Conference quark::mennotes

    I buy my toys because they please me (stereo) or because they help me
    to do what I want to do better (woodshop tools).  The computer is both. 
    I'd dearly love a Macintosh, and I know that it would enable me to do
    certain things better (handle PostScript files easily), but the Apple
    IIGS does other things better (games and color HyperCard) - and I've
    already got the IIGS.
    
    Being better than my neighbors/friends/colleagues' toys?  Hardly.  Not
    when my daughter has a 17/210 Mac IIsi.  :-)
    
    -dick

Because I like them and because they satisfy my needs. Who gives a stuff
what the other guy has ?

A friend of mine, who's one of those 'I have to have it bigger and better' types, 
has just bought himself the new Porsche 911 with all the bollocks. Nice
car. Personally I wouldn't give 180,000 DM for a new Porsche unless I had so 
much money 180,000 DM was like loose change. Until then I'm happy with my XR2. 

Isn't it very Freudian to always want to have something bigger and better than
the next man ? I'll have to check my Psychology books tonight but I do recall
it has to do with men that have a complex about the size of their Penis.

- Paul.

    I only buy toys that I want and that fit into my budget. I really
    don't care to compete on toys. If others have toys that I want I
    want them because I think I'd have fun with them not because someone
    else has them.

    There is a bumper sticker that says "he who dies with the most toys
    wins." I see a lot of them but I really don't think people live that
    way. I think its a joke. A way of rationalizing in a humorous way the
    buying of toys that one wants for no good reason other than they want
    it. 

    People who are not into toys or a specific kind of toy often, I think,
    would rather believe that there is a competition doing on than believe
    that someone really wants toys that they personally have no interest
    in.

    BTW, with men it's toys. And we define that pretty broadly. For women
    it seems to be clothing and other things to wear. I think it is just
    as logical to say that women buy clothes or shoes out of competition.
    After all who needs more than 3-5 pair of shoes? :-)

    		Alfred

    Okay, I'll be honest.  I bought the '92 Kawasaki Ninja ZX-6 because
    it's trememdously fun to ride, but also because I really get a lot of
    stares going down the boulevard.  I look damned good on it!!!  ;^)
    
    Competition has quite a bit to do with it, too.  But my best friend
    rides a ZX-10, so it really doesn't have to be bigger and faster, just
    better looking.  Most of the competition is around riding skill anyway.
    
    I think we should all be allowed to be shallow every now and then!
    
    Jon

    re .3, nobody needs more than 3 to 5 pairs of shoes.  However, there is
    no limit to the number of rings a person might need in a lifetime.
    
    How does being a collector differ from buying "toys"?
    People who collect, whether it be jewelry, guns or quilts, sort
    of think of their collections as toys, I think.
    
    Do more women collect than men?
    
    Lorna
    

    I buy my toys because they please me, and/or my family.
    
    I could care less about keeping ahead or up with the Joneses.
    
    Jeff

>    How does being a collector differ from buying "toys"?
    
    I don't think it does differ.
    
>    People who collect, whether it be jewelry, guns or quilts, sort
>    of think of their collections as toys, I think.
    
    You're probably right. It's just that men seem more likely to use the
    word "toys."
    
    		Alfred

    i dont buy toys, i dont have time to waste on games. iam a very busy dude.
    
    hope this helps.
    
    \bye
    \nasser

    re .8, chess is a game.
    
    hope this helps.
    
    Lorna
    

    >re .8, chess is a game.
    
    OMI'God !!
    
    Dear Lorna,

    for your information, chess IS NOT A GAME !!
    
    football and basketball and bowling are "games", chess in NOT!! it is 
    much more than that! chess is struggle for the truth and beyond, much
    beyond, much much beyond.

    now, go bang your head for saying that chess is just a "game". 
    (dont have to it too hard).

    hope this helps.

    \bye
    \nasser
    

    Re .10
    
    From Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary:
    
        chess \'ches\ n [ME "ches," fr. MF "esches," acc. pl. of "eschec"
        check at chess -- more at CHECK](14c): a game for 2 players each of
        whom moves his [sic] 16 pieces according to fixed rules across a
        checkerboard and tries to checkmate his opponent's king...
    
    From Petit Larousse illustr�, 1989:
    
        �CH�CS n.m. pl (persan �ch�h�, roi)  Jeu dans lequel deux
        adversaires font man�uvrer sur un plateau de 64 cases deux s�ries
        de 16 pi�ces de valeurs diverses...
    
