SCGT: Wher are the headlights????

Not visible from inside the car while driving. One of the small but dissapointing oversights. Amazing considering how good the lighting is overall. JM > When racing at night all I see are streetlights. Do these cars have any > headlights? If not, racing at night is pointless. You can turn up the gamma, > but then you may as well be running during the day.

When racing at night all I see are streetlights. Do these cars have any headlights? If not, racing at night is pointless. You can turn up the gamma, but then you may as well be running during the day.

Hit H and you can turn on the headlights, not visible from in-car view though... Dan Belcher Team Racing Unlimited

I see you didn't really consider changing that uncanny name. So far i do not know whether it is mere ignorance on your part or something else, so i will try to stay friendly. Please quit posting under this particular pseudonym as it is _highly_ offensive. Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ? -- Greg Hellmann Hakenkreuz schrieb in Nachricht

What happened to freedom of speech, freedom of political expression and freedom or religion? I can't say I agree with the views that particular symbol is used to promote, but others hold those views. The only wierd thing would be if he is not beliving in those views, others may be upset at him for no reason. Basically no problem for me. Cheers! John

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I see you didn't really consider changing that uncanny name. >So far i do not know whether it is mere ignorance on your part >or something else, so i will try to stay friendly. Please quit >posting >under this particular pseudonym as it is _highly_ offensive. >Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" >is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ?

Since I don't know what it means it doesn't bother me. Is it some offensive auto simulator thing or something? I'm sure you wouldn't be wasting bandwidth on some m***crusade. I am here trying to read auto sim stuff not some m***righteousness. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Was this the guy with the Swastika in his name? Anyway, in ancient times, the Swastika was a symbol of peace or something like that. It wasn't orginally bad. Racer X Veteran Sim Racer Victory Lane- http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/1423/

Greg, I've read some other respondents', er. . . . responses to your request, and, as is their right, they don't have a problem with Mr. (Ms.?) Swastika's "name." I suppose I find it less offensive than simply banal. It's strange how even something as horrific as the Nazi regime (yes, yes, he/she may point out the swastika's not _exclusively_ a Nazi symbol--yawn, of course, of course . . .), can be appropriated and water-down to where it becomes just another label for resentment and wanna-be hyper-masculinity. Like calling yourself "killer" because you like to get rowdy with the boys. So I'll say, fine, "hakenkreuz," call yourself what you will. Posturing is allowed. DK PS Unlike some, I don't think R.A.S. should be, or can be, some sort of pure space devoid of politics or morality. A little m***crusading is good for the soul--may get you an extra tenth with the Powers That Be.

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I see you didn't really consider changing that uncanny name. > So far i do not know whether it is mere ignorance on your part > or something else, so i will try to stay friendly. Please quit > posting > under this particular pseudonym as it is _highly_ offensive. > Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" > is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ? > -- > Greg Hellmann > Hakenkreuz schrieb in Nachricht > >When racing at night all I see are streetlights. Do these cars > have any > >headlights? If not, racing at night is pointless. You can turn > up the gamma, > >but then you may as well be running during the day.

John, i never thought i would actually disagree with something you post, so please - while you read my answer - be aware that it was written with all due respect. Freedom of speech or political statement is not boundless. Rule of law, democracy, human rights are superior principles. But apart from the fact that a particular basic right (ie freedom of speech) can be of less significance than other constitutional principles that weigh a lot stronger, i don't understand why you would approach the "Swastika" symbol and the despicable ideology that it represented in the 20th century in this very context; disdaining the millions that were ***ed in the concentration camps. Perhaps you could point out to me what you mean. I don't think we're talking about a religion here, but an ideology that disregarded human rights that are far more fundamental than the ones you enumerated above (but those as well). I agree with you that everybody should of course be entitled to their opinions, and of course i accept your indifference to this. However, unlike you i can't pass over this in silence (like it was only a rude remark of some troll). It is criminal offence to use this marks where i live. I am really sorry for this highly off topic post. -- Greg Hellmann >>I see you didn't really consider changing that uncanny name. >>So far i do not know whether it is mere ignorance on your part >>or something else, so i will try to stay friendly. Please quit >>posting >>under this particular pseudonym as it is _highly_ offensive. >>Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" >>is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ? >What happened to freedom of speech, freedom of political expression >and freedom or religion? I can't say I agree with the views that >particular symbol is used to promote, but others hold those views. >The only wierd thing would be if he is not beliving in those views, >others may be upset at him for no reason. >Basically no problem for me. >Cheers! >John

