| |
In lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
| |
“HOLY CARP, ERIC DIDNT POST IN THE RIGHT FORUM,LETS USE THIS AS AN EXCUSE TO
DESTROY HIM BECAUSE WE DONT LIKE HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!”
|
More like “HOLY CARP, FOR THE SECOND TIME ERIC POSTED AN AD WHERE HE
SHOULDN’T EVEN THOUGH HE’S BEEN ASKED NOT TO BEFORE!!!!!!!!!!!”
|
| |
Actually that’s more like what happens when people refuse to play fair. Let’s
not avoid the fact that ERIC HAS DONE THIS BEFORE AND BEEN TOLD OFF FOR IT...
not by me or any of his perceived (or otherwise) enemies but by a totally
neutral party.
|
The point is when Eric did it there was a flame storm because of it and the
first time had really the same result. So your defense that this is somehow ok
because he has been told before is off. Flaming and trolling somebody for any
reason is never ok on Lugnet.
| |
I have no problem with moderation but I’m not keen on frequenting anywhere
with it. I know I’m not alone in this given the growing membership of jlug.
|
There are Lego forums that are heavy on the moderation that are growing at a
much faster rate than jlug, and are many more times larger than jlug will ever
be - so your growing membership of jlug may be all well and good, but it is not
a sign that everybody wants to see what you are putting out.
| |
| |
Look, I am not taking sides either way on this, but I find the selective
enforcement of the rules by mass-hysteria here disgusting, and its a shame
that it is allowed to happen.
|
What selective enforcement? Could you point out where I or anyone else
complaining about Eric’s beaviour have consciously ignored such a severe
breach before?
|
Not sure what Rich had in mind, but I have a great example
right here. Now I noticed you left
yourself with an out by saying ‘consciously ignored’, all you have to do is say
something like ‘oh I never saw that’. But the fact remains Matt abused each and
every one of the forums he posted that to (Announcements is a MAJOR no-no for
posts like that. It should have been in BST so general was not the correct
place. And since it was a BST type of post the storage and brickshops forums
were also against the ToU of Lugnet). But people like Matt, so nobody said a
word, nobody called him names and nobody flamed him.
| |
I’m glad you made your opinion known. Please come again and post next time
there is something you don’t like. I hear that really makes for a positive
forum.
|
Tim, many of your recent posts show that you yourself do not care to follow the
ToU of Lugnet, and that is a shame. Times like this I wish Todd or Suz would do
SOMETHING on this site to hold up the order they left behind long ago. You have
taken MANY personal shots at Eric and have been throwing flames and acting the
role of the troll. That may be all well and good for jlug, but jlug this is not.
Remember - two wrongs do not make a right.
And if you cared about the ToU so much, why have so many of your posts
(including the one I am replying to) been in the incorrect forum? I would think
when you are flaming somebody for posting in the wrong forum you would be extra
careful to put your posts in the correct forum.
M
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
| |
You have taken MANY personal shots at Eric and have been throwing flames
and acting the role of the troll.
|
Small correction here - the “You” at the front of that sentence was supposed to
be “People here”. Not saying you (Tim) have not done it, but it has been done in
great numbers by the group as a whole, and that is what I mean to convey.
|
|
| |
Dear Mark,
| |
The point is when Eric did it there was a flame storm because of it and the
first time had really the same result. So your defense that this is somehow
ok because he has been told before is off. Flaming and trolling somebody for
any reason is never ok on Lugnet.
|
When have I flamed or trolled Eric on lugnet? I have flamed him once on jlug
where flaming is allowed but only after he was rude to me.
| |
There are Lego forums that are heavy on the moderation that are growing at a
much faster rate than jlug, and are many more times larger than jlug will
ever be - so your growing membership of jlug may be all well and good, but it
is not a sign that everybody wants to see what you are putting out.
|
I’m not really seeing your point here Mark unless you think I would like to turn
lugnet into jlug which is not the case and in no way related to what I said (“I
know I’m not alone in this given the growing membership of jlug.”). I even
censored a post on jlug after it was linked to without a profanity warning which
I certainly wouldn’t have done if I wasn’t respecting the rules and ideals of
lugnet.
