|
|
 | | Re: Brickshelf and Lugnet front page?
|
| (...) However there probably still should be more error checking in the random gallery box code ;) ROSCO (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Brickshelf and Lugnet front page?
|
| (...) It's back! Jim (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Brickshelf and Lugnet front page?
|
| (...) Hmm, I see the same problems. I cannot access Brickshelf galleries or pages, but (URL) deep links> still seem to work. Jim (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Brickshelf and Lugnet front page?
|
| Is anyone else getting a brickshelf.com (and maj.com)? Also, the stories seem to have disappeared from the main Lugnet page, this seems to be caused be the server error at brickshelf, causing an abort error in the "recent gallery" box. ROSCO (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Technic sidebar thingie
|
| Rene, Can you please choose to murfle (URL) The embedded graphic contains language that can be considered profane and is risque in terms of LUGNET's family friendliness. Somehow the site does not read the text contained in images. ;-) Kevin, while I (...) (18 years ago, 17-Feb-07, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.admin.general) !
| | | | | Re: Technic sidebar thingie
|
| (...) Note that until then, the traffic link is still on every other page besides the main page. ROSCO (18 years ago, 16-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) That wasn't my conscious intent at the beginning, but thinking about it now--Others were provoking him. You're right--they weren't better than him. Sorry if the truth hurts, but there the (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Sorry. I meant to say Al. Tim (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) To be clear, I was never threatened with legal action. A DMCA notification was served against Northstar (host of jlug.net) regarding pictures linked from jlug.net (but hosted by maj.com). It was Northstar that was obliged to remove the link, (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) -snip- (...) My regrets sir, I apologize. Eric Sophie (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Allister: Please do not call Eric an idiot. Thank you. Eric: Are you in earnest with the statement above? Because there's a way for ME to protect LUGNET and me from such a hassle, but I doubt this would be what you want. Please be very (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general) !
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I'm sorry but I still feel that your choice to single out Eric as being "better than this" was implying that others weren't. Eric's actions lately imply that he is in no way better than this. This latest incident was started by Eric (off (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I had a whole beautiful (if I do so say myself) exposition here but somehow the page refreshed and it all went 'bye bye'! So I start again, and I've noticed from past experiences, that the second time through is never as good as the first one. (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| Any chance we can fix the murfling code to spell the subject correctly? Yeah yeah, it isn't officially a word anyway, but I still think "(Murfled)" would be a better subject for murfled posts than "murfl". ROSCO (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) I've stayed out of this thread until this comment. There is no evidence that Eric is in anyway better than this. There is plenty of evidence that he is not. Just because people get a rise out of him doesn't mean he is well-behaved. I had (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Actually, you'd be qrong--the available evidence is that he, you know, is better than this. However, being sniped at by, well, many, many people, is grating and I can't blame someone for lashing out. That said, I fully realize that his lashing (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Shouldn't this be correctly posted in lugnet.admin.terms? Tim PS. Fup-to set to .off-topic.PUN ===== (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) You have used this term incorrectly. Properly used, it is: D'OH! ====== Thank you. JOHN (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| (...) Actually, the available evidence indicates that he's, you know, not. So I think it's probably better to appeal to the people poking him. And since I used to be one of them, who better to deliver the message? Guys, he's only worth so much of (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: malicious behavior
|
| Re: (murfl) My apologies to LUGNet and to those I've inconvenienced- I just got caught up in the event. I don't hold any personal grudge against Eric, I just sometimes wish he would walk away and not respond. Like I should have done. Again, I (...) (18 years ago, 14-Feb-07, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
|
