Publishing : 3459


Publishing / 3459

Brickshelf problems? —Jude Beaudin

I am unable to access anything related to the gallery on both Brickshelf and Geekshelf. I keep getting 404 errors. Jude BTW, set follow-up where appropriate, I am guessing with using this ng. (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Kevin Loch

(...) The Gallery system is temporarally offline while we install the full-moderation function. From now on all files will be previewed by moderators before they can be viewed on the website. In addition, all previously uploaded files will be (...) (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish) !!

Re: Brickshelf problems? —James Trobaugh

Wow, what was the motivation behind this? Has there been a problem with some of the images being loaded? What are the moderators checking for in the images? What will be the estimated "turn around" time when pictures are uploaded? Thanks, jt (...) (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Kevin Loch

(...) Anywhere from 15 seconds to days. It all depends on when a moderator gets to it. Brickshelf does not have the resources to have full-time staff moderating the gallery. KL (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Jude Beaudin

(...) Kevin, Can you please post the how's and why's of this change? Thanks, Jude (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Anthony Sava

(...) Does this mean you'd need volunteer moderators? Or does the logistics of having a volunteer staff of moderators prevent you from having one? Or did I miss a public call for help somewhere along the way? I'm sure there would be plenty of (...) (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Scott E. Sanburn

Kevin & All, (...) Well, if you ever need volunteers for moderating, I would like to help, after providing such a great resource to me, and MichLUG, and the rest of the LEGO community. Scott S. -- (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —John Barnes

I suspect there may be brickshelf regulars who have no interest in posting improper material. Since brickshelf knows who's logged in to upload, why not have trusted accounts. New users only become trusted after "n" good moderated uploads. If an (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Dean Husby

(...) I think they are going a little farther then necessary... I think simple "Report this content" buttons would be fine. Let everyone be a moderator. If the button is pressed the account or picture is held until it is checked. Dean (22 years ago, 6-Jul-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Bruce Hietbrink

(...) This is an outstanding idea! Kevin, is this easily programmed? At any moment of the day, there are lots of responsible AFOLs checking out Brickshelf. I'm sure nothing bad would remain up for more than a minute. You could make it so that once a (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jul-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —John Henry Kruer

(...) Yes, that would be great. The moderators wouldn't have to check every image, and they would have plenty of time to look at the few questionable images. This would mean that any harmful images would be quickly delt with. Again, Kevin, is this (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jul-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —John Herre

(...) This might work for off-topic items, but I don't think this would work for inappropriate images. In the most recent incident there was a fairly lengthy discussion on BZ before I saw the pictures mentioned anywhere else, and the pictures were (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jul-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Paul Sinasohn

(...) <SNIP> What is BZ? I woul dbe interested in reading that discussion. Paul Sinasohn LUGNET #115 (22 years ago, 2-Aug-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Rob Doucette

(...) I think its the Bionicle Zone: (URL) (22 years ago, 2-Aug-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Richard Marchetti

(...) How long will all of this take? I get the funny idea it is going to mess up the IP 2002 contest voting process and schedule, big time! -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Bruce Hietbrink

(...) Kevin, I'm sure you've thought through all the issues, and you've provided a huge service to all of us, so please don't take this as a complaint, but, is this the best solution? I've been on mailing lists where you were unmoderated unless (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Kevin Loch

(...) While it wasn't originally designed for kids, the fact is many children visit the Gallery each day. In light of that, there is no responsible option other than full moderation. KL (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Shaun Sullivan

(...) I can certainly agree to this ... However, given the fact that up until yesterday, there were few (if any) outstanding problems with inappropriate gallery content: (1) Would it be reasonable to allow the galleries uploaded *prior* to yesterday (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —John Henry Kruer

(...) What makes kids different from adults? Are some things that are good for adults bad for children? I am a child. I'm twelve. (and turning 13 soon!) I have never seen any bad content in b-shelf. Some things have occured, but were quickly (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Benjamin Medinets

(...) I think you hit the issue on the head...that is the problem. By not having images moderated, bad content is always a possibility. I think the majority of the posters on-line are abiding with not putting bad stuff on there. I also liked the (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Scott E. Sanburn

John & All, (...) Legally, there is a good deal of difference. The age to vote, drink, serve in the military, get certain media products, etc. For Brickshelf, if there was a large percentage of "adult" material on the site, Kevin would have to put (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —William R. Ward

