To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 10088
10087  |  10089
Subject: 
Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.market.theory
Followup-To: 
lugnet.market.theory
Date: 
Fri, 25 Jan 2002 13:40:20 GMT
Viewed: 
2348 times
  
In lugnet.admin.general, Scott Arthur writes:
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:

No, actually it bolsters MY point which is that not every instance needs to
be reminded and that some allowance for error and some allowance for the
assertion that if one reminder was issued, (within the thread, or within so
many days, or whatever metric I think will satisfy the "you must make a good
effort" requirement) that's enough.

Scott (et al.),

First, see this post, in response to a very polite and non-confrontational
questioning of Larry, and the other GoB members, about the whats, whys and
wherefors of establishing , asserting and maintaining a trademark:

http://news.lugnet.com/market/theory/?n=2285

...and that bolsters MY point. Unless you are willing honour every single
trademark you mention here, you are in absolutely no position to chastise
others for not doing so. Doing so would be sheer hypocrisy. Do you fail to
see that?

What you fail to see, Scott, is that Larry has been nothing but polite from
the get go about the trademark issue. Your seeming lack of knowledge of, or
willingness to find out more about, the subject at hand is what is keeping
this thread afloat. You are incorrect, Scott, and you need to back down from
this issue.

Larry is well within his rights to continue to claim and assert the GoB
trademark. It is also the decision of Larry and his group when, where, how
often and how strenuously they decide to assert their mark, and their
failing if they choose not to do so in a manner which retains the mark's value.

Further, rather than being Larry, or anyone's, hypocracy in not properly
indicating the trademarks of others, it is the responsibility of those mark
holders to do the same type of assertation on a regular basis, or by
whatever means and schedule they deem fit. Case-in-point: The LEGO®
Company's Fair Play document. They have choosen to publish one document
outlining their legal stance and views, and if it is not followed (like in
instances of the word "LEGO" in a domain name), they may take an active
stance with the violator, and have this guideline to point to. Larry has
choosen to take a more active hand in his continued mark assertation, and
that is his perogative.

Further, if your were to start honouring trademarks just so you could
chastise others I'd be a little worried about you.

And in the vein of YET ANOTHER current LUGNET thread about your disruptive
tendancies, your continued sniping and heel nipping at Larry has me a little
worried about you. You need to back away and take a good look at the way you
post at LUGNET, and the tones you take...especially if you value your
involvment here to any extent.

You have many people upset wih you currently, and as we have seen in the
past, a grassroots campaign for administrative action can be very
effective...and I don't feel like seeing another one of those beginning here
again. Not now...not ever.

This thread also does not belong in lugnet.admin.general, as it does not
pertain to the LUGNET™ trdemark, and I am moving it to lugnet.market.theory
where it should have been all along (as Larry stated early on).

Matt



Message has 4 Replies:
  The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...)
 
My deepest apologies for this long re-post, but I had meant to change the name of this thread, as the current name was completely off-topic, but I posted just the same. Please make replies to this current subject to this version of the post. Thank (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.market.theory)
  Non ISO charaters (was Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market))
 
(...) I've been addressing this issue before, but I think it is about time to pick it up again. Matthew, I'm using your article as an example, no offence! I frequently see the use of characters which are not in the ISO 8859-1 character set on (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
  Re: Vendettas (was Re: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...)
 
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GqpspD.Kq4@lugnet.com... (...) My bad... I followed Matt's lead yesterday though. ;-) I'll fut all of my replies away from .people and to .debate. -Tim (23 years ago, 29-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
  Re: Posting Dates (Was: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...))
 
(...) It looks like you both did. Scott's message is dated 1-Feb, a couple of days following the previous message, although it showed up some 8 hours ago. If I look at the dates, you're the one holding the shovel. I thought this NNTP date (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Community Policing is a Good Thing(TM) (Was: Re: Do you think there is a market)
 
(...) ...and that bolsters MY point. Unless you are willing honour every single trademark you mention here, you are in absolutely no position to chastise others for not doing so. Doing so would be sheer hypocrisy. Do you fail to see that? Further, (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jan-02, to lugnet.admin.general)

83 Messages in This Thread:



































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR