rec.autos.simulators

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Fri, 24 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Careful when you use the collective "we". I don't buy the argument. Until
now, I have based my purchase decisions, moviegoing decisions, music
decisions, book-buying decisions etc. on reviews written by people who have
received their evaluation copies or pre-screenings through legit channels.
Or at least I used to; now it seems, for sim software, the legitimate
reviews are going to be drowned out by those who are scrambling to be the
first to try a new product and post their own "official" review. Seems like
a bit of an ego thing to me.

Stephen

by **Sean Blac** » Fri, 24 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Games always used to get released on a Monday as well, up until a few
years ago. I can't see why they just can't be sold as soon as they get
to the shops like in the US.
--
Sean Black

by **Zonk** » Fri, 24 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 18:53:15 -0500, James Wohlever

>> >On the following date: 22 Mar 2000 20:06:51 GMT, said person(s)

>> >>.... as British games are almost always
>> >>released on Fridays.

>> >Could someone explain to me why that is?
>> >Why are games in the UK released on a certain "day"?
>> >Just think it's odd.

AFAIK, US games always release on teusday/wednesday. It's just a done thing-
mainly concerning cut off dates for distrubution- stock has to arrive at the
warehouses of the ig chains by the previous monday for UK Friday releases..

Z.

Please remove my_pants when replying.

by **Chris Bloo** » Fri, 24 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Obviously Irony tends to get watered down by 6000-12000 odd
miles of copper wire and fibre optic cable?

Chris

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

by **rrevve** » Fri, 24 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>> Hmm too bad the native indians couldn't have done that.......

>It's unfortunate and I would agree with you. They were outnumbered and the
>years of assimilation created that.

So why don't you move out of your home and let the Indians have
'their' land back?

--
* rrev at mindspring dot com *

by **ymenar** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Those laws are neither extreme, just a protection of our culture from the
Americanization and oppression we have dealt with for centuries. It's quite
hard to be a 8million society surrounded by 300 million English-speaking
people. You have to fight to simply save what you love, which is our
culture.

Notice that in many countries you are seeing this appear, per example in
some cities of Southern California. Not to say the law is perfect, since
there is some small flaws.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **ymenar** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

I was implying via legitimite channels also. Sorry for the confusion. Im
more trying to point out the fact that people want to know before the
product or Entertainment is released, whatever the way is legit or not.

Well, I have mixed feelings also. It could be ego, but aren't they actually
helping people in that way? There is always ego involved and this newsgroup
has a fair share (I don't hide that fact), but the principal reason is to
inform people. Name me a good reliable racing software reviewer? There is
Randy Magruder, and then it mostly comes from racing-oriented sites such as

overall mass opinion or simply want to be informed about a question, he has
only here to go :)

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **Stiff on** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Hmm too bad the native indians couldn't have done that.......

> > I thought the Qubecquois got rid of their more extreme translation
> > laws after the last election?

> Those laws are neither extreme, just a protection of our culture from the
> Americanization and oppression we have dealt with for centuries. It's
quite
> hard to be a 8million society surrounded by 300 million English-speaking
> people. You have to fight to simply save what you love, which is our
> culture.

> Notice that in many countries you are seeing this appear, per example in
> some cities of Southern California. Not to say the law is perfect, since
> there is some small flaws.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- May the Downforce be with you...
> -- http://www.WeRace.net
> -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't
realise
> how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **ymenar** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

It's unfortunate and I would agree with you. They were outnumbered and the
years of assimilation created that. I guess that possibly in long term the
advantages were greater than the bad things that happened (in terms of human
evolution). Be sure we will continue to fight against assimilation to keep
our heritage and culture. Not that we have anything wrong against others.
FYI Im 1 quarter Inuit :)

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **Stiff on** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

I could never understand why French Canadians complain about being oppressed
when all Canadian's oppress the native Canadian. It's hypocritical of French
Canadian's to complain about opression. Like the old joke, The Englishman
say's to the Frenchman "sorry eh" then the Frenchman say's to the native
Canadian "desole, eh". Je me souvenir, we're all
Canadian........................

> > Hmm too bad the native indians couldn't have done that.......

