 | | Re: Lugnet clone handling? (was: Re: LEGO clone auction) —Christopher L. Weeks
| | | | (...) I think this is a reasonable answer. Like you, I continue to be frustrated by incidents of differential discipline. However, as a manager of people, and a parent, it has proven - time and again - more reasonable to set up guidelines rather (...) (26 years ago, 26-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Lugnet clone handling? (was: Re: LEGO clone auction) —Todd Lehman
| | | | | (...) Sometimes patterns of posting emerge that weren't clear earlier, and sometimes things just reach some threshold. In the case of clones, for example, it was believed (by me, mostly) that people just wouldn't want to talk about clones at all -- (...) (26 years ago, 28-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Lugnet clone handling? (was: Re: LEGO clone auction) —Christopher L. Weeks
| | | | | (...) Sure, but that 'l' is there in .off-topic.x and .loc.x too. So this means that the rest of the newsfroup's name can override the 'l'. Why then, doesn't the 'build' in lugnet.build or the 'announce' in lugnet.announce also override the 'l'? (I (...) (26 years ago, 29-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Lugnet clone handling? (was: Re: LEGO clone auction) —Todd Lehman
| | | | | (...) I guess the off-topic.* hierarchy is a discrepancy -- or, more specifically, a special case/exception. (...) Sure, as long as the thread stayed within the spirit of building and building techniques. But if the thread wandered toward brand-x as (...) (26 years ago, 29-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | | |
