 | | Re: For the BrickBros
|
|
(...) .mediawatch would probably be good, as it's AFOLs in the news. -Suz (21 years ago, 10-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | LUGNET Site Administration
|
|
All, Last week I flew to Boston to talk with Todd Lehman about LUGNET's status and events leading to it. I was brought up to speed by both Todd and Matthew Miller. Briefly, I'll relate some history. The Transition Team's work toward a community-run (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.announce) !!
|
| |
| | Re: For the BrickBros
|
|
(...) Altho I also wish Jeremy and Brian the best, this post doesn't belong in .admin, it is more for .market - maybe .market.theory but I'm not sure. -Lenny (21 years ago, 8-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | For the BrickBros
|
|
(URL) posting is for Jeremy and Brian. When you two open the store let me know I will be the first person in line. Jeremy and Brian (21 years ago, 8-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) NNTP here as well. Only used the web interface twice, from web cafe's, but prefer plain text (most of my computer time is spent in the linux console) (21 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGOFan.org 2.0 is now online!
|
|
"Frank Filz" <ffilz-lists@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:IFxpoC.94s@lugnet.com... (...) How about lugnet.communitysites or lugnet.community.sites or something similar? That way one group could cover other portal/community sites. Richard. (...) (21 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
Mike Walsh wrote in message ... (...) but (...) You may not be typical, but you are certainly not alone. I'm another NNTP holdout. And let's not forget just *how much* the traffic drops on LUGNET when for some reason NNTP is down. Kevin ---...--- (...) (21 years ago, 4-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGOFan.org 2.0 is now online!
|
|
(...) Hmm, we could add related sites to lugnet.org (lugnet.org.legofan) or we could create a new hierarchy lugnet.site, so it would be lugnset.site.legofan. If we do that, it would at least give people a place for all the "what's wrong with (...) (21 years ago, 3-May-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) For one, it is easier to sign up, read and follow threads. For old timers, it is also about opening up possibilities. At CSF and CC, what was just ".space" can be expanded into Space/General; Moonbase/Events; Space MOCs; Spacewerks/Inprocess; (...) (21 years ago, 3-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
"Terry Prosper" <terryprosper@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:IFtDGs.13qJ@lugnet.com... (...) vote (...) was cool, (...) Are there any statistics about the number of people who read LUGNET via NNTP versus via the web interface? I always read (...) (21 years ago, 3-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
"Dave Johann" <legomecha@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:IFu985.JpA@lugnet.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) pirates (...) does can (...) resources (...) information. (...) [ ... snipped ... ] I don't believe trains has another forum. ILTCO has (...) (21 years ago, 3-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) I'm in! Where's the new Bellville post to spotlight? (...) You said it, brother. Still, if this occurs during a late night hour, I take it as a compliment that I am reaching other nations because I know no other US LUGNETters keep the wacky (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) Hey Terry, I actually don't think this is a software issue. At some point this weekend my "Scenes from Los Angeles" post was the number one post, and it had only 3 votes.* The current top post (Tony's great ship) has only 5 votes (one of them (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) Actually, I've thought both of these are major contributing factors to LUGNET's continuing decline as a community hub. Members don't vote as often as they should partly because some don't use the web interface and I know of no other way to (...) (21 years ago, 2-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm way off-track here, but the proliferation of theme-oriented community websites is part of the problem to me. We had a much stronger castle and space community here a year ago, but thse themes, along with others, have moved to other (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: This is ridiculous
|
|
(...) Yeah, I saw that too. (...) Fat chance of that ever happening! When was the last time someone fixed anything in Lugnet's software? But I agree, the Top Stories thing is pretty messed up. I think it's probably a problem that could be fixed if (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | This is ridiculous
|
|
Hello I just saw 4 posts from the same person in the Top Stories, all posts were 5 hours old and had receive 0 or 1 human recommendation. They all talk about pneumatics, which usually interests only a small percentage of the AFOLs, not because it's (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-05, to lugnet.admin.general) !