(...) I hope that you will consider letting others help with the moderating. The task will quickly bury you if you try to take it all on yourself. Also, if you decide to charge for access to upload pictures, you might be able to give moderators (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Ross Crawford

(...) Then could you *please* implement a facility to move pics / folders ASAP, as I for one will find it a pain having to have stuff re-moderated just to move it to a different folder. Regards ROSCO (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Maybe... BUT... Right now I'd rather he put time into making the moderating facility a bit more efficient for moderators, there is a terrific backlog of stuff to chew through... I was just in there doing some and it's a lot of work. My fingers (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —James Trobaugh

(...) Ok since you hit on the moderation process and the massive backlog, would it be better if we didn't submit and new or updated images to Brickshelf at this time? I had some updated instructions I was going to post, but if it's going to cause (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Mark Papenfuss

(...) I have 2 question/comments... First I noticed that there seems to be newly uploaded files. Is this the case? I would think/hope that the old 150 thousand pictures be given the green light first before some new stuff gets added to the pile. How (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Dan Boger

(...) it doesn't matter if you submit new pictures up - the way the moderation cgi works, it shows one of the (random) older folders first... so the new folders will just get added to the queue, but probably not get moderated until the older folders (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) Actually, the randomness is only to reduce the change of multiple moderators working on the same folder. The subset of folders that are randomized is selected from the newest folders. That way new stuff and old stuff get moderated. KL (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Dan Boger

(...) sorry, my mistake. I thought you set it up to select from the oldest first, so that the backlog will eventually diminish...? Dan (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) You can now do that. You will now also see empty folders, as those need to be moderated too. Current moderation stats: 2537 out of 15634 folders moderated. KL (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Bruce Hietbrink

(...) Wow! I just wanted to send a big thank you to the people moderating. I'm impressed that that many have already been processed. I'd also be happy to volunteer to help moderate. Bruce (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Wow! Thanks! I am busily clearing Eric Sophie's whole tree as we speak. (had to start somewhere, why not there) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) It's harder than I thought! For people with deeply nested folder structure it is hard to tell what HAS and what has NOT been cleared yet. I found myself logging out to check then logging back in a lot... (this was with James Mathis, Eric I (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —William R. Ward

(...) Try running two browsers - e.g. one Netscape and one IE. Since they have separate cookie jars, you shouldn't need to log in and out. --Bill. (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) OOOH, good idea. I did not think of that. I guess I better go install NS then, do you have a recommendation for a good and stable and free version? Meanwhile the elves have been steadily improving the interface while I was working (I just (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) Don't you wish all software development was this efficient? It's even written in C. Kids, don't try this at home :) BTW, you are using Mozilla 1.1a right? Besides being a far superior browser to IE or NS it has a fortuitous bug where it (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I'm actually using IE but I'll check out Mozilla... (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Dan Boger

(...) unless there's an explicit header saying the cgi has expired (which i didn't check), I say mozilla is doing the Right Thing, while IE and NS don't. A GET CGI is supposed to give the same output when it's parameters are the same, so browsers (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) Yes. A GET CGI is supposed to give the same output when it's (...) Where does it say that a GET request always returns the same content? a GET for a dynamic page is no different than a GET for a "static" page that might change at some point. (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Dan Boger

(...) wait - am I completely confused here? I thought we wanted the cgi output to NOT expire? so that "back" will show you the same page? (...) hmmm... : 13.9 Side Effects of GET and HEAD Unless the origin server explicitly prohibits the caching of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Richard W. Schamus

(...) I use IE, and was quite surprised when that happened to me the first time (checking a folder and going back, just to find that another random folder appeared rather than the one I was exploring). Since then, I just open the questionable (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) Boy, you guys are tough to please! You are right though, everyone, not just moderators should be able to tell that a subfolder is unmoderated. The right thing to do is have an "unmoderated" icon, but as a quick hack, unmoderated folders now (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Cool. Now what happens to the ones that are off topic? Previously the off topic keyword seemed to just get added one more time each time you pressed it but the folder would (randomly) keep reappearing until you said it was safe Also what is (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Kevin Loch

(...) It used to do that, but now the Off Topic link also sets moderation level -1 (the same as Unsure) so it will disappear from the regular moderator page. (...) -5 is temporary while thumbnails are being generated -2 is Unsafe -1 is Unsure 0 is (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Nicole Drumm

