 | | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I just wanted to add that I agree with Eric J. once again. I know I and a few others were playing a bit of devils advocate durring this discussion. Thats mostly because I thought several peoples reasoning for banishment were misguided. There (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Colorized Images (was: Partsref Update)
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: <snip> That rocks, man! Way cool. Thanks, Steve and Todd. (...) waterfall in a diorama. (GMLTC didn't have a waterfall in the last layout for lack of trans blue bricks, and for lack of place to put it) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I agree. However... I think that there were people who felt that way initially, but that many, if not all, have come around to reject that view. And that's a good thing. For the few remaining, can you identify yourselves and post reasons why (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Colorized Images (was: Partsref Update)
|
|
How 'bout Chrome BURPS!!? (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Colorized Images (was: Partsref Update)
|
|
(...) Full-on swingage! OK, I see the other colors there too now. Man, this fully rocks! These are nice and very small and _very_ quick to load. (...) Yup, that's great. (...) Fine too! (...) OK, I got 'em up now, and the URLs go like this: (URL) (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I think Eric meant it as wise advice. --Todd (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Me too. (...) Not sure why he needs to be very careful, since the decision years from now whether or not to banish someone else will still be Todd's decision to make, not mine or yours or anyone else's (unless Todd decides to make it someone (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) It's very difficult -- and I'm not even going to try -- to sum everything up in a nice simple pat statement (not that you're asking for one), since, to various extents, I agree with almost everything that everyone here has said. My opinions (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general) !
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) <snip? (...) OK quick question(1). Now I don't think many/any of us know much of Matthew other than he has some personal issues to work out and that he likes to cause havoc. So here's the question. Assume that Matthew is say 14 and he is (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) D'oh. I don't know where I got the impression that he was fairly new (to posting, at least, because there's no way to tell how long someone's been lurking). That does color things slightly- after all, it means he's been here long enough to (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) That would be censorship. No. (...) Even if it _didn't_ have LEGO material, they wouldn't get banned simply for posting a site address, no. Hopefully of course they wouldn't be posting such an address with malicious intentions to injure others (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Agreed. I went and looked using the search function. I may have missed some but I found a number of posts from Matthew going quite a ways back. Some were hyperbolic, but none (that I found, but I may have missed some) were vitriolic. Nothing (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I'm sure the phrase "new member" must means different things to different people -- perhaps two weeks to one person, two months to another, or even two years to another. In any case, for the record, Matthew's first post here was on April 9, (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Let's not forget this. John, thanks for drawing attention to this passage. --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: people.newbie
|
|
"Frank Buiting" <frank.buiting@infopulse.nl> wrote in message news:G2uFAt.ABA@lugnet.com... (...) organises (...) it (...) Oops! I didn't notice the 'New user? Come introduce yourself...' link on the news page! Ignore the above paragraph. -Frank (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | people.newbie
|
|
Larry wrote a very friendly introduction to LUGNET and made a lot of good suggestions for links to visit. Maybe it's a good idea to put the links he mentioned in the 'yellow' area (like the 'sites to see' section in (URL) and many other newsgroup (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
"Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G2t3zJ.F5K@lugnet.com... (...) Yup. And how you're handling things now to me is just proving to me that perhaps I should not have been so quick to give you another chance a couple days ago. (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) Sign... I wish I can also do or say anything and expect others to take it easily if I got "very angry". You must be very special to have such privilege. (...) And people can't take your remarks on your public site personally because? (...) And (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) Well I don't know how specific you want but without nameing names I will try. I also assume you want specifics as to what I don't like about the reasoning for banning Matthew not reasoning for not liking Matthew. It is my feeling that there (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
G'day Mike, I've already posted my personal points on this issue: (URL) I'll reinforce them for my part... (...) Why should the ToS of this site be relevant to off-site content? If the message posting the link (exluding the link itself) abides by (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: hackin the faq
|
|
(...) Would'a replied earlier if I saw it!! (...) You're doing a very good job (and great for the community)! I'm sure many will appreciate it, whether old-timers or newbies. (...) Good idea! [..] (...) Definitely! You might want to have a cross-ref (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
(...) way? (...) I'd agree with the argument. And I think I'd go one step further. If I maintain a site at www.isecretlyhatetodd.com and I never mention it here, I'm not sure I should be held accountable ToS-wise if someone stumbles across it and (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I don't mean even a bit by the above paragraph it was all you, and the flame war is not a big thing to me as alone. The paragraph is just a chronology, so I put it back to it's original form. (...) Read below. Besides, bet I care even a bit (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