|
| |
| | Re: Peace
|
|
Thank you for posting that. e (21 years ago, 30-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) Hello, I don't post much neither and been here a long time (#98)! But HUMMMM what a debate!!!! I would like to interject my point of vew about people and LUGNET. When I became a member and made a $100 contribution for LUGNET, it was because it (...) (21 years ago, 30-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Nice and peacefull
|
|
Aaah, the sound of sorting (not fighting over) Lego. :-) Highlighted for peace, relaxation... and building. (21 years ago, 30-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Thanks to Lar and crew!
|
|
Just wanted to give a shout-out to whomever is responsible for getting me back my posting ability. I've been unable to post since about the time of the server change some time ago, or maybe some other changes since then, but anyway, this past week (...) (21 years ago, 29-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Listen up.
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Suzanne Rich Green wrote: ] (...) I - L - O - S - T ;P Bruce (21 years ago, 29-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Nice and peacefull
|
|
(...) I sense a plot... Dave! (21 years ago, 28-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Listen up.
|
|
Hmm. As I said the other day; things are not going well when personal attacks on admins are spotlighted…. so please don’t blame the messengers. The challenge should be for the admins to run this show in such a way that no "feedback" is required. (...) (21 years ago, 28-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Listen up.
|
|
(...) I'm out. :) Chris (21 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Listen up.
|
|
(URL) Isn't that nice? Hey, I know! Let's -ALL- play a game, right here in AdminLand! (^^) It's called The Quiet Game. Whoever remains silent longest wins! No tickling is allowed. ..funny faces are okay. Let's begin. I'll go first. [Hopefully we (...) (21 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general) !!
|
| |
| | Re: hi-ho
|
|
(...) I respectfully request this post be cancelled - it's about drugs and prostitution! ;) ROSCO FUT: .ot.fun... (21 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.test, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I just asked in the admin.suggestions for the ability to prevent or remove highlights for any of my posts. I would have much rather kept this local to admin.general. I think the discussion was important for LUGNET, but not good to subject all (...) (21 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
Well first off I would like to apologize to Duane, I wasn't specifically refering to you, nor did I mean to imply you were childish, but instead I meant people getting really mad over lego issues is silly. I guess I was trying to say that life is (...) (21 years ago, 27-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Nice and peacefull
|
|
Congratulations! Looks like someone highlighted a non-conspiratal post... (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I didn't have an issue with the post(1) or the language in it so much as its appearance in the Spotlight section. It was posted to the .admin hierarchy which in and of itself limits the number of people paying attention to it IMO. And as has (...) (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) Jake, I'm happy to say that this has happened to a large degree already. Thanks for the input. Kevin (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
I can't imagine that an 8 year old would pay any attention at all to this discussion. The only people who care about this are the adults acting like children, not children themselves. I can't for the life of me understand why people having a (...) (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Setting follow-up (was something else)
|
|
(...) In fact you can. With Outlook Express You just select "View" --> "Show all headers" when you're composing the message. And there it is: "Followup to", just enter the appropriate group. (All menu items translated from Swedish, so the actual (...) (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: my “button pushing” opinion! ;)
|
|
(...) ...and I thought he only got 45% of the vote. ;) (...) I’m beginning to feel that he is being bloody-minded on this issue. Scott A (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Nice and peacefull
|
|
I know this is off topic, but.... It is so nice and peaceful here... what a relief. Maybe someone will highlight this post. Kevin (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Keep it up, and knock it off (was Re: Badgering emails) Darmock and J'laud at Tenagra
|
|
I think my post adds a lot of hot air and really doesn't help things. Please cancel this post: (URL) you. Eric Sophie Member # 1051 (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) Well, considering there weren't any addresses listed around the posting setup pages and that was on the bottom of every page, I couldn't think of any better options at the time. I almost never visit the front pages of the newsgroups, so I'm (...) (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association)
|
|
(...) Setting the reply-to header does that. (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LPRV?