    From the Oxford American Dictionary:
    
    	chess (ches) n.  a game played by two persons on a board with
        thirty-two chessmen...
    
    If chess is for you not a game, perhaps you should see a psychiatrist
    about your obsessive compulsive behavior.
    
    -dick

    >If chess is for you not a game, perhaps you should see a psychiatrist
    >about your obsessive compulsive behavior.
    >
    >-dick

    OMI'God !!

    how can you say that !! are you implying iam funny in the head ??

    is this what you are trying to say??

    iam NOT a compulsive obsessive behavior! IAM NOT !!

    and i dont care a doodle what these dictionaries says, after all they
    were written by people who dont undertand chess any way. chess is NOT a
    game! and i know it. how can you put CHESS and something as silly as
    people running after a ball on an open field the same level ??

    if chess is a game, then iam napoleon.

    i refuse to accept that chess is a game.
    
    now, go bang you head too. and do it hard.

    \bye
    \nasser

 I think anal-retentive is probably closer to the mark.

    I agree with Mark.  I play chess - note the verb here, PLAY.  It's a
    game.  If you want serious mental challenge, \nasser, try Go.  Now
    *there* is something serious!
    
    -dick

    Would somebody please send /nasser a copy of Rand's "An Open
    Letter to Boris Spassky" ?

    > -< it's a drug... >-

    OMI'God !!

    Chess is not a drug!!!   chess is life man !!

    when i started playing chess at 17 or so, my friends in the YMCA
    in England used to bring food to me to my room 'cause i could not leave 
    'cause i was studying chess all day long, i played chess all the time
    i get up in the morning and play chess till night, it was heaven!!

    but i paid for this at the end of year when i took my school exams :(

    now , with work and more school , no time to play as much chess :(

    by the way, check out GRIM::CHESS_DISCUSSION for latest news on
    chess and the coming Short-Kapsarov world chess champ. and stuff
    like that.

    got to go, we'll talk more tomorrow.

    \bye
    \nasser

Yes, "go" is a much better game than chess.  Do you know we have a go conference
and about usenet group rec.games.go ?

As someone once said (anyone remember who?)

	Where chess is merely a battle, go is an entire war


Not that I condone warfare (I am indeed starting to believe "war never really
worked"), but I *love* go.

I used to play chess at lunch here at work about 15 years ago.  Then one of my
opponents started playing go with another guy, and they tried to talk me into
trying it.  At first I said "naaa, I haven't mastered chess yet, don't want to
spread myself too thin".

But finally I tried a few games, and I've been hooked ever since, and it's been
over 15 years.

By the way, do you know that the Ing Institute is offering a $1,000,000 American
prize to the first person to program a computer to play master level go ?  no
one has come *close*.  But in chess, people have pretty good go programs.
So go has thus far eluded even the computer.


Thanks.

/Eric

    re: basenote
    
    I doubt that many people buy their "toys" just to please others. They
    usually buy them because they enjoy "using" them.  But I think that
    most people who really examine their attitude towards their toys would
    understand that part of their enjoyment comes from other people's
    admiration for those things.
    
    As for me, I'm not much interested in electronic or mechanical gadgets,
    so I don't have much along those lines, and I admit I get a little
    thrill out of the reverse snobbery that comes from not spending $ on
    things I don't care about. My rule is never buy any gadget that is
    not pure commodity found in 75% of homes, and get a minimum of 10 years
    out of your car or truck. 
    
    My toys are a little more off-beat (the endless restoration of my 2
    Victorian hulks, old books, a house and cellar full of cheap antiques in
    various stages of disrepair). I enjoy those things for what they are,
    but I also enjoy them for the chance to have others admire them.
    
    Kit

    One mans toys can be constrewed as another mans tools. Case in point,
    the usage of celular phones. For some they can be considered a status
    toy. For may others its a necessity. Other toys? How about the slick
    pocket diary that is electronic that replaces the daily reminder? 
    Neet thing about these toys are that they will beep you to be some
    where, esp when your engaged in some other task. 
    
    Beepers? Yep. Got one. It can be considered a toy and a tool. Some
    folks have them for status as well. Funny reasoning? Justification of
    toys or tools? I guess there is a saying in marketing that every
    purchaces is considered one that will enhance our lives. Make us better
    people. Weither it is stereos or jewlery or celuar phones.

    Re .20
    
    Beautiful (unintentional) pun:
    
    > One mans toys can be constrewed as another mans tools.
                              ^^^^^^^
    
    I throw my toys and tools all over the place...
    