| |
Not sure what Rich had in mind, but I have a great example
right here. Now I noticed you left
yourself with an out by saying ‘consciously ignored’, all you have to do is
say something like ‘oh I never saw that’. But the fact remains Matt abused
each and every one of the forums he posted that to (Announcements is a MAJOR
no-no for posts like that. It should have been in BST so general was not the
correct place. And since it was a BST type of post the storage and brickshops
forums were also against the ToU of Lugnet). But people like Matt, so nobody
said a word, nobody called him names and nobody flamed him.
|
They should have. Plain and simple. Where were you to point it out? You’ve
pointed out perceived abuses of the ToU
before (to and about one of the
owners of the site) so you obviously care deeply about the ToU being abused.
| |
Tim, many of your recent posts show that you yourself do not care to follow
the ToU of Lugnet, and that is a shame. Times like this I wish Todd or Suz
would do SOMETHING on this site to hold up the order they left behind long
ago. You have taken MANY personal shots at Eric and have been throwing flames
and acting the role of the troll. That may be all well and good for jlug, but
jlug this is not. Remember - two wrongs do not make a right.
|
Where have I breached the ToU to make them? Please substantiate your claims.
| |
And if you cared about the ToU so much, why have so many of your posts
(including the one I am replying to) been in the incorrect forum? I would
think when you are flaming somebody for posting in the wrong forum you would
be extra careful to put your posts in the correct forum.
M
|
Actually the ToU specifically allow for threads to run in their original forum
to some degree. They ban explicitly posting off-topic in a forum (as Eric did).
Tim
|
|
| |
Tim, there is such a divide when it comes to the Letter of the Law and Spirit of
the Law. The letter of the law is influential, no doubt, however the greater
challenge is for us to embrace the spirit of comradery.
As for others, libelous slander is unlawful.
e
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
> Tim, there is such a divide when it comes to the Letter of the Law and Spirit of
> the Law. The letter of the law is influential, no doubt, however the greater
> challenge is for us to embrace the spirit of comradery.
>
> As for others, libelous slander is unlawful.
>
> e
Eric,
Given the number of people complaining about your actions I would say you broke
both the letter and the spirit of the 'law'. Is it comradery to do something
that annoys many other people and be completely unrepentant about it? Is it
comradery to treat someone else with as little respect as you treated your
co-curator? Is it comradery to steal someone elses work for your own profit?
Only when you answer yes to all of the above with a straight face will I believe
you genuinely care about comradery. Until then I will assume that what you mean
by "comradery" is "doing exactly what Eric Sophie wants".
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Timothy Gould wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
> > Tim, there is such a divide when it comes to the Letter of the Law and Spirit of
> > the Law. The letter of the law is influential, no doubt, however the greater
> > challenge is for us to embrace the spirit of comradery.
> >
> > As for others, libelous slander is unlawful.
> >
> > e
>
> Eric,
hi, Tim.
> Given the number of people complaining about your actions I would say you broke
> both the letter and the spirit of the 'law'. Is it comradery to do something
> that annoys many other people and be completely unrepentant about it?
Unrepentant to people who have axes to grind with me? Not likely. If you can
understand that, then perhaps you'll start to get it.
> Is it
> comradery to treat someone else with as little respect as you treated your
> co-curator?
That is a relative circumstance, not a direct officiality in anyway.
As much love as I have for Mark. Sometimes, he doesn't get it either.
Though he is pretty darn awesome. He's got other priorities, sometimes seeing
only part of the story. He can call me and talk to me if he has any beef.
Speaking of, maybe that would be a good idea for a couple of us to talk on the
phone.
> Is it comradery to steal someone elses work for your own profit?
My Mech is for sale, not the graphic. Quit being a nimrod. I chose that graphic
because I felt it was the best one I had that captured the essence of what the
robot was all about. As far as I knew, Mark made that drawing. (he is an artist
you know), and because he's my buddy, I didn't think he'd give me a hard time,
the thought never entered my head at all. He knows any sales I derive from my
artistry will go towards the cause. You and others could also benifet from
contributing a postive attitude. Making our hobby all the better.
Reaching more people, making it stronger.
I once asked a question at Brick Fest during the Keynote.
I said "What would you (TLC) like to see us as fans do, or amount to?"
Infact I did it twice.
Once, Brad responded, and once Jake responded, in front of all of us in person.
They both said, (wonderfully if I may add) [and paraphrase]
"keep doing what your doing! Your doing great....Keep having fun, build your
ideas, continue to build a market for yourselves, continue to grow, all the
Lugs, all the groups and special interests genres, keep it up! These kinds of
pursuits help to make a solid foundation for all of you as fans. In turn we
(TLG) as a coporation can help, the things that you as individuals cannot do, us
(TLG) as a multi national coporation, things we can do, we'll try to help.