Sorry for the malformed subject, it feels like it's 2 AM to me. Something has been nagging at me about one aspect of the latest... I think I want to recant some of my own words, and see if some other people do too. At least a little. Maybe it's a (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) You never were, and still aren't, in my mind. What you put on your site led me and countless others to the personal conclusion that you are a jerk, but that's a completely separate issue from judgment of what you did or didn't do here on this (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) While I would certainly agree that one person with a petty vendetta does not make a "huge conspiracy", if the idea that you were purposely out to harm the online LEGO community is "bs", how do you explain this post: (URL) seems pretty clear to (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Not accurate, no. Beside the point, nobody who wrote me was upset by your views -- only by your attitude and immature behavior level .space and .off-topic.debate. --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) So the ENTIRE flame war was all me, huh? No one else participated at all? No one else helped add fuel to the fodder? That's kinda funny cause that's not exactly how I remember it. (...) Hey look, a conspiracy theory. Oh hey, here's a thought, (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) Yes, but so far I haven't seen anyone show any evidence which points to the contrary. I mean let's see some evidence that I did something else wrong. And I don't mean weird conspiracies based on things I did over a year ago. And I also don't (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) I'm not a social scientist, too, but I say yes to the first question. Maybe I take the word elitist as different one, but I can see that we are at similar points on the subject. I already throw some words on it (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) Can you be more specific? --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes: <snip> (...) <snip> Todd, I don't have a heck of a lot of time but in general I will say this as to Matthew's concerns. 1. As far as TLC's fair play rules I could care less and I personally would rather (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Friends, I know I'm not very fluent in this language which is native to me, so I rewording it again: He started a flame war. He did that knowingly, and he even chose the person to flame by rather randomly, since he did that just for the sake (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) I let this one sit for a while, maybe should let it sit even longer. I think we do need to separate the issue of what to do about MM (which seems to be coming to a consensus, more or less) from the larger issue of whether Lugnet is (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The Friendliest Place On The Internet. (Was Re: What's going to happen.)
|
|
Thanks for the reply Paul. I was being afraid of there would not be one. And of course be sure that there was no hard feelings, and we of course friends just as before. But I still want to make clear something. For me "friendliest" doesn't mean (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Selçuk Göre skrev i meddelandet <39F0D9E8.9A73C9F@su...ne.com>... (...) what (...) I don't think 'suspicions' are enough to judge anyone. 'Evidence' is what's used for that. The evidence in this case are the messages posted on lugnet, nothing else. (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) It's possible that you are the only one with that viewpoint. (...) I think that's debatable too, but it's off-site and therefore moot as far as LUGNET is concerned. (...) I'm willing to bet 99% of people would disagree with that. (URL) (line (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
I got to thinking today about what I REALLY did wrong here. What did I do wrong? I attacked Jude's site in a somewhat mean way and didn't give any reasons as to why I thought so. And that's it. That's all I did wrong. Well I did also get caught up (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | The Friendliest Place On The Internet. (Was Re: What's going to happen.)
|
|
Selçuk Göre wrote in message ... (...) the (...) Selçuk, Mike, and everyone, I'm sorry for any name-calling. I was angry and upset and I didn't realise how much it came out like a flame. I'm sure than we can forget this, and continue to "play well" (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | LUGNET and Matthew Moulton
|
|
G'day folks, Yesterday, I think it was, I posted a message about how happy I was that I managed to stay out of the flame war. Now that discussions are a lot less heated, I think I'll add some thoughts. I've been thinking in point-form lately, so (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) No, I'm pretty sure we are, since there are people that are still telling Todd they want to see him banned permanently. I don't think that's right, and apparently (based on other people's posts here) I'm not alone in thinking that. Based on (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) I don't understand the question. --Todd (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Well said, Larry. Build On! John Matthews Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G2rA03.5Gt@lugnet.com... (...) site, (...) about (...) what (...) although (...) about (...) announcement (...) mostly (...) fundamental (...) (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
*Well, maybe I do not have the knowledge to speak/write in the language oher than my own, but hey, I'm here to learn* Todd! I think that the service you provide us/me is more than I/we could ever have been asking for. I think that the service you (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) LEGO (...) do (...) he (...) Well, yes and no. :-) Todd's manifesto was so well written, so thoughtful, so detailed, and so ahead of its time that when *I* read it, I begged Todd to come to Cambridge Technology Partners (1) as a consultant for (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I think we are not talking about "excluding him from Lugnet", he is already excluded in some way, and not for his web content. What we are talking about is whether his apologies are sincere or not. And his web content makes me believing the (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Sorry, but I don't. (...) He's simply stating some things he doesn't like about the Lego community as he sees it. What's the problem with that? Once again, what it comes down to is this: Over on *his* site, which you are under no obligation to (...) (26 years ago, 21-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Eric Kingsley wrote: <snip> (...) I will be agreeing you on this for a different case but not this. We are not trying to rationalize to TOS him because of his web content. It's just his web content is another evidence for making his (in my mind) (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Lorbaat wrote: <snip> (...) I think you are stretching a bit Eric. Forget about the JJ icon and look at his "document" about "My views about the self entitled "Lego Community"." (URL) (note the name of the html!!) You respected a community and want (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: What's going to happen.
