Subject:
|
Re: Porthole alternative
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:23:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
192 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys writes:
> And yet this thread generated responses by those who took the idea and made
> their own portholes for their own trains, so it appears to be a pretty
> legitimate train topic to me.
>
> If Bram said 'You must buy my stuff to see how I do it!' then it's pure
> selling. What he did do was put up *directions* to build a *porthole* for a
> ***train*** hence, train topic. If he also wanted to sell said porthole,
> it was cross-posted to buy/sell/trade for that bit.
True.
> So the issue didn't happen until you, Larry, made it an issue. This is not
> laying the smakdown, just making an observation, imho.
Oooh! That's got to hurt!
> Further, the order of replying is very important... if I understand it
> correctly,
>
> Bram posts 'Hey, lookit my protals, and if you wnat one, you can buy it...'
> to trains and buy/sell
Portholes are awesome!
> Others post saying 'What a great idea--think i'll build my own!'
>
> Larry posts with cute banter even, about banner ads
hmm....
> so far, no issue
>
> Bram goes on to post that he's sold out, both to .trains (for those train
> heads that might be interested still) as well as .buy/sell...
>
> I agree with that post as well...
>
> Larry phrased a very polite and sincere post saying that in his opinion (as
> well as some others) that Brams sold-out post should be only in buy/sell...
> I do not agree, but I concede to those that are 'in the know' i.e.
> responsible for the newsgroup.
>
> Bram, jokingly, replies to Larry's post, saying 'smackdown' et. al...
I would have done the same
> And then it gets to .admin.general.
Gee, I wonder how that happened?!
> If the discussion ensued beyond this point, then get it to .admin.general
> and bug the admins. Up until this point there was little to get your
> knickers in a knot over.
>
> This is where I will reiterate the thick skinness needed for the situation.
> Bram last post didn't post more sales or whatever, he just replied to
> Larry's post in a 'banter-like' fashion.
>
> I can't speak for Bram, but I don't think he has a problem with 'gentle
> guidance' At least, that's the way it appears to me.
>
> Since my post dealt with my appreciation for Bram's portholes for .trains, I
> could have left it there. However, since tempers are short to begin with, I
> removed it from that group. As well, I hope it shows the impromptu and
> unneeded escalation to .admin.general. Since my reply has nothing to do
> with buy/sell, that was removed as well.
Right on! I agree with you on that one! Bram's posts weren't illegitimate,
but I do think it is kind of poor for Lar to start an argument. Isn't that
stuff reserved for offtopic.debate?
<<_Matt Hein_>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read the Draken Chronicles, my Lego story @
www.lugnet.com/people/members/~1112/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Porthole alternative
|
| (...) And yet this thread generated responses by those who took the idea and made their own portholes for their own trains, so it appears to be a pretty legitimate train topic to me. If Bram said 'You must buy my stuff to see how I do it!' then it's (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
