 | | Re: No tolerance proposal.
|
|
(...) Hmm.... thinking about exactly what's been going on around here, I think add my $.02 to the issue. - As to whether or not Matthew deserves to be permanently banned, as I've said before, no. As for temporary banishment, perhaps. I could (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Apology accepted, Mike. That's all I ever see is necessary. Cheers, Paul Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) (namecalling (...) on (...) he (...) caused (...) learned (...) it (...) the (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) I think you got it the second time ;-) you need to do a little practice in "swenglish", or me in english. LOL It was a good answer, and I think you deliberately made it loooong to keep me busy for a while;-) (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | No tolerance proposal.
|
|
I know that some people do not think I am sincere in my apologies and they want to see me banned. I would however like to make a no tolerance proposal. Basically I think that I should be on a sort of probation period for say the next three months. (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) My professional opinion is I'm concerned that the arguments of the past 36 hours have been more about Matthew and his continued presence or non-presence and less about the underlying issues he was trying to raise. Perhaps the collective mind (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
