or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Did the STYLEman thread just vanish?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Did the STYLEman thread just vanish? - Page 7  

post #91 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
(ernest @ Feb. 24 2005,22:14) So censorship can only be made by a government?
Yes.
Quote:
For exemple, the boss of a newspaper who asks his journalists no to talk about something = this is not censorship?
No.
I do not agree. It seems that many member neither do.
post #92 of 160
Quote:
I do not agree. It seems that many member neither do.
It seems to me that you are wrong. On both counts.
post #93 of 160
Quote:
Boobs are great. Look, we even have one for a President. Thus, every time Bush is on TV I see a boob.
Jon, I was lead to believe that Linux is Canadian. The question was an honest, albeit pointed one ... but not directed at any person. Must we jeopardize being shoved over to politics & power?
post #94 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
Boobs are great. Look, we even have one for a President. Thus, every time Bush is on TV I see a boob.
Jon, I was lead to believe that Linux is Canadian. The question was an honest, albeit pointed one ... but not directed at any person. Must we jeopardize being shoved over to politics & power?
It was a political joke. Read my post on page 8 (of this thread) to see why this is not only funny regarding what I posted, but as well, it is amusing from your side of the equation. Jon.
post #95 of 160
Quote:
Boobs are great. Look, we even have one for a President.
I had already read your serenader post. Bit of a difference in impact between an early 20th century reference and your current post, no?
Quote:
your side of the equation
Excuse me? Did I miss math class? Please clarify: What is the equation? And upon which side of such equation do I reside?
post #96 of 160
I agree with the sentiment about loosening those rediculous laws we have on sexuality, etc. I wouldn't mind seeing more boobs on TV, so long as they're for comedic value, educational value. Basically anything except to sell me a product. The Pueblo indians had it right, for the most part, with their gender balance and sex-positive attitudes.
post #97 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
Boobs are great. Look, we even have one for a President.
I had already read your serenader post. Bit of a difference in impact between an early 20th century reference and your current post, no?
Quote:
your side of the equation
Excuse me? Did I miss math class? Please clarify: What is the equation? And upon which side of such equation do I reside?
First off, it was not a 20th century reference; the Mikado was written in 1885, but that's not here nor there. My reference was this line: "The Judicial humorist -- I've got him on the list." Regarding my stating: "It was a political joke." The other side of the equation: your side and my side. Jon.
post #98 of 160
Quote:
Um, you can get anything you want in any country on earth, its called satellite dish. That's right, you weren't dreaming, the Russians really did launch sputnik.
If you didn't mind potentially breaking the law in Canada you could indeed have any channel you want. The CRTC decides what channels are allowed in Canada, not consumers or broadcasters. The government seems to believe that it solely has a right to determine what Canadian culture and values are and therefore enforces its view on Canadians.
post #99 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
(imageWIS @ Feb. 24 2005,22:36) Um, you can get anything you want in any country on earth, its called satellite dish. That's right, you weren't dreaming, the Russians really did launch sputnik.
If you didn't mind potentially breaking the law in Canada you could indeed have any channel you want. The CRTC decides what channels are allowed in Canada, not consumers or broadcasters.
Yes, I know that, but no one can stop you from purchasing a dish, and pointing it in a certain direction. Jon.
post #100 of 160
Quote:
Yes, I know that, but no one can stop you from purchasing a dish, and pointing it in a certain direction.
And how does one watch these signals without the appropriate decoding box and card? Unless you are able to illegally purchase or manufacture American satellite cards to watch these signals, you are forced to deal with Canadian broadcasters and they only carry channels that have been approved by the government.
post #101 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
(imageWIS @ Feb. 25 2005,00:18) Yes, I know that, but no one can stop you from purchasing a dish, and pointing it in a certain direction.
And how does one watch these signals without the appropriate decoding box and card? Unless you are able to illegally purchase or manufacture American satellite cards to watch these signals, you are forced to deal with Canadian broadcasters and they only carry channels that have been approved by the government.
Oh, I'm sure they manufacture satellite dish cards / encoders in other countries too. Jon. Oh, and not every dish is the little DishTV type of dish, they do have the larger ones as well, that are much more versatile.
post #102 of 160
Quote:
Oh, I'm sure they manufacture satellite dish cards / encoders in other countries too. Jon. Oh, and not every dish is the little DishTV type of dish, they do have the larger ones as well, that are much more versatile.
Sigh. I hear that they do make them in other countries. I also hear that the RCMP also likes to raid black and grey market dealers of foreign dish cards and encoders. In fact, it happened in the little city I live in. I am aware that there are other types of dishes. My father has a larger one that he uses to watch television from the Balkans. These channels are not encoded so there's no big deal. Again, I ask, if a Canadian wanted to watch an encoded American channel that is currently being banned by the Canadian government, how would they do it without breaking the law or going through the onerous steps of having their bills sent to an American address before being routed to Canada? I'm not sure what this debate is about: the Canadian government in large part determines what Canadians watch, listen to and even read.
post #103 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
(Ambulance Chaser @ Feb. 24 2005,13:14) Then he claimed kinship with one of the wealthiest men in Britain.
You know, if you look at his words strictly, he did not.  What he said was "Gerald Cavendish is my second uncle."  Others have pointed out that "second uncle" is not a relationship that any geneology expert would admit even exists, so what he meant by that is anyone's guess.  I will here point out that I don't know of any "Gerald Cavendish."  Canvendish is the family name of the dukes of Devonshire; rich, to be sure, but not billionaires.  "Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor" is the current (6th) duke of Westminster.  That is no doubt whom Syleman meant, but it's telling that he got such a "close relative's" name wrong.
I'd have to search for examples, but I thought it was (somewhat) common in the 19th and 20th centuries to not use the so-called "surname" with those with titles, and so, for example, to leave off the "Grosvenor" in the example below. I could (and probably am wrong) about this...
post #104 of 160
Quote:
I was personally amazed at his horrific spelling, considering the outstanding education he must have received in one of England's finest private academies.  Terrible communication skills, especially for one who regularly dines and socializes with men of global prominence.  It's funny.  For all his talk of the boorish manners of America, it seems our own private academies uphold much higher standards than the undoubtedly regal institution which he attends.  Maybe in his English upper-class family, only the servants are required to attain any semblance of education.  After all, when you are the second-nephew of the most powerful man in England, you must realize that work is for the peasantry only.  Who needs language skills for a life of leisure and trolling?
Well, perhaps His Grace was educated by private tutors.  And anyways, consistent spelling was more an American thing than a British one, and in a way, one could argue that there is a form of reverse-snobbery at work... Remember Young Grasshopper, your soco-economicl transmformation (recall your Gatsby-esque post on another section), must include not only a sartorial re-invention, so as you are not confused with those from the middle-class, but one in which your ethos is changed. The rich aren't inherently interested in education.
post #105 of 160
Quote:
Quote:
(Manton @ Feb. 25 2005,04:20)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernest,Feb. 24 2005,22:14
So censorship can only be made by a government?
Yes.
Quote:
For exemple, the boss of a newspaper who asks his journalists no to talk about something = this is not censorship?
No.
I do not agree. It seems that many member neither do.
If there's a real confusion here, rather than a deliberate case of obtuseness, maybe it has something to do with the restricted use of the word "censorship" in English. Maybe the term is more all-encompasing in French. E: you have your French Academy dictionary handy?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Did the STYLEman thread just vanish?