Quoted text (8 lines)

>John, >i never thought i would actually disagree with something >you post, so please - while you read my answer - be aware >that it was written with all due respect. >Freedom of speech or political statement is not boundless. >Rule of law, democracy, human rights are superior principles.

[etc] I agree with most everything you say. Yes, "freedom of speech" is not boundless, nor has it been held to be so here by the US Supreme Court. Some forget that and just immediately respond knee-jerk-like that anything said is allowed citing the phrase "freedom of speech". Like every right, it is weighed against every other. The oft-cited yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is not the only case where freedom of speech is curtailed. Some statements are not only reprehensible, but also illegal. Like most everything, it isn't a black/white issue. But in the light of "weighing" rights, I cannot fully agree with your following statement: that it takes a back-seat to "rule of law, democracy, human rights". It must be balanced against there, not be considered inferior. Do realize that different societies will weigh freedom of speech differently. I think we hold it in very high standing here. OTOH, one should bear in mind that, yes, the swastika is an illegal symbol in Germany. One should respect the view of others. Inciting, for the sole purpose of doing so is obnoxious, anti-social, and in some cases, illegal. So, I wouldn't be quick to defend the instigator here. He's probably an a**hole. And I to do apologize for the off-topic'ness of this.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I see you didn't really consider changing that uncanny name. > So far i do not know whether it is mere ignorance on your part > or something else, so i will try to stay friendly. Please quit > posting > under this particular pseudonym as it is _highly_ offensive. > Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" > is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ?

Just ignore the guy, everybody has the right to be an ignorant ***. (I was friendly the first time I saw him post, so there... ;^) l8er ronny -- How to get rid of censorship in German game releases <http://www.gamesmania.com/german/maniac/freedom/freedom.htm |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

>Who else here thinks that the use of the name "Hakenkreuz" >is inappropriate beyond endurance and will back me up ? His/her handle tells me a lot about the poster, so I just skip his/her messages..... Remco

What is the name "Hakenkreuz" from? At the moment, it means nothing to me, so I am gleefully not offended.

The "Hakenkreuz" was used by the Nazis. The poster with this handle is aware of that, so I guess he is trying to offend. Remco >What is the name "Hakenkreuz" from? At the moment, it means nothing to me, so I >am gleefully not offended.

Just for the record... More people have been killed in the name of various "Powers That Be" than Hitler ever thought about killing, so I find any mention of Religion or even references to the entities those religions theoretically serve to be deeply, personally offensive. Using logic presented elsewhere in this thread, I have to presume anyone that even mentions this to be an +sshole. If this person had a conscience, they would avoid mentioning these "Powers That Be" for the m***good of all mankind. The important thing to remember about freedom of speech is that its limits are not founded in what any individual or group of individuals finds OFFENSIVE. blah blah blah, ~daxe -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

On Mon, 10 May 1999 00:52:11 -0400, "Daxe Rexford" > The important thing to remember about freedom of speech is that its limits >are not founded in what any individual or group of individuals finds OFFENSIVE. Given that his beliefs are different, indeed opposite, from yours, it is likely offensive that he be denied from saying his beliefs while you are free to state yours. I'm sure some of the English people on the group could tell me "Wallace" is an offensive name after all the ***ing and cattle-thieving he did all those years ago, but you have to have SOME level of tolerance to live in the world these days, shurely...? Cheers! John

Yeah or that it's like Rusty Wallace, hehe. Racer X Veteran Sim Racer Victory Lane- http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Speedway/1423/