(ok more Brad) Brick Link? We love Brick Link!
Now what I mean to point out here with this answer or philosophy, is that we
should continue to follow what we like to do. All of us should not make things
so strict that we end up falling all over ourselves, impeeding our ability to
make our enjoyment better than it ever could be.
> Only when you answer yes to all of the above with a straight face will I believe
> you genuinely care about comradery.
That's your argument and I don't subscribe to it. You have too many issues for
me to really understand your motives. In previous posts you stated I've been
rude to you, you also quote JUST LIKE SOREN, old posts from 2004?!! other posts
from months and months ago.
You actively campaighn to tell people not to buy my art, a direct act of war,
for which I rely to live. If we were in person, I'd smash your face for getting
in the way of my dream. How dare you.
So you want to point out all these hard laws, and then make the statement that
you are not keen on frequenting a forum that has moderation, yet you presume to
take on that role yourself? Quit tooling around.
> Until then I will assume that what you mean
> by "comradery" is "doing exactly what Eric Sophie wants".
If we were cool with eachother to begin with, we wouldn't have these issues now
would we. You have a bad attitude towards me, and just like a select few, I'll
never do right in your eyes. Boi.
> Tim
e
To Suz and Todd, hey, I'm sorry to have to act like this, I really wish you
would understand the culture of hate that is in effect here. How many years has
it been? Wise up, everyone, including me, fine.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
| |
That is a relative circumstance, not a direct officiality in anyway.
As much love as I have for Mark. Sometimes, he doesn’t get it either.
Though he is pretty darn awesome. He’s got other priorities, sometimes seeing
only part of the story. He can call me and talk to me if he has any beef.
|
Then perhaps you should’ve responded to
this with something
other than “eh heh.” What kind of way is that to treat a ‘buddy’?
| |
My Mech is for sale, not the graphic. Quit being a nimrod. I chose that
graphic because I felt it was the best one I had that captured the essence of
what the robot was all about. As far as I knew, Mark made that drawing. (he is
an artist you know), and because he’s my buddy, I didn’t think he’d give me a
hard time, the thought never entered my head at all.
|
Thoughts entering your head do seem to be a rare occurrence. The fact is it was
your duty to check first if you plan on using it to advertise a sale. Mark
made it clear that it isn’t his work, and yet you are still doing nothing to
change it.
| |
He knows any sales I derive from my
artistry will go towards the cause.
|
“Time left: 1 Day 8 Hrs+ Number of Bids: 0” Looks like a lost cause.
| |
You actively campaighn to tell people not to buy my art, a direct act of war,
for which I rely to live. If we were in person, I’d smash your face for
getting in the way of my dream. How dare you.
|
You are a true pacifist.
| |
To Suz and Todd, hey, I’m sorry to have to act like this,
|
No you’re not, or you wouldn’t keep doing it.
| |
I really wish you
would understand the culture of hate that is in effect here.
|
You bring it entirely on yourself, Eric. Of course, that doesn’t fit in with
your ‘dream’ of being a martyr to ‘the cause’, whatever that may be. But
whateva, Lugnet is never so much fun as when you’re frothing. Keep it up.
| |
How many years has
it been? Wise up, everyone, including me, fine.
|
Especially you, Eric. Especially you.
Allister
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
>
> > That is a relative circumstance, not a direct officiality in anyway.
> > As much love as I have for Mark. Sometimes, he doesn't get it either.
> > Though he is pretty darn awesome. He's got other priorities, sometimes
> > seeing only part of the story. He can call me and talk to me if he has any
> > beef.
>
> Then perhaps you should've responded to
> <http://news.lugnet.com/market/buy-sell-trade/?n=17064 this> with something
> other than "eh heh." What kind of way is that to treat a 'buddy'?
Reasoning in reverse. Morose. Who asked you?
> > My Mech is for sale, not the graphic. Quit being a nimrod. I chose that
> > graphic because I felt it was the best one I had that captured the essence
> > of what the robot was all about. As far as I knew, Mark made that drawing.
> > (he is an artist you know), and because he's my buddy, I didn't think he'd
> > give me a hard time, the thought never entered my head at all.
>
> Thoughts entering your head do seem to be a rare occurrence. The fact is it
> was your {duty} to check first if you plan on using it to advertise a sale.