|
|
(...) The V in review. I didn't pick it! Matt did I think because he set up the list (1) I would have went with LPPRC (Lugnet Policy & Procedure Review Committee) Too late now though! 1 - you do-s the work you get-s to picks the acronymie-s (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LPRV?
|
|
(...) Well, I had to pick somewhere to ask this, I chose here... I would like to know where the "V" came from? I never saw anything that started with "V" attached to (URL) the committee charter>, only the "V" in "review". Was it just a typo that (...) (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) Good suggestion. XFUT to admin.suggestions Please feel free to XFUT any others from this string that seem like they ought to be suggestions as well. (21 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | message for Larry
|
|
Dunno if my e-mails aren't gettung thru--I composed a nicely worded e-mail but bottom line is yes, i can do that if it meets with the approval of those that need to sign off on it. (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) I recently had some posting trouble and emailed both the feedback@ and admin@ addresses. Didn't get any replies, but thankfully a few days later my problem was solved (perhaps because of the changes Dan Boger was implementing - thanks!). (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) In other words, we should complain to Todd and Suzanne directly? Either that or hope that the day will come when Todd and Suzanne will "let go" of Lugnet so that Lugnet really can become more democratic. Note that I mean no disrespect for (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) OK, I scrolled down a bit farther and there it is at the bottom of every page. I bet I haven't paid attention to the stuff down there since Clinton was in office... -Duane (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote: ... (...) Wow! I had to search around even to find that feedback address. Since I rarely visit the front page (it's pretty much useless IMO) I never would have found it tucked away down at the bottom (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) What address did you mail? We have been having technical problems with some addresses. if it was actually feedback (at) ... then ya, that may not go anywhere other than the owner. Per this page (URL) it's not really the right place for (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) I am well aware of the issues in the past that molded the current shape of posting procedures; I was here at the time if you recall. However, they are in the past. I felt they were too extreme then and are too extreme now. However, I wouldn't (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Lenny, I never said all the people would believe such assurances all the time. But I still think it's worth providing them. ROSCO (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association)
|
|
(...) Well, if you can't, it isn't a limitation of NNTP - but possibly of your newsreader. NNTP protocol has had the ability to set followups from pretty early on. On the other hand, I don't know if there's any facility to set followups for those (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) (it's possible other circumstances might alter this slightly, like if it's been excessively long between offenses-- like-- years, or if the user consciously defies being told otherwise): 1) First time offender A) Someone (officially or not) (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | light touches (was Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Yes. If posting an official warning is the right level of touch, that is. I said that after Tony had a chance to answer, I'd say what the admins did, and my guess at why. I'm still hoping Chris will answer why he thinks nothing should be done, (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
"Tony Alexander" <tw0nst3r@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:IFIJDx.FMy@lugnet.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) should (...) that (...) there (...) [ ... snipped ... ] Shouldn't Admin posting such as the one above be posted by "LUGNET Admin" as (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association)
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@...e.DOT.com> wrote in message news:IFIpFp.1zt2@lugnet.com... (...) I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken... Please FUT to o-t.fun - I can't from NNTP Rob (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) You are SO out of it, I admit I'm wrong all the time. It's just that... (wait for it) I never make misteaks! ++Lar (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) I'm happy to report that you should be back on the committee as soon as the email is reconfigured (from the LTT perspective). (which should be about 2 min after Matt reads his mail) I didn't even think to ask the rest of the LPRV how they felt (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
<SNIPPAGE> (...) ... (...) </SNIPPAGE> If you guys aren't going to stop hijacking my thread, I might as well join in on the claim-jumping too... I'd officially like to make this a red letter date. A day to remember. A day for the history book (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The sky is not falling
|
|