I'd just like to say again that if you (Kevin) need more free, good, help you have four ready willing and able people here. -- Thanx~ Nicole (URL) Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com> wrote in message news:GyECpE.9oM@lugnet.com... (...) structure (...) with (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf suggestions (was: problems?) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) That border line helps a LOT!!!! But is it recursive? That would be best, if there is one unmoderated folder in there somewhere, it's still "unsure" and you need to go drilling. (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Jim Schifeling

Wouldn't it be just easier, quicker and better to have kids get permission and have a gate? What exactly are we all worried about? Has someone posted a snuff film or something? I think this is nonsense but I don't know the how and why of it all (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Larry Pieniazek

(...) While I have no idea what "call hi-jinx" means (Is it like a spell cast or something?) I think it's *been* explained already. To my satisfaction, anyway. Read the entire thread, it's not that big. It's not clear to me that having "kids get (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Frank Filz

(...) Maybe I missed something, but the only statement of explanation I've seen is: (...) By itself, I don't think this is an explanation. Other free web sites don't have moderation. Not that I'm saying Kevin shouldn't do it (though it would be nice (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Jim Schifeling

Calling hi-jinx is. .... well I don't really know what it means. I think it came from a South Park episode. My employees have been using it for a while so I started using it. I read the thread I didn't see anything that explained why he was taking (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I don't have all the details and I'd rather Kevin himself answered if he has time. That said apparently someone uploaded porn. Again. (this isn't the first incident) Kevin had set up a system for post review so that anyone with moderator login (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —William R. Ward

(...) I remember "calling shenanigans" from South Park, but not hijinx. --Bill. FUT: lugnet.off-topic.fun (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Mark Papenfuss

(...) Ok, so the moderators can see what folder a picture was uploaded to? That is a good thing! And they can move it from one folder to another? If so - COOL! I am happy about this! But I saw the picture I linked to in another part of this thread (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Yes, moderation happens at the folder level. Add one or more pictures to a new or existing folder and it seems to mark the folder as needing review. (...) I do not think we have the power to MOVE pictures from folder to folder. All we can do (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf —Ahui Herrera

(...) I DON'T think the user gets an email saying that the folder or conetnt of the folder have been removed. I had 5 main folders in my top directory and now only 4 are there. The 1st one was a bunch of .gsd files that when merged together would (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Oliver Kutsche

Hi Kevin, first I want to thank you for providing the LEGO fan community a central place to exhibit their creations on unlimited free disk space. I don't want to miss it. BUT if you restrict it too hard, people are going to seek for alternatives and (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

Briefly addressing a couple of things, Kevin is your authoritative source... (...) I did not delete this one. But I DID look at it pretty hard, several times and marked it "unsure" each time. NOT beccause it's porn. An image of a very pretty girl (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Constantine Hannaher

Without knowing the details on how the moderating works, it does worry me a bit that this image was visible on Brickshelf and accessible from the Recent folder for some non-trivial length of time. In view of the massive unavailability of folders (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Oliver Kutsche

"Constantine Hannaher" <channaher@netscape.net> wrote in news:GyFAJB.490@lugnet.com... (...) then (...) The image was visible only to me and not public. (...) other (...) that (...) manufacturer (...) Look closer. The ice cream is made of bricks. If (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Constantine Hannaher

(...) That is not true, and is the point of my posting at all. I did see this image in the recent folder at Brickshelf yesterday. It was public. This has more to do with Brickshelf than with you... (...) Or if you had uploaded at least one image of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Pedro Silva

(...) I must agree with Oliver on this point: the MOC would completely lose its interest if not inserted in the picture. I had the chance to see (and download) the manipulated ad, and quite frankly I can't see why everyone is so concerned... It is (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Constantine Hannaher

(...) download) (...) to (...) Let's try that again: Or if you had uploaded at least one image of the _(_MOC by itself_)_, [instead of] _in addition to its placement_ inside a derivative work (term of art in the copyright field)... On the other (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Pedro Silva

(...) That I do understand, and agree. As an addition, it would definately make sense. (...) Yes, I realized that when I hit post - I keep forgetting LEGO is very brand-aware... :-) It might have been advisable to include a disclaimer, in tiny (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) You cannot say that for sure. (...) My main concern and why I kept voting "unsure" was that this parody has the LEGO(r) logo on it. I really don't want to see a huge debate break out about this. It's been discussed in some depth before that (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Anthony Sava