> Mark made it clear that it {isn't} his work, and yet you are still doing
> nothing to change it.
I fully expect rablerousers like you to peep up.
> > He knows any sales I derive from my
> > artistry will go towards the cause.
>
> "Time left: 1 Day 8 Hrs+ Number of Bids: 0" Looks like a lost cause.
The more you pay attention to my stuff, the more I make you my bitches.
You know that saying? You should, you have been doing it well for a while now.
> > You actively campaighn to tell people not to buy my art, a direct act of
> > war, for which I rely to live. If we were in person, I'd smash your face for
> > getting in the way of my dream. How dare you.
>
> You are a true pacifist.
No, you got it wrong, I live in New Jersey.
> > To Suz and Todd, hey, I'm sorry to have to act like this,
>
> No you're not, or you wouldn't keep doing it.
>
> > I really wish you
> > would understand the culture of hate that is in effect here.
>
> You bring it entirely on yourself, Eric. Of course, that doesn't fit in with
> your 'dream' of being a martyr to 'the cause', whatever that may be. But
> whateva, Lugnet is never so much fun as when you're frothing. Keep it up.
Jealous fool.
> > How many years has
> > it been? Wise up, everyone, including me, fine.
>
> Especially you, Eric. Especially you.
>
> Allister
I see written on the web, messages saying you need a dose of your own medicine.
I recall you saying you have a son, would you have him read the negativity you
show, what kind of example are you, I'm almost embarrased for you to know that
you are a father not mindful that your written words could be read by your
children. Relax and cut the non sence. Your provoking me.
I warn you, you have written slanderous disgusting lies about me. You should
have your posting privledges revoked.
Eric Sophie
Member #1051
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
> > In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
> >
> > > That is a relative circumstance, not a direct officiality in anyway.
> > > As much love as I have for Mark. Sometimes, he doesn't get it either.
> > > Though he is pretty darn awesome. He's got other priorities, sometimes
> > > seeing only part of the story. He can call me and talk to me if he has any
> > > beef.
> >
> > Then perhaps you should've responded to
> > <http://news.lugnet.com/market/buy-sell-trade/?n=17064 this> with something
> > other than "eh heh." What kind of way is that to treat a 'buddy'?
>
> Reasoning in reverse. Morose. Who asked you?
Mark deserves a proper answer, as do the many people who have raised perfectly
valid concerns only to have you either ignore them or post nonsense, if not
outright abuse in response.
> > Thoughts entering your head do seem to be a rare occurrence. The fact is it
> > was your {duty} to check first if you plan on using it to advertise a sale.
> > Mark made it clear that it {isn't} his work, and yet you are still doing
> > nothing to change it.
>
> I fully expect rablerousers like you to peep up.
Another non-response. If it's still too complicated for you after many attepmts
to explain the problem here, just say so and we'll try to use smaller words.
> You know that saying? You should, you have been doing it well for a while now.
I intend to keep doing it as long as you keep trolling lugnet with your lunacy.
Isn't this fun?
> I see written on the web, messages saying you need a dose of your own medicine.
>
> I recall you saying you have a son, would you have him read the negativity you
> show, what kind of example are you, I'm almost embarrased for you to know that
> you are a father not mindful that your written words could be read by your
> children.
Since you brought it up, I have three sons, each of which displays more capacity
for reason than you do, Eric, even the baby.
I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading it.
Even a child can clearly see what's really going on.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
> > You know that saying? You should, you have been doing it well for a while now.
>
> I intend to keep doing it as long as you keep trolling lugnet with your lunacy.
> Isn't this fun?
NO - it is NOT fun.
SOMEBODY be the bigger man and just walk away, please.
Mark
LUGNET member 1634
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
> I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading it.
> Even a child can clearly see what's really going on.
Yep.
To summarise, Eric's in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and regarding
using material of others without permission, and you and your gang of trolls are
using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and egg him on
(knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him) instead of just letting it
go, since there's a leadership vacuum here, and has been for some time, with no
foreseeable leadership in the offing.
That's about the size of it, in my view.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
>
> > I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading it.
> > Even a child can clearly see what's really going on.
>
> Yep.
>
> To summarise, Eric's in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and regarding
> using material of others without permission, and you and your gang of trolls are
> using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and egg him on
> (knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him) instead of just letting it
> go, since there's a leadership vacuum here, and has been for some time, with no
> foreseeable leadership in the offing.