|
|
(...) Sorry about making you such dissapointed and angry, but please consider that you are not the only one. Not mad at you of course, and not at any other people who accepted his apologies. You just tried to make your point and I don't have any (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Well that definitely wasn't nice if thats how it happened. *But* how much damage do you think he could have done to us from his site? From a technical standpoint his site is nice but not something that is going to generate a ton of hits on its (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) been (...) It was actually only one year ago. He remembered it wrong. (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I can't recall where exactly he said it (in a couple places, I think), but Matthew admitted in a post on Lugnet that he faked the content on his website and made the inflamatory remarks that he did specifically to damage the Lego community. (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: What's going to happen.
|
|
(...) Lets face it, if MM is half as machiavellian as MS claims, he must be laughing like a lord(1) at the fool MS is making of himself. Scott A Please excuse my use of what I assume is a UK colloquialism. (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) For what it's worth (not much) I'd wager I got you both beat on that issue. ;) (...) I've requested that all of my posts (well, not counting this one, I guess) on this topic be removed. I didn't add anything productive to this discussion, and (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, James Brown writes: <snip> (...) Agreed. (...) Agreed. (...) Definitely Agree. (...) If it was posted here I would agree but I don't think it was. It may have been posted on his site or sent to Todd and then he admitted to (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Ah. Well, my point stands (as does yours)- you weren't greeted with showers of roses and gold just because you stated your intentions for the site. You went ahead and built in anyway, and now you're King of the World (well, as soon as we bump (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) In general, I agree with you. However, Matthew used his website (in my opinion) as a tool to damage and disrupt the community. He crafted lies and misdirections, then posted something designed to stand out and direct traffic at his site. I (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) <snip? (...) First I should appoligize because "Clouds" was not the right word. What I was trying to say is that I think you feel a closer connection with James and his legacy than many of us do. That makes what Matthew did more personal to (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) The first way is closer to what happened. In November 1997, an announcement was made to RTL of this: (URL) and then construction began. There was some controversy and some disbelief but mostly it either got ignored or people said "good luck." (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I think you're confusing the Lugnet community with the LDraw community. Don't. (...) I would think removing it, when he's made it clear he still doesn't feel it was wrong, would be insincere. (...) Do you actually know the definition of the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
"Eric Kingsley" <kingsley@nelug.org> wrote in message news:G2qtCJ.CHJ@lugnet.com... (...) Matthew's (...) really. (...) like (...) I should correct myself - not *should* in the sense of a clearcut condition, but as a willful action to demonstrate to (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Sorry Tim but I think you are wrong here. Do I think the graphic on Matthew's site is distasteful? Yes. Do I care about the other text there? Not really. We cannot make the content of someone's personal site a prerequisite for inclusion in the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Just want to quickly address this one point. A website is not private. It is not a home. I do not need an invitation to come in, I can get there through any one of a number of valid & common methods of using the internet. No one has to knock (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
"Lorbaat" <eric@nospam.thirteen.net> wrote in message news:G2qso5.AAH@lugnet.com... (...) Why should he express that in a manner that attacks the community he claims to want to be a part of? (...) to (...) And no one is forcing me to accept his (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd, This MUST end now...
|
|
(...) And he apologised, and claims he has learned his lesson. (...) I think there are bigger issues being debated here. (...) "I would never want to belong to a club that would have me for a member." -Groucho Marx. eric (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I think that I misunderstood how you felt, and I reacted to that. (...) I'm sorry. <:( Although, I'm at work... which of us do you think has it better? :D eric (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Why should he not express how he feels? If he leaves it there, and you don't like it, no one is forcing you to go to his site and look at it, or to say that it's right. Why should taking that off his site be a contingency of his being accepted (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Todd, This MUST end now...
