 | | 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)
|