>
> That's about the size of it, in my view.
Hi Lar,
My problem here is that Eric is entirely unrepentant of his own bad behaviour.
He needs to be made to see that what he did was wrong. Many people have tried
the polite approach to him on this and other topics, others (myself included in
the past) have tried ignoring him when he behaves badly. Neither of these
approaches have worked. As such I was willing this time to make myself look bad
in the hopes that berating him might work. As this doesn't seem to have worked
either this will be my last post in the thread.
The perfect solution IMO would be to ban him for a period, and if he continues
his poor behaviour when he returns to ban him for good. He seems to have an
overwhelming feeling of his own right(eous)ness regardless of what is said or
how it's said so it may be that this is the only solution.
Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
>
> > I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading it.
> > Even a child can clearly see what's really going on.
>
> Yep.
>
> To summarise, Eric's in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and regarding
> using material of others without permission, and you and your gang of trolls are
> using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and egg him on
> (knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him) instead of just letting it
> go, since there's a leadership vacuum here, and has been for some time, with no
> foreseeable leadership in the offing.
>
> That's about the size of it, in my view.
I listen to Larry.
I offer this:
Please excuse my perceived auction spam.
Respect my follow up and my intentions not to get carried away.
Rather understand I feel must reach a core audience that may not have known
about it otherwise.
As for the graphic, I honestly thought my friend made it.
When I announced the graphic on LUGNET sometime ago, no one said anything.
How was I to know it was going to cause a stir later when no one said anything
at the time I released it? All I got was deaf ears. Only later when it is fuel
for fire does it come up, so I am not keen on hearing any argument after the
fact. You all had your chance, silence seemed to equal aknowledgement. Not even
a "hey that's cool", until it served to denigrate me.
I worked for a few hours making the graphic, when I posted it, all I got was
silence.
I would ask that LUGNET grow to include new ways of thinking for the future.
Thank you.
e
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
| |
I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading it.
Even a child can clearly see what’s really going on.
|
Yep.
To summarise, Eric’s in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and regarding
using material of others without permission, and you and your gang of trolls
are using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and egg him on
(knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him) instead of just letting it
go, since there’s a leadership vacuum here, and has been for some time, with
no foreseeable leadership in the offing.
That’s about the size of it, in my view.
|
Hmmm, well lets list this so-called “Gang of trolls” shall we?
(In no particular order)
Timothy Gould
Soren Roberts
Mark Neumann
David Koudys
Jeff Stembel
Keith Goldman
Bryce McGlone
Allister McLaren
Joseph Williams
Matt Hein
Ross Crawford
I probably missed some, yada yada.
Let’s look at the people who replied to the “Gand of trolls” (again in no
particular order):
Eric Sophie
Marc Nelson Jr
Rick Manzo
Mark Papenfuss
Larry Pieniazek
Jas Nagra
Lindsay Frederick Braun
Paul Sinasohn
Maggie Cambron (indirect “me
too” post)
Dave
Schuler
I probably missed some, yada yada.
The interesting thing is that the posts on the second list generated a
comparable number of direct responses as those on the first. So are they a “Gang
of anti-trolls”?
Sure reads that way to me.
And is a “Gang of anti-trolls” any better or worse than a “Gang of trolls”?
ROSCO
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
| |
I stand by every word I write here, and have no problem with them reading
it. Even a child can clearly see what’s really going on.
|
Yep.
To summarise, Eric’s in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and
regarding using material of others without permission, and you and your gang
of trolls are using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and
egg him on (knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him) instead of
just letting it go, since there’s a leadership vacuum here, and has been for
some time, with no foreseeable leadership in the offing.
That’s about the size of it, in my view.
|
Hmmm, well lets list this so-called “Gang of trolls” shall we?
(In no particular order)
Timothy Gould
Soren Roberts
Mark Neumann
David Koudys
Jeff Stembel
Keith Goldman
Bryce McGlone
Allister McLaren
Joseph Williams
Matt Hein
Ross Crawford
|
That might be YOUR list of trolls but it’s not mine. Mine is much shorter
Allister, Soren, Ross
I mean, really... putting kind, helpful, courteous, and thoughtful David Koudys
in the same list as Allister? That’s a bit of a stretch.
