 | | Re: Posting Dates
|
|
(...) so you think if it inserted itself with all the read messages, it'd be less confusing? I know I'd never see it, now will anyone who reads through the web interface... (...) naw - it's not the server's fault that whoever it is sat on the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Dates
|
|
(...) Oops...ought to clarify for readers that this is a web interface problem. Obviously those having the messages delivered via newsgroup or e-mail would not see this as a new message...it would just show up by date where it belongs in their (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Dates
|
|
(...) That would only be true if the message somehow just showed up where it belonged in line. If it posts as a new message 28 days later, it is highly confusing. This instance has proven that. Besides, it is a disservice to the users to have their (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Dates
|
|
(...) I don't see it as broken. The date of a message is the date it was composed. The date it was posted is unimportant, imo. :) Dan (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Nope, that's not what anyone is saying. There would have been a point reached where, had the replies continued, it should have been moved to wherever else if it had nothing to do with trains. It's like, hypothetically, RCX newsgroup, "Hey I'm (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
I quite agree with Lar on the points he relates here (snippage aside). I myself have a vested interest in Lego marketing directly from TLC, but it would be absolutely inappropriate for me to make more than just the casual reference that I make at (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Dates (Was: The Care and Feedng of Your Trademark (Was: Community Policing...))
|
|
(...) Indeed! My most abject apologies Scott. Had I caught that error in the posting scheme, I would never have responded as I did! Again, my apologies! Thank you Rob, for catching that mistake. Admins: What is the deal with this? Is it a function (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Which is why the original post, which had on topic aspects, got merely a ribbing. I whould have hoped that Bram was enough of a thought leader to connect the dots (where his purely market relatd followup should go) without an explicit warning. (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-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)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Shouldn't that be "rucki"? XFUT: off-topic.pun, because this doesn't belong in admin.general. And if you disagree, I'm gonna go get mom! -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
Come on Lar, I think we can all see the difference between posting a message saying XX parts now in my brinklink store, and a link to an image that shows a valuable building technique which also states in the image (and not in the original posting) (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Yes, there should be little room for ruckusii (that's latin for more than one ruckus). (...) But this is the point: this incident aside, I support, encourage and wholeheartedly embrace policing (see rant before about community policing). My (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Be careful, as TC would say: "If I'm doing my duty and respectfully guide someone on something they post, and THEY or THEIR COHORTS cause a ruckus, oh well. That's THEIR problem (and that problem will be corrected too). There should be little (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Membership webpages not meshing with news
|
|
(...) well, from what I can see, the www server and the news server are meant to be two seperate machines... So naturally your page is on the www server (though one day it might be on a members.lugnet.com), and not on the news server. Perhaps the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) True. (...) Oooh! That's got to hurt! (...) Portholes are awesome! (...) hmm.... (...) I would have done the same (...) Gee, I wonder how that happened?! (...) Right on! I agree with you on that one! Bram's posts weren't illegitimate, but I do (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | RE: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) Thanks, Dave. --Bram Bram Lambrecht bram@cwru.edu www.bldesign.org (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: US S@H Specials, Feb 27 - Mar 5, 2002
|
|
In lugnet.announce.lsahs, Tom Stangl writes: Isn't it time to kill this page: (...) (URL) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.announce.lsahs, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
|
(...) I see no yelling. Merely gentle guidance. (...) (off topic) (...) (because I got away with the first one?) (...) Four. FUT admin.general since you seem to have an issue with gentle guidance on this. Your original message was off topic for (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Membership webpages not meshing with news
|
|
Hi Dan! Mah Nishma? As usual it's me and my obnoxious requests. ;-) When I'm somewhere reading the news, I'm at this address: (URL) say I want to get to one of my membership pages, I always type "~88/" at the end of the address, so it becomes: (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