That was my point, exactly. Being offended by something is not a reason to make someone else stop saying it. Far too much of people's individual rights are put aside these days so as not to offend others. The ridiculous hyper-sensitivity of some people serves no-one except those selfish whiners doing the complaining. ~daxe -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

Naturally, what you state is correct. It is also very general. Tolerance surely ends when it comes to the ideology of the Nazis and the horrifying aftermath it caused. That's the point when remembrance of the countless victims is more appropriate than anything else. Stand up and raise voice against man's inhumanity to man. In the film 'Schindler's list' there is a scene showing a concentration camp: The SS officer conducting the camp, a Nazi, gets up in the morning and takes a piss. After that he steps out on the porch looking around. He then loads his barrel and shoots a few jewish woman, children and men that are walking around. Randomly. This illustrates what was done in the name of the "Hakenkreuz". It is the reason i feel offended by this person using it as his pseudonym on r.a.s. and that's all. -- Greg Hellmann >On Mon, 10 May 1999 00:52:11 -0400, "Daxe Rexford" >> The important thing to remember about freedom of speech is that its limits >>are not founded in what any individual or group of individuals finds OFFENSIVE. >Given that his beliefs are different, indeed opposite, from yours, it >is likely offensive that he be denied from saying his beliefs while >you are free to state yours. I'm sure some of the English people on >the group could tell me "Wallace" is an offensive name after all the >***ing and cattle-thieving he did all those years ago, but you have >to have SOME level of tolerance to live in the world these days, >shurely...? >Cheers! >John

Yes, I think that's highly offending but then again that's probably all he wants. After all that's usenet, the only option you have is to ignore him, better yet, killfile him. Or complain to his ISP - fat chance he's from AOL... --Tel

No, tolerance ends only at the action precipitated by the ideology. Ideology should not be controlled, nor can it. And like I mentioned before, more human suffering has been caused thoughout the course of human history in the name of religion (Christianity, for example) than Hitler ever caused. Does that mean that religions should be treated the way you are proposing we treat people with Nazi ideologies? Appropriateness is subjective. You may well tolerate something I find intolerable and vice-versa. Who is correct? Yes, it was horrible. I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't. Put bluntly, why should anyone but YOU care what offends you? Do you know what offends me? Are you going to govern your actions based on what I am offended by? If not, why not? After all, you are expecting others to know and abide by your sensitivities. ~daxe -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

daxe went ballistic when I mentioned the dreaded " . . .Powers That Be" um, daxe, that was a bit of tongue-in-cheek humour. I'm an atheist meeself. But I don't get a worm up my ass at reading some believer's mention of her or his personal belief system or tradition (unless it happens to be nazism, or something similar). Because I realize that while religious beliefs have indeed been a factor in much ***shed and atrocity, they have also been a factor in much good. It doesn't take a genius--and it doesn't mean having to abandon one's own m***integrity--to admit that. Although I myself am an atheist, I find the atheist-puritan stance ("so I find any mention of Religion or even references to the entities those religions theoretically serve to be deeply, personally offensive.") to be just a bit, um, dogmatic. Where are the headlights, indeed? David, (a bit of an +sshole to be sure, but a decent guy nonetheless.) > > PS Unlike some, I don't think R.A.S. should be, or can be, some sort of > > pure space devoid of politics or morality. A little m***crusading is good > > for the soul--may get you an extra tenth with the Powers That Be. > Just for the record... > More people have been killed in the name of various "Powers That Be" than > Hitler ever thought about killing, so I find any mention of Religion or even > references to the entities those religions theoretically serve to be deeply, > personally offensive. > Using logic presented elsewhere in this thread, I have to presume anyone > that even mentions this to be an +sshole. If this person had a conscience, they > would avoid mentioning these "Powers That Be" for the m***good of all mankind. > The important thing to remember about freedom of speech is that its limits > are not founded in what any individual or group of individuals finds OFFENSIVE. > blah blah blah, > ~daxe > -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! > ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----