 | | Re: My Own Train - Special Offer
|
|
(...) Scott, I'm sorry if I am posting in the wrong groups. Please clarify what specifically you have a problem with and I will immediately adjust my posts accordingly. Is it that there are certain posts that are inappropriately included the wrong (...) (21 years ago, 19-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Own Train - Special Offer
|
|
(...) Probably not alone, but I'll bet most people are willing to tolerate it in the name of good relations with TLC. That said, I think you raise a good point, although I'm not sure I would have done it as a direct reply to one of the posts in (...) (21 years ago, 19-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: My Own Train - Special Offer
|
|
Am I alone in getting annoyed with TLC's relentless "market" posts in non-market groups? Is this what we envisaged for LUGNET? Scott A (21 years ago, 19-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Why do I not receive some confirmation e-mails?
|
|
(...) Looking at the headers, there's no indication of extra actions. I notice that Lugnet's clock is 3 seconds slower than my ISP's clock! The thing is, there hasn't always been a time delay - it seems to come in waves. I used to get the emails (...) (21 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Sleepers and Talent Brainstorm Invitation
|
|
Per my announcements at BrickFest DC, here is a follow up regarding the brainstorming sessions that were postponed. Your ideas and explorations are wanted regarding these two questions: 1. How can we--the LEGO community--at both the club and/or (...) (21 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.org, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | A change to email spamblocks?
|
|
Would it be possible to stop the "megabloks-are-evil" anti-spam phrase from appearing in email addresses on LUGNET? The sentiment strikes me as petty and, frankly, a little childish. Additionally, I have not been informed that my postings to LUGNET (...) (21 years ago, 17-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Why do I not receive some confirmation e-mails?
|
|
(...) I'm having the same trouble - at least an hour between posting and receiving the confirmation email. It's a big nuisance when you're trying to keep up with a discussion! The confirmation emails (when they finally arrive) have the correct time (...) (21 years ago, 13-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Possible delays on approving email setups and other administrative tasks
|
|
All the admins are going to be at BrickFest, so there may be some delays in approving email setups, or responding to cancel requests, or responding to suggestions that force FUTting is needed or responding to enquiries due to travel and other issues (...) (21 years ago, 11-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Why do I not receive some confirmation e-mails?
|
|
I'm hoping someone on the admin team can help me. I have been trying all morning to post a message to .space, but I have not yet received the confirmation e-mail. I posted a test message to .off-topic.test, and received the e-mail almost instantly. (...) (21 years ago, 7-Aug-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Happy day for Compartmentalised Dorks! (was Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
Hello! Hehe! I admit, having set FUT to an off-topic group has been a bit provocative. (...) That's a very good solution! Congrats! Bye Jojo (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Happy day for Compartmentalised Dorks! (was Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
(...) Put the Dremel(r) down, Rob, and back away from the table. These nice men are here to help you. They are going to take you to a place where you can talk about parts modding to your hearts content, and you won't have to hurt any more Jar-Jars (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
(...) even (...) or (...) we (...) seriously. (...) "Day 42: Today I beheaded a Jar-Jar in hopes that my cries will finally be heard at that wretched establishment called Lugnet. It's finally becoming clear to me that I should move onto larger and (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
(...) It was a mistake, with no overt or covert subtheme to the truncation that I am aware of. Apologies for any confusion or false inferences drawn. (...) I truly hadn't thought about it. That may be too compartmentalised even for me. (...) Yes. (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
(...) Interesting that you truncated the group's title, and not a bad truncation at that! IMO formal clone *brands* should be generally confined to ot.clone-brands, but one-shot modifications are an artistic creation of their own and I agree with (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Are custom made parts LEGO?