(...) snip (...) This is a good reminder. Sometimes when you get close to something, problems seem overwhelming and all-encompassing. We have some significant issues that need to be worked on, but overall I have to agree with you that LUGNET is (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Larry, always the competitive one :P Levity is a good thing. and by the way, you're welcome. (...) I'm very pleased to hear this Larry, with this we can work to go forward. I look forward to it. If the LTT and LPRV (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Sorry to reply to my own post, but a few caveats (still at work, but thought of more and had a chance): * I'm a member/user, not an admin; as such, my immediate reply to seeing this post would have been: "Hmmm...not technic...on to the next (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Thanks. For everything you said. "I can think of a hundred things I'd rather do than debate this stuff." Ya, me too! I'll see your 100 and raise you a hundred. Emotions have run high here, but your recent actions convince me I was wrong to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | The sky is not falling
|
|
Hey all, So many times these threads begin with a complaint, so I just wanted to point out something positive. There has been much discussion recently about the spotlighting, and various ways to "fix" it (and, I admit, I've added my share of blather (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tom Duggan wrote: snip (...) Yet another good reason to tighten our borders! I am sure there are plenty of US citizens that could fill those jobs but they would want more money and benefits(1) ;) (1) And probably would want (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) We've had a lot of trouble with spoofed IDs, and also with emails that were not possible to spam decode, or not possible for LUGNET itself to parse properly, which is not really related to whether someone has made a donation or not. Todd took (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) First of all, one can try to get a receipt from the receivers mail program. This is certainly not fool proof, but if you get a receipt, the receiver has almost certainly seen at least the Subject of the mail. If you never get a receipt, you (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Legends of Todd
|
|
(...) Again, I'm at work, and can't give this better attention until tonight if I get the chance, but: While this may be true in theory, it seems that many here **think** that the establishment is not interested in their opinions, and may feel (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
Quick note: I'm at work on lunch break, and can't give this the thought I want to word it as well as it should be... (...) Nobody's perfect, and everybody makes mistakes. I'm not sure if it constitues a TOU violation, as I'm not as well-versed in (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) First, thank you for approving the change. Perhaps automation is in order for this, if at least for paid members? Maybe assign the duty of checking for this type of thing to a specific person? I find it rather odd I can change my posting setup (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) True. If LUGENT's servers end up on a blacklist again, it would be everyone's problem. But while Kevin could (and probably should) ask his ISP to unblock Larry's server, I would doubt one user would actually make much of an impact on them. So (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Well, Lenny, Larry and I have had some conversations, especially when the LPRV was first formed, and he acknowledged that he felt that Admins should be held to a higher standard hat on, or hat off. So Larry beleives there should be a double (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) That's what I'm talking about! I didn't think of that idea, good workaround, thanks. (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Hmm, I think it's actually both peoples issue to solve. SPAM is a real problem, but I have seen several providers take a lazy way out. Remember when Lugnet was incorrectly put on SPAM black lists? If it was only Lugnet's responsibility to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Yes, honestly, I am. Not for me but for the other admins too. As I said, we had some situations in the past where emails (from other admins, NOT from me) went blocked or went lost and we, the admins, had no idea it happened. I agree that short (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Email Setups (was: Re: Badgering emails)
|
|
(...) I think this issue can be boiled down to: 1. Official LUGNET email messages need to come from "*@lugnet.com" reply-to. Resolution: Each admin sets reply-to in their email client. Timeframe: Immediate. 2. To avoid spamblockers and spoof (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Honestly, Larry, are you really asking for advise? Or are you just excercising your natural method for drawing out a thread ad infintum, until the other part gives up? Short term advice: Get yourself a gmail account and post from there - gmail (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Wow, I didn't know. In that case, a solution should certainly be found. In the meantime, a workaround would be to send two copies of the email from two admins, maybe? The chance both will fail are much smaller... And that doesn't require any (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I'm talking about the general case. We've had several situations in the recent past when mail from admins was not received (and no bounce was returned) which led to difficulty, warnings not received, timeouts not properly started because they (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: my “button pushing” opinion! ;)
|
|