(...) <SNIP> (...) <SNIP> Sorry to nit-pick, and maybe I'm just badgering the point, and maybe the images were changed before they were uploaded. But the enhanced image that I saw (as I did not look at these images until after they were re-uploaded) (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Yes you are, and yes they were. The original image had the LEGO logo in it not a parody. But even the parody is a technical violation of the fairplay document... one that lots of people do (similar parodies or distortions that is) but a (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Jude Beaudin

(...) Lar, Less typing, more clicking. I want everyone to be able to see my pics soon. ;-) Jude FUT .o-t.debate cause it ain't worth it even though you are right (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Pedro Silva

(...) Why would a company feel upset about free advertising? I mean, it is not as if the picture was in any way an insult to the ice-cream... I agree I cannot tell for sure that they *won't* feel hurt, but what I said is *it is unlikely* they'll (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

In lugnet.publish, Pedro Silva writes: <snip> That's all plowed ground, I am not going to debate it here. (...) If I understand your question the answer of late is: Orbital - 2 Chemical Brothers - Exit Planet Dust Paul Oakenfold - Tranceport or (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Pedro Silva

(...) I did not know that - please apologize the persistence :-( (...) Huh... rythm, as in "the average pace in which you (reviewer) review files". I should have used "review" instead of "analysis", but the first does not exist in my native language (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Ah. OK. The answer is it depends. External factors: How fast does the page load? That's driven by the network load. I have a cable modem connection to the internet and a 100 Mbps internal network. During the day the network is loaded because (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Kevin Loch

(...) Careful... How do you know that the name at the top of the folder is the person who uploaded each file? KL (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Um, I'm assuming that I found the right person by looking their name up, and I'm walking their tree. If the folders I see there when I start don't match up with what I expect to see (because I know who they are and what they put there (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Joseph Williams

(...) Since your doing some mammoth overhaul on Brickshelf right now, I was wondering if you could implement a new browsing feature: by member number. Is there some sort of privacy policy that would break if it was available? I know I would be using (...) (22 years ago, 29-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Censorship and public relations (was: Brickshelf problems?) —Oliver Kutsche

"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in news:GyF7IL.I35@lugnet.com... (...) for (...) Some of the best photos on brickshelf are (were?) spoofed ads or packages. I wonder why someone can show splattered, blood covered bodies of minfigs (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Mark Papenfuss

(...) Well, you have to figure this is Kevin's site and it is up to him to run his free site as he wishes. I have had some things not ok'ed by the mods that be. But its ok, I can live with it. The pictures of mine that were deleted were in the (...) (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Bruce Hietbrink

(...) When I checked Brickshelf last night (about 8:00 PM Pacific Time Zone) it was fine. Then this morning (10:00 AM Pacific Time Zone) I got the same error you report. It looks like it's still the same. The scan library is fine, though. Bruce (22 years ago, 25-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Thomas Garrison

(...) Huh? Wha? Since some time this morning I have been unable to get www.brickshelf.com or library.brickshelf.com to resolve at all. I was able to browse www.geekshelf.com for a while, but now I can only get to the first page (which is still a lot (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Bruce Hietbrink

(...) I just tried again and was able to get through to the scan library. Try going directly to: (URL) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Thomas Garrison

(...) my computer, I get an unknown host error, but I can ping (or lynx to) l.b.c from another computer on the same network, and can browse l.b.c through anonymizer.com. Maybe Brickshelf was dropped from one or more of the nameservers? Thanks, -- (...) (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Dan Boger

(...) could it be that your computer has a cached NX in it's DNS from a transient problem? Dan (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Thomas Garrison

(...) I think my computer was deeply confused yesterday. . . Entering 206.131.246.52 in Galeon gave "library.brickshelf.com could not be found. Please check the name and try again.", which has to qualify as one of the most bizarre error messages (...) (22 years ago, 27-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.off-topic.geek)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Eric Sophie

Wow, this is heavy duty! We all love Brickshelf! Definetly one of my favorite web-sites of all time! I hope for a speedy resolution! I'm a hit junkie! Legomaster (22 years ago, 26-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Kevin Dixon

On a side note, are the page hit counters being updated right now? Kevin (22 years ago, 28-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)

Re: Brickshelf problems? —Joey Finnell

So are we alloud to upload pictures again? or should we wait????? Joey aka ~~darksyde~~ (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.publish)