|
|
(...) What follows is my opinion, not any sort of Lugnet Admin official stance by any means... I think there's a need for a custom parts discussion group but I'm not sure it belongs under off-topic. You can argue it both ways. This argument has in (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Request for deletion of second post
|
|
(...) Good idea, and easy to do since it's just an alias. Has been talked about before, time to bring it up again internally. (...) This is a bit harder to implement but in my view a worthy suggestion. (...) As is this. (21 years ago, 29-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Request for deletion of second post
|
|
(...) The process is: Send a note to someone on the Admin team with the URL of the post that needs to die, we will take care of it. Currently that's Todd, Frank, Tim or myself. Hope that helps. (21 years ago, 29-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Request for deletion of second post
|
|
I accidentially posted twice in build.mecha Here: (URL) someone take care of that for me? I remember reading that someone could but forgot the process of where to ask. Thanks Mark (21 years ago, 28-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: valid email addresses
|
|
(...) That's still true I believe. (...) True enough, if you were sending him a note about it. (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: valid email addresses
|
|
(...) I didn't mean to specifically point you out, Jason - if you want to change your registration, I'm sure Larry would be happy to help though. On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 03:17:09PM +0000, Larry Pieniazek wrote: (...) Actually, it was saying anything (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Request a LUGNET Newsgroup
|
|
The members of San Diego LEGO Users Group, SANDLUG, are requesting a newsgroup on LUGNET. Here is our suggestion: lugnet.org.us.sandlug Location Notes: Country: U.S.A. State: California County: San Diego Coverage: all cities, towns, and communities (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: valid email addresses
|
|
(...) Oh, one other point. The approval of these is a manual process. Some of the problematic ones (in particular Jason's current one) were approved by me before I knew about this issue. I'm not sure I agree that the interface should force (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: valid email addresses
|
|
(...) Dan: You might want to decode that regular expression into english for those not regexp literate, since you're publicly asking for a change. I THINK it means at least one @ and at least one "." that is at least one character after the at sign, (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: valid email addresses
|
|
(...) So is there something I should do? Jason Spears | (URL) BrickCentral> | (URL) MichLUG> | (URL) CLB> (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | valid email addresses
|
|
Can we fix the registration form for the newsgroups to require that the email address provided is actually valid, as far as the RFC goes? At the very least, require that it will match /.*@.*\..*/? The reason is that SMTP breaks otherwise - see (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | New Lego Group requesting LUGNET newsgroup
|
|
The Chicago LEGO® Builders (CLB) would like to request (1) the creation of the group: lugnet.org.us.clb A little information about the club (not sure if necessary, but possibly useful.) We had our first meeting on 3/13 and a few more in the (...) (21 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) Embarassing? No. Regrettable, perhaps. But please do bear with us. This one thread is messier than one might like, yes, but hopefully overall future admin activity will be the better for it. As for ObNASA's I did consider including some but (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
Don't you think it is a little embarassing that the thread is now 75% administration Lar? I pushed "nested inline" in the expectation of lots of juicy NASA stuff. You didn't even include an "ob NASA" anywhere. :( You must go back N levels to (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.geek, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) Yes, I agree with that as a general principle. I do think this one was already over the line though. But I'm massively compartmentalised. Should a "is this here instead of there?" post/question precede a forceFUT? I dunno. It's possible to (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Profanity and bowdlerization
|
|
The LUGNET admins have talked about this topic and reached the following consensus. We're inclined to go with a strict interpretation of the ToS. The ToS was put in place in order to give LUGNET a certain flavor, and we'd like to retain that flavor. (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: New Users Guide: Call for Volunteers
|
|
(...) Hey Lenny, I've got a Few ideas. First, the personal webpages are a hugely underused feature of Lugnet. On the front page there is a button for how to go about making a personal page, but there is no master list (or at least none that is (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) I agree, I'm not sure. I assumed it would belong in .nntp, just because we're talking about threading, and how it should work... But looking at the nntp charter, it's not clear if it belongs there or not. (...) Heh, whatever I think of bashing (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) The fact that past threads became debates doesn't mean that talking about NASA is OT for .geek. I'd recommend judging each thread by it's own contents, not by the history of the subject. (...) Regardless if anyone actually replies to the (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
There is some confusion in my mind about whether this topic belongs in .general or .nntp... read the charter for general and it's on topic there. Plus that's where every other admin post is. So FUT to both I guess. (...) Whether it was already a (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
This is a reply to both Kelly and Steve (close by in the tree) and the FUT is set to just admin.general (...) I don't know what's proper. We're experimenting. I hope people won't get too upset about it, till we get it right. I did an experiment (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) Had further thoughts about this - are there guidelines about recognizing at what point a thread should be rerouted into a different group? This particular thread, IMO, is pretty harmless (now), but I can see how (URL) threads can deteriorate>. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad news for NASA
|
|
(...) I think the topic of 'right level of notification/intervention' is worthy of public discussion. IMO, in this specific instance, the intervention was unnecessary. I hadn't read any 'debate' into the discussion, and any time 'NASA' and 'budget' (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Profanity Question (was Re: American Idolatry)
|
|
(...) It's not censorious, it's a condition of usage. No censorship is involved. (...) My personal preference is no. An administrative answer is, stay tuned. Personal preference again: Hold off till the answer comes down. (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