(...) My miscounting was wrong, and I was wrong to say Larry did any abusive emailing. I respectfully request that (URL) post be cancelled, so that Larry no longer has to defend himself against false charges. (...) Not in my opinion. Kevin (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I agree. I wish there were ways to prevent *my* posts from being highlight. Admin is the correct place ti discuss this stuff, not out there for people who don't care to see. Kevin (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Trust: was Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) You told us you wanted us to wordsmith it and fix syntax and gramatical errors. When I first started proposing ideas that were not in the document, a member of LTT started arguing with me. In an attempt to look at each case, I applied *my* (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) We love you anyway :) (...) I would disagree with that though. Not to mention the server sends emails all the time - news-by-mail, auth emails, etc? (...) Ah, that's what I thrive on :) Perhaps one of the other admins knows? Can find out? (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) nm, I read further down the thread and found my answer. (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Please forgive my lack of webknowledge. You KNOW I'm a WEBTARD!! We've been over it before ;) Lugnet, right now as I understand it, cannot handle items like automated emails and whatnot. I've had quite a few ideas for upgrading content stuff (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I thought I was answering what you asked... And what hsould be done NOW? Since you are aware of the problem, just have one of the other admins mail Kevin if need be - since it doesn't matter which admin the official mail comes fron... (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: my “button pushing” opinion! ;)
|
|
(...) Yeah, a lot of people. But MOST people think that Larry is suitable to be an admin. And most importantly, Todd thinks Larry is an excellent choice to be an admin - as it is Todd's choice to empower an Admin or not. -Lenny (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote: (...) I don't understand -- how is requiring admins to use their @lugnet.com address to send official email dependent on server changes? We aren't talking about switching addresses for posting to (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | my “button pushing” opinion! ;)
|
|
(...) Larry, No. I'd start to worry when (arguably justified) personal attacks on a LUGNET admin are (URL) spotlighted> on LUGNET's homepage. For that to happen once is very unfortunate. For it to happen repeatedly… I'd be further concerned when (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Not really, no. I agree that's the desired end state but that's not what the server does now, is it? I'm asking about what should be done NOW. (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Um, huh? Why in the world would we NEED to do anything in PHP? And even if we did, what's the issue? But aside from that, if the Server Switch is step one, let's take it! (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
<snip> It just makes me sick that a post such as this is the top highlight. What do you think would run through a visiting 8-yearold's mind when they read this? (URL) -Duane (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) There are more issues that just switching to a new server. For example, Lugnet runs on perl, and many of these automatic-emails would need to be produced by php coding or what have you. Code that needs to be written. Server switch is step one. (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
Could you guys please start a new thread with all this feces? It seems this thread has fallen victim to name-calling and the other normal antics... Back on topic. Evey decently large community has a members' association. I bet a few of you who live (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Why not? Why can't we switch to the new servers? AFAIK the domain issue has been resolved? (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) #1 How would the user know there was a problem? #2 Assuming the user knows there's a problem, how can he possibly fix it if he doesn't control the mail server (or the ISP, or whever the block is occuring)? Asking that HE change his email (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I think this is the biggest issue here. The Admins have been trying to operate on a boat that is either malfunctioning or in the process of being fixed. There is all sorts of "you should do this or that" - they'd love to, but they can't RIGHT (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I agree. I'd give it high priority once coding resumes in a major way, but it's not there yet. (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Sounds like the double standard again. I was called to town for asking users to respect Admins, and everyone said there is no way to police whether people respect us or not. And now you're trying to call Larry out because he doesn't respect (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Is saying someone wigged out a personal attack? Is it beaving to a different standard? DOesn't sound like you are unpholdin' to you own rules. You commiteed to do better. Kevin (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) You know, I have to agree on this. This would be a great step forward in understanding whether the communication taking place is with the admin Hat on or the admin Hat off. It seems like such a small thing, but it would go a long way in (...) (21 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