> It's unfortunate and I would agree with you. They were outnumbered and
the
> years of assimilation created that. I guess that possibly in long term
the
> advantages were greater than the bad things that happened (in terms of
human
> evolution). Be sure we will continue to fight against assimilation to
keep
> our heritage and culture. Not that we have anything wrong against others.
> FYI Im 1 quarter Inuit :)

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- May the Downforce be with you...
> -- http://www.WeRace.net
> -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't
realise
> how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **Stiff on** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

We have we actually and we live under a bridge like a couple of troll's. As
well we are the basis of the story for Billy Goats
Gruff............................Oh yes our homes have been turned into
***'s

> >> Hmm too bad the native indians couldn't have done that.......

> >It's unfortunate and I would agree with you. They were outnumbered and
the
> >years of assimilation created that.

> So why don't you move out of your home and let the Indians have
> 'their' land back?

> --
> * rrev at mindspring dot com *

by **James Wohleve** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

On the following date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 22:39:51 -0600, said person(s)

He's got ya there.
Move back to jolly old England and left the Indians have their land
back :)

- James "Gunslinger" Wohlever

Techware Computer Services
http://techware.gtinsider.com

Send ATTACHMENTS (Files) to:

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

> > I thought the Qubecquois got rid of their more extreme translation
> > laws after the last election?

> Those laws are neither extreme, just a protection of our culture from the
> Americanization and oppression we have dealt with for centuries. It's
quite
> hard to be a 8million society surrounded by 300 million English-speaking
> people. You have to fight to simply save what you love, which is our
> culture.

I think you will find the cultural groups of Switzerland (Italian, French,
German, Romansch) have no problems maintaining their identity without the
same Draconian laws that were implemented in Quebec. You can't legislate a
cultural identity. You have to nurture it out of a desire to preserve it.

Stephen

by **rob** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>> I thought the Qubecquois got rid of their more extreme translation
>> laws after the last election?

>Those laws are neither extreme, just a protection of our culture from the
>Americanization and oppression we have dealt with for centuries. It's quite
>hard to be a 8million society surrounded by 300 million English-speaking
>people. You have to fight to simply save what you love, which is our
>culture.

Geez, get your stories straight! This is a total contradiction from
what you were preaching in the "other" NG a couple of weeks ago.
Didn't you say that after separation the government of Quebec would
provide its citizens with unlimited access to all of the American TV
channels that the oppressive CRTC was preventing them from seeing, and
that you had statistics that proved that this is what the majority of
Quebecers wanted? In your own words:

But, yet, it's okay if the government of Quebec feels that
Americanization is such a problem that it has to have laws to protect
its citizens from it???

So, who is protecting who from what, and why are they doing it if
those who they are trying to protect don't want to be protected? <g>.

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Heh heh heh.... love it. After living through the October crisis, the
various referendums (referendi?) the PQ and the Bloc, I was kind of happy to
move over to Europe for a while, if for anything to get away from the
constant flip-flopping from one moment to the next of Quebecois discussing
the sovereignity issue.

Stephen

> >> I thought the Qubecquois got rid of their more extreme translation
> >> laws after the last election?

> >Those laws are neither extreme, just a protection of our culture from the
> >Americanization and oppression we have dealt with for centuries. It's
quite
> >hard to be a 8million society surrounded by 300 million English-speaking
> >people. You have to fight to simply save what you love, which is our
> >culture.

> Geez, get your stories straight! This is a total contradiction from
> what you were preaching in the "other" NG a couple of weeks ago.
> Didn't you say that after separation the government of Quebec would
> provide its citizens with unlimited access to all of the American TV
> channels that the oppressive CRTC was preventing them from seeing, and
> that you had statistics that proved that this is what the majority of
> Quebecers wanted? In your own words:

> >Our culture is America, and our tradition/history is French-based.

> >It's pure bollock, we are Americans, we just speak French. Our main
culture
> >is the same, just different on some aspects but overall, we are the same
> >people.

> >We should have ESPN. ESPN2. CNN. DIscovery Channel US.
> >Disney Channel. TBS. TNT. USA Network. VH1. C-SPAN. MSNBC. ZDTV.
> >HBO. Showtime. StarZ. That's what us Quebecers want.

> >We have had US channels for years, but we do not agree -at all- with the
CRTC
> >laws saying that the influx of American culture would assimilate us.

> But, yet, it's okay if the government of Quebec feels that
> Americanization is such a problem that it has to have laws to protect
> its citizens from it???

> So, who is protecting who from what, and why are they doing it if
> those who they are trying to protect don't want to be protected? <g>.

rec.autos.simulators

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally

F1 2000 is available legally