Hope that helps.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.terms, Allister McLaren wrote:
> To summarise, Eric's in the wrong regarding posting auctionspam, and regarding
> using material of others without permission,
Yes. What do you propose is done about it? Let it go? Again? How many times
should it be let go before he is held accountable?
> and you and your gang of trolls are
> using that as an excuse to be disruptive, make fun of him, and egg him on
> (knowing that you can easily get a rise out of him)
'Gang of trolls'? I speak for no-one but myself.
Look, Eric is the problem here, Lar. There's been plenty of times in the past
where I {have} let his tirades go. But there comes a point when even the most
patient fellow has to respond to his lunacy. I try to at least keep it to a
humourous level (most of the time), and if you can show me where I've breached
the TOS I'll happily delete the post. It's hardly my fault that Eric is so
mentally unbalanced that he takes {any} sort of criticism as an act of 'Evil
Oppression'.
> instead of just letting it
> go, since there's a leadership vacuum here, and has been for some time, with no
> foreseeable leadership in the offing.
'Letting it go' has proved ineffective in the past, Lar, and I can guarantee it
won't stop Eric from repeating this in the future. I want Lugnet to be a nice
place as much as anyone, I'm just taking a different approach than this passive,
wimpy, ineffective 'letting it go'.
Honestly, the oversensitivity to any sort of conflict on this site is
ridiculous. The number of posts complaining about the arguing is often as high
as the ones doing the arguing. Either jump in and get dirty or shut the hell up.
The unsolicited opinions of lurkers that only ever post when there's a bit of
conflict are as much a part of the 'problem' as the thing they're complaining
about.
And what {is} happening about this leadership vacuum? There's been precious
little info about that, and none at all since August last year.
> That's about the size of it, in my view.
Your view has been noted. No go crawl back under your Brickwiki rock.
and Have a Nice Day
Allister
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Ross Crawford wrote:
That might be YOUR list of trolls but it’s not mine. Mine is much shorter
Allister, Soren, Ross
|
Wow! Such a short list! And no sign of the esteemed Messers Dulin or Arthur!
Oh and you seem to have omitted your list of anti-trolls.
ROSCO
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.terms, Eric Sophie wrote:
| |
As for the graphic, I honestly thought my friend made it.
When I announced the graphic on LUGNET sometime ago, no one said anything.
How was I to know it was going to cause a stir later when no one said anything
at the time I released it? All I got was deaf ears. Only later when it is fuel
for fire does it come up, so I am not keen on hearing any argument after the
fact. You all had your chance, silence seemed to equal aknowledgement. Not
even a “hey that’s cool”, until it served to denigrate me.
I worked for a few hours making the graphic, when I posted it, all I got was
silence.
|
I really can’t see why this is so difficult to understand, Eric. No-one had a
problem with it when you first released it because it came under ‘fair use’ and
you weren’t trying to make money out of it.
It wasn’t a coincidence that concerns were raised over IP theft only after you
used it to advertise a sale. This has been repeated many times in this thread,
and still you aren’t getting it.
Frankly, if you are serious about making a living as an ‘artist’, it is up to
you to inform yourself of copyright law, and it is especially important to
make sure it is ok to use any image you haven’t created yourself if you intend
to use it in any way connected with a sale.
This would be true even if it was Mark’s creation. You can’t assume it’s ok to
use it just because he’s a buddy. In fact it’s extra important to respect the IP
of people you consider to be friends. IP theft is bad enough from a stranger,
but from a friend it is an act of betrayal that can destroy a friendship.
All this is especially galling considering your reaction to Stefan Garcia’s
doctoring of an image a few weeks ago.
| |
I would ask that LUGNET grow to include new ways of thinking for the future.
|
What? To include insanity, paranoia and a carefree attitude to the rules?
Thankyou, no.
Allister
...and now cue the inevitable ‘whateva’ or other non-response that neatly avoids
any need to actually answer to anyone for anything. :yawn:
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
That might be YOUR list of trolls but it’s not mine. Mine is much shorter
Allister, Soren, Ross
I mean, really... putting kind, helpful, courteous, and thoughtful David
Koudys in the same list as Allister? That’s a bit of a stretch.
Hope that helps.
|
Thanks Lar. I love you too. :kiss:
I would like to add that since this post, I’ve had a flood of applications of
people wanting to join the ‘gang of trolls’. These applications are currently
under consideration and I’ll post an updated list un due course.
