To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / *12316 (-5)
  Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
 
(...) if/when? Does Lugnet not view editing the FUT editing? This is widley done by the Admins. I thought if you changed anything about a post than you were editing it. Am I wrong in this assumption? M (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general) ! 
 
  Forced voluntary self-censorship?
 
So its not censorship but "voluntary" self-censorship backed up by force? In short, this is like a gouvernment that says: "Oh, we are not going to torture you. AI is against this, and we need the good image. But we won't release you from prison (...) (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general) ! 
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) I like how you are "asked" to do something, but yet if you do not reply, or do not agree to what is being "asked" you are suspended. So, what is the point of asking? Why not say the plain and simple truth - "look, we delete your post of you (...) (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) I have no immediate problem with lugnet's rules. And for that manor I have no problem with the implementation of censorship here. I only object to the claim that it's not censorship. (...) Well the admins, mostly Larry, have stated repetedly (...) (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) LUGNET *was* too peaceful for too long. It's about time. The place is starting to feel normal again. -Tim (21 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)

Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more
Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR