quote:
This means that you can't safely use the phrase, without providing strong contextual indications of its real meaning. Unfortunately, it might still cause confusion in the reader.
If that works for you. But I'd rather use words correctly and let the reader be confused.
quote:
Isn't language a silly thing?
It's shown itself to be a useful invention and far more precise than grunts and farts.
Joe
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by John C
Joe.. I tell you we weren't here yesterday. Another of your nightmares.
Mike.. And where were you yesterday evening according to you?
Joe.. How do I know? In another compartment. There's no lack of void.
Mike.. Good We weren't here yesterday evening. Now what did we do yesterday evening?
Joe.. Do?
Mike.. Try and remember.
Mike.. Do... I suppose we blathered.
Joe.. About What?
Mike.. Oh.. This and that, I suppose nothing in particular. Yes now I remember. Yesterday evening we spent blathering about nothing in particular. That's been going on now for half a century.
John
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Steve Toy
Is it because the Mana Forum is too similar - in structure - if not in style, to this one? I do object to the "sheep" reference made by at least one certain individual over there, who, hypocritically, also posts over here
Mike,
I'm an agnostic too, which is why I find the *religious fervour* over there to be somewhat unsettling!
It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve
Posted on: 10 August 2001 by Steve Toy
I have really grown to like the current format.
If it aint broke...
It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve
Posted on: 11 August 2001 by Mick P
Steve
Believe it or not, the Mana crowd are much more restrained than they were in the past. The only "zealot" left is Mr Pig and even he is becoming less aggressive in his approach.
12 months ago you would have been bombarded from all sides for making the comments you are currently making.....so be grateful.
What I find objectionable about Pig is not only his evangilistic fervour (remember he is not objective at all) but his obsession with telling the world he knows what is best for them.
Despite his time on this forum, he went out and purchased a 11 year old 250 amp which was knackered. He got it home, plonked it on Mana and told the world just how good the Mana made the 250 sound. His wife, walked out of the room in disgust because it sounded so crap but he had convinced himself it sounded good because of Mana.
So he was recommending Mana because of how it improved the sound of a clapped out amp.
Then a couple of weeks ago, he admitted that it took him a couple of months to realise the tweeters in his speakers were below par, but even then its Mana makes everything good.
He really should not be dishing out advice if his ability to judge music is that bad.
Unfortunately I cannot say this on the Mana forum any longer because I have been banned from it,for being nasty to Mr Pig. Evidently I upset him.
Regards
Mick