Cheers,
Allister
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
Wow! Such a short list! And no sign of the esteemed Messers Dulin or Arthur!
|
Maybe you esteem them, but I don’t. Anyway, I didn’t see them in this thread,
which is the thread I was talking about, but if they turn up and act like
Allister or Soren or you, I’ll be sure to add them to my mental list.
Here’s the thing, Eric is wrong and everyone else chastising him for his
outlandish behaviour is right, in spirit, but the right thing to do was not
to flame about it, make up rude pictures, or be a butt, it was to point it out
and leave it at that. Then, to move on, or perhaps even send a note to the
admins here asking/demanding/pleading that something be done, instead of using
ridicule as a weapon in public.
Doing that is just wrong. That’s the major part of the trollish behaviour of
Allister and Soren. Your trollish behaviour, on the other hand, is of a
different, subtler sort. There are a few other people in this thread that ought
to know better but I don’t see them being out and out trolls the way the three
of you are in this thread.
There ain’t jack for enforcement around here, so the trolls get away with it,
and even (see Allister’s latest stuff) apparently relish in it. If there was any
rule of law here any more, a bunch of posts would have been murfled and a bunch
of timeouts handed out. (not just Eric, mind you, although he’s probably due
for a pretty long one for his behaviour, but several other people in this thread
could use one as well)
But, the trolls are safe. It is not committees or discussions or studies that
are needed, it is someone, or some set of someones, operating with a clear
mandate from the owners, empowered to be decisive, and acting on that
empowerment. Murfle the things that need murfling, hand out timeouts to the
people that need them, and not put up with a lot of gafla. The closest we came
to that was last year, but it became obvious that when the community squawked a
bit, the owners didn’t have what it takes to stand by the people they empowered,
so ... so much for that idea.
There isn’t jack for enforcement here, and whatever talk Suz talks, I’m not
seeing any prospects for any... not any time soon, if ever.
Whatever. Too bad, really.
Now, if you’re true to form, you’re not going to respond substantively, you’re
just going to keep picking away at irrelevancies but hey, prove me wrong.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
Wow! Such a short list! And no sign of the esteemed Messers Dulin or Arthur!
|
Maybe you esteem them, but I don’t. Anyway, I didn’t see them in this
thread, which is the thread I was talking about, but if they turn up and act
like Allister or Soren or you, I’ll be sure to add them to my mental list.
|
Well it’s more than mental now.
| |
Here’s the thing, Eric is wrong and everyone else chastising him for his
outlandish behaviour is right, in spirit, but the right thing to do was
not to flame about it, make up rude pictures, or be a butt, it was to point
it out and leave it at that. Then, to move on, or perhaps even send a note to
the admins here asking/demanding/pleading that something be done, instead of
using ridicule as a weapon in public.
Doing that is just wrong. That’s the major part of the trollish behaviour of
Allister and Soren. Your trollish behaviour, on the other hand, is of a
different, subtler sort.
|
Please explain. I’m truly interested.
| |
There are a few other people in this thread that
ought to know better but I don’t see them being out and out trolls the way
the three of you are in this thread.
|
Who? Ought to know better than to do what?
| |
There ain’t jack for enforcement around here, so the trolls get away with it,
and even (see Allister’s latest stuff) apparently relish in it. If there was
any rule of law here any more, a bunch of posts would have been murfled and a
bunch of timeouts handed out. (not just Eric, mind you, although he’s
probably due for a pretty long one for his behaviour, but several other
people in this thread could use one as well)
|
Which ones in particular, and why?
| |
But, the trolls are safe. It is not committees or discussions or studies that
are needed, it is someone, or some set of someones, operating with a clear
mandate from the owners, empowered to be decisive, and acting on that
empowerment. Murfle the things that need murfling, hand out timeouts to the
people that need them, and not put up with a lot of gafla. The closest we
came to that was last year, but it became obvious that when the community
squawked a bit, the owners didn’t have what it takes to stand by the people
they empowered, so ... so much for that idea.
|
Indeed.
| |
There isn’t jack for enforcement here, and whatever talk Suz talks, I’m not
seeing any prospects for any... not any time soon, if ever.
Whatever. Too bad, really.
Now, if you’re true to form, you’re not going to respond substantively,
you’re just going to keep picking away at irrelevancies but hey, prove me
wrong.
|
I’ve given up trying to prove things to you Larry. Whatever I say, you assert
that I’ve proved something to you about my character anyway, so why bother?
ROSCO
|
|
|