|
|
Todd, it's time to end this once and for all... ou know how I stand. You see how others have reacted. The time for discussion is over. A decision shoud be made. Doesn't anyone see what is so abundantly clear? Matt's intent was to disrupt this (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
"Mike Stanley" <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in message news:G2qJ13.95M@lugnet.com... (...) a (...) sap who (...) overly-nice (...) person (...) many (...) he (...) can (...) that he (...) "apology" - (...) therefore (...) I'm a bit unsure on the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) And now he might be let back in. So my question stands. (...) How can you be so sure that he's being dishonest? What do you stand to lose if he's given a chance to really show what he wants to do on Lugnet? (...) Where? (...) How can you be (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In conclusion... (my stance hasn't changed)
|
|
(...) I hope that's not how I'm being viewed. I made a stupid mistake, one that I'm not very proud of, I apologized for it, and more than that I hope to try and be a better person. There are some people who still genuinely hate me, that is their (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Sorry, I'm in debate mode right now and that's not what we need. I just deleted a fairly lengthy response in which I defended my actions (namecalling in this case) as acceptable for various reasons, but I don't want to post that, because more (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Well I promised I wouldn't get to involved in this discussion and I won't in a detailed way. I just wanted to say that I have agreed with just about everything Eric J. has had to say in this discussion. Certain things have been brought into this (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) First of all, I'm not 100% sure the term "second chance" applies. After all, he is a new member. We're not talking about "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" here. I'm also not suggesting that *every* time he acts up Lugnet (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: What's going to happen.
|
|
Matthew wrote in message <39f06e60.3126733@ne...et.com>... (...) Firstly, thank you Matthew for apologising. I told you that it was the right thing to do. In future, please make an effort to moderate how you express your feelings, and if you do say (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Would you give cancer or a terrorist a second chance? Don't fall for plastic sentiment, faux remorse, and hollow words... John (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) Oh, well done, Mike. Just slipped out, did it? Doesn't really cast a good light on your whole stance regarding Matthew's recent transgressions, now does it? Perhaps you should APOLOGISE TO MATTHEW RIGHT (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In conclusion... (my stance hasn't changed)
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Moulton writes: By acting as a virtual punching (...) Matthew: Please give up the martyr routine. We are here because you have said some nasty things and violated the TOS. I feel just fine about myself today, thanks. (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Mike, could you please keep this hateful rubbish off LUGNET?!? Thank you. Mike Stanley wrote in message ... (...) (including (...) community (...) removed (...) LUGNET (...) person (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Your right. And for that reason, I would support banning him, as well. I would not support banning him *simply* because he maintains that graphic on his website, however. Nor would I support banning him simply because it's what he believes. If (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) No, I don't know that. Not based on what you said. If that's not how you feel, I suggest you stop obsessing over his disrespect for James, because that's certainly how it's sounding. (...) Fine, that was the final straw. But if he's learned (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I fully supported the ban on his posting privileges. His repeated diatribes that "James is dead. Deal with it", or whatever was reason enough - not because he in fact holds that uncompassionate and cruel sentiment, but because his repeated (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Yes that kind of happened. But rememebr RTL was not the 'community'. It was a half abandoned group already. I was excited when I first saw your post since it is nice to have a alternate server. Well it turns out you were more into flaming than (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Of course not. I posted several posts here about the subject, about how much a good thing that he banned, and about how unnecessary to allow him to post again even in admin, but I never mentioned his sick hatred as an only reason or not a (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | What's going to happen.
|
|
I know I'm going to get banned again. Why do I know this? I don't know, it's just a feeling, I can't really explain it. It doesn't upset me too much though, because I was able to publicly apologize, and I was there to help some people relieve some (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I'm not saying you shouldn't be offended. I'm just saying that your offense at his beliefs, or thoughts, or graphics on his webpage, or even what he says here, doesn't constitute a good enough reason to ToSs him, IMHO. To think otherwise is to (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
Eric, I think a not so slight difference between not liking someone, and ridiculing him/her with ugly ways just because you don't like his/her software. I don't like Ldraw much, I use LeoCAD from the very beginning, and think it is superior to Ldraw (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) If I believed that, I wouldn't be here. However I don't, and that's why I'm here, and that's why I want to try and fix whatever dammage I did. If you were a "bunch of...blah...blah...community" then my attacks would not have affected anyone, (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes: <snip> (...) we (...) people (...) exist. (...) <snip> (...) Bravo Eric ! Matthew, you still want to CREATE this website or another or something else? Then do it. Do it for yourself. Do it because you are (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In conclusion... (my stance hasn't changed)
|
|
(...) If I didn't mean what I said I wouldn't even BE here. I know I screwed up, even more so than you can realize. If my apology wasn't heart felt then why am I here? You seem to think I'm some sort of evil person, that I have some alterior motive (...) (26 years ago, 20-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
