Subject:
|
Re: Porthole alternative
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:43:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
717 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Frank Filz writes:
> > Kyle Beatty wrote: • <snip>
> > >
> > > Characterizing unhappy responses to correction as being inherently
> > > anti-Lugnet is dangerous. (By the way, every time I use this expression,
> > > "correction," the hair on the back of my neck stands up. It really creeps >>> me out in a deeply Orwellian way.)
> >
> > I certainly agree that there seems to be a lot more "correction" and
> > related noise. I think there are a few problems here.
> >
> > - The Lugnet admins have not had a lot of time recently to do the
> > administrative stuff they used to do.
>
>
> Do you think that if “the admins” were still playing the role they used to
> here they would be stepping in and “correcting” quite as much? I worry about
> the *potential* for Todd’s apparent inactively to be used as an excuse to
> throw a little weight around. Perhaps I'm worrying about nothing?
If the admins were correcting as often as the "community" has been of late,
I think it would be in such a way as to avoid the noise of our current
method. I don't mind the community action. What I *do* mind is the fallout
created when someone is corrected. Just look at this thread as one example.
I think you do have a valid concern about members taking on the
responsibility of corrective action without support and/or approval of the
admins. I see a zero tolerance policy developing by precedence. I feel that
the speed of the thread elevation (to lugnet.admin.*) is an indicator of
such a policy.
>
> We have to live with the fact that policing is here to stay. It should be
> done with respect, and it should be remembered that respect is a two way >street.
I think the tone with which a corrective action is written, sets the tone
for any replies.
>
> Scott A
>
> =+=
> Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet?
> http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=scotta
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So, does this mean that all of your posts including this sig need to be
confined to .market? Where's the line drawn?
<snip>
-Duane
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Porthole alternative
|
| (...) Wasn't he way ahead of his time?? (...) Few minor issues, no need to get someone's knickers in a knot over. Just maybe rethinking certain things. (...) I appreciate the work the LUGNET admins do for all of us. Just wanted to say that here. Why (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Porthole alternative
|
| (...) Do you think that if “the admins” were still playing the role they used to here they would be stepping in and “correcting” quite as much? I worry about the *potential* for Todd’s apparent inactively to be used as an excuse to throw a little (...) (23 years ago, 1-Mar-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
39 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
|
|
|
|
