 | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) Kelly, I think you misspelled "poopstorm." Anyway, that reminds me: when the posting authentication stuff went in a few years back, the architecture underneath was such that a post goes through "stages" of life: submitted, pending, then live (...) (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| Ciao Willy! Kopf hoch, laß Dich nicht ins Bockshorn jagen! Ja, diese Zensur hier ist perfide und albern, und grundsätzlich solidarisiere ich mich mit Dir*. Aber diese Praktik sollte Dich nicht daran hindern, weiterhin in dieser Gemeinschaft aktiv zu (...) (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) If the code puts ###@%% in for a list of words, then any word that 'slips thru' would be manually edited such that the word is now #@%#@#. The code'll catch the 95 percent, thus freeing up admins time for the other 5. Dave K (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) That's my sticking point too... we can technically put a filter in place, but that won't stop people from going around it. If they are going to violate the ToS, they're going to work at it. It's more a matter of understanding that rules are in (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | (canceled)
|
| |
|