    :-)
    
    -dick
    

    Toys/tools   chess/games   Bah.... semantics.
    
    To some the tools are toys, to others the tools are tools... chess is
    a game to some, a serious study to others.
    
    You people go back and forth on this stuff and you are ALL right I
    think.  By your own definitions you are all right.
    
    I use the word toys for some of my acquisitions to describe their use.
    I 'need' a washing machine thus it is not a toy to me.  I don't need
    my boat, I enjoy it alot though... so its a toy.  Now, if I hugely
    enjoyed doing the laundry then maybe the washing machine would become
    a toy to me, as well as a necessity.
    
    Kids need toys for emotional health,  so do adults.  I don't see the
    term a put down at all for an adult to have toys.  So what, we all need
    some.
    
    Jeff

    AAAh! But what kinda of washing machine? Your standard Sears? Or does
    it have a microwave oven attached and a 21 color tv screen? :) 
    
    Anyhow..... I have a celar full of metal toys called weights and gym
    equipment. It is def a bunch of toys that will give me a long and
    healthy life to buy more toys. 
    
    

.0> Why do you buy your toys? 
    
    Because they fill a need on one or more levels.
    
    I bought a car because I need one for work.  I bought a Celica because
    I like to drive sporty cars that handle well.  I bought a red Celica
    because I like double takes from babes and I (apparently) like appearing
    in traffic court.
    
    Since I spent 99% of my time in the kitchen, bedroom or bathroon, I still
    haven't bought home entertainment equipment for my living room.  As soon
    as I need it, I will.
    
    So, I guess I buy as a direct response to a need, on one or more levels,
    not just for the sake of buying something and/or spending money, and not 
    for the sake of keeping up with the Smiths or Jones.

    I must be the odd duck.  I abhor acquiring or owning things. Especially
    machines.  I love getting rid of machinery.  Things either own you or
    you have to repair them just when you 2)cannot afford them or b)don't
    have the time.
    
    A car is a prime example.  My definition of ALL cars - a machine with
    5000 parts all doing one thing - wearing out. Ergo, no car impresses
    me.
    
    POssession-wise - my happiest time in life was when I was in the Navy
    and everything I owned (clothes and a walkman) fit into my locker or
    dufflebag. No machines to fix, possession to make payments on, or worry
    about taking care of. Free living, uncluttered.
    
    Anyone else like this out there?
    
    Paul

    Re .25
    
    You're not alone.  Although I don't subscribe to that philosophy, the
    author of the Curmudgeon's Dictionary appears to do so:
    
    	possession, n.  Ownership of an object, or the object owned.  In
    	neither usage is it generally recognized that possession is a
    	reflexive condition.
    
    Interesting to ponder.
    
    -dick

    I'm not allowed to buy any toys.
    
    - M

    .27
    
    let me guess. you are married?
    
    \bye
    \nasser

    Re .25: Well, I'm sort of middle-of-the-road acquisitive (except for
    books, which I hoard and to which I am addicted) but I do know what you
    mean about the freedom of having very little. [This does not stop me
    from acquiring things, but I occasionally sit and brood over the weight
    of my "stuff," and think myself very philosophical indeed. ;-)]
    
    -b

>    I'm not allowed to buy any toys.
    
    	Yeah, right! I suppose you're not allowed to Note either.
    
    			Alfred

Hey, Mike, still have that Porsche?

		Steve

    re .30
    
    I'm not allowed to note.
    
    - M

 re: 32.27

>    I'm not allowed to buy any toys.
    
	Let's review:

	Porsche 944 Turbo
	At least one pistol in every known caliber
	Evil Assault rifle(s!)
	Dillon progressive reloader
	Bullet Chronograph
	Electric Trains
	New Jeep on order
	486 dx2-66 PC with 16 meg, 400 meg. disk, running NT.
	Laserdisc Player

 You're not what?
							-Brian

    In my defense, I don't think the Jeep should be counted because it's
    only "on order".  Besides, Linda was with me holding on to the
    checkbook.
    
    - M

    Gees, a guy orders a new Jeep with anti-lock brakes out of concern for
    his family and people are all over his case.
    
    - M

re: .-2 Ok, but then we'd have to count the current jeep instead.

re: .-1 If it were really concern, you'd have ordered the limited slip
	differential.

							-Brian

	So Mike, just how many vehicles *do* you have?

		Alfred