 | | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) This wasn't in reference directly to 'the incident'. This was in reference to the perception that the administration is cloistered, 'working furiously'on a 'boldnew future' for LUGNET and will come outwith it when they're good and ready. Thus, (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Well, as far as I could tell, the LPRV pretty much just had the privilage to see the document before it went into effect. And, I'm not opposed to that, really. I mean, I fully recognize and support the desire to strengthen a document before (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Kevin L. Clague wrote: <snip> (...) Larry has provided me with convincing evidence that the email breakdown from his work to me on yahoo was not his doing. I will ask this though, given that you knew the email conduit was (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote: <snip> (...) Nowhere in the charter did it say "stay on task and avoid time-consuming loops like debating personalities or picking apart past actions". Why would you create a charter with the working (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Another resignation: I'm stepping down.
|
|
(...) Define "active". Does activity require a specific number of posts per day for a particular group? A specific number of views per day? A specific number of e-mail subscriptions? Who is to set the baseline for comparison? This growth, or (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) ? Sorry, could you clarify that? Every reviewing action lately has been seen, there haven't been any non public timeouts given in quite a while. (...) ? Can you clarify that? I see no signs of that! (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) This is a huge point. Proofreaders. My perception of the group was that we were not able to agree or disagree with anything in the document, rather we were to simply point out syntax and grammar mistakes. Given that I openly don't (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) So, the democratic association rules on certain tabled options and in turn passes those options agreed upon to the aristocracy? How is that better exactly? -Duane (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) For informal functions, that's probably a good idea. The LPRV, on the other hand, did/does have real power and responsibility: the power to change and steer and directly influence an important part of LUGNET's direction, and the responsibility (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Yeah, I know, you'd think as a web developer I'd take better care of the various presentation methods. There's a dash between the key learning and comment, that should help a little. Kelly McKiernan LUGNET Administrator (21 years ago, 22-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
