Subject:
|
Re: Can we help?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:22:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
314 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Marc Nelson, Jr. wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Marc Nelson, Jr. wrote:
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
|
| |
| |
Your FUT cancelled (it’s way off topic for .general) and FUT reset to
admin.general
|
The force-FUT power of admins was a really bad idea.
LUGNET is about posting what you want where you want (within reason).
|
No, I believe that if you review the ToS you will find that it is not at all
about “posting what you want when you want”. One of the great virtues of
LUGNET, in at least this reader’s view, is the compartmentalization it
fosters.
|
From the Terms of Use:
12. (do not) Stray hopelessly off-topic without moving the discussion to a
more appropriate location. (There is a fair amount of leeway here, since it
is natural for discussions to drift, and moving a discussion can sometimes be
inconvenient or difficult. If in doubt, appeal to common sense.)
|
It is my view (and that of other admins) that discussion of whether it is
appropriate to mock someone is OFF topic for .general. Hopelessly off topic. Do
you agree? If not, why not?
It is my view (and that of other admins) that discussion of whether it is
appropriate to mock someone is ON topic for the administrative area. Do you
agree? If not, why not?
I’ll go further and reiterate that I do not view mocking posters as appropriate,
and it is a practice that ought not to be condoned. I would argue it runs afoul
of the Anti Baiting rules which are in place, although they are not explicitly
spelled out in the ToS.
| |
There is already a mechanism for moving discussions, and it is available to
everyone - the FUT. What I object to is the unchecked power of the admins to
unilaterally change the location of someone’s post.
|
I think you need to consider reviewing what powers the admins have and what they
cannot do more carefully. The admins do not have the power to move a post and
thus do not have the power (much less unchecked power) to “unilaterally change
the location of someone’s post”.
Forcing the FUT merely means that the default FUT is already set to a different
location that the poster set it to. A followup poster can change it back.
For example, Richie or you or whomever could still have your reply post go to
.general... your post would get some scrutiny to be sure, to make sure that it
fit the topics allowed in general, and if it didn’t there would be consequences,
as with the FUT changed and the change announced, it should be clear to posters
that they need to think about it. But you could still do it.
Also it does not move the post that was already made. That post is where it is.
| |
I would have no problem
with an admin moving a post with the posters’ consent (which would take
care of anything mistakenly posted to the wrong newsgroup).
|
Technical reasons make that difficult to achieve. I wish there was a way to do
it. Forcing the FUT (but not moving the original post) to default to something
else, some other location, is the best we have.
| |
This specific case is especially objectionable because the force-FUT was used
to hide the discussion in a dark corner of LUGNET, where it will go unread by
everyone who uses the default skip-filter settings.
|
The default skip filter settings are the way they are after long discussion,
because it has been determined that most people do NOT want to read about
administrative issues. I am not sure that your characterisation of admin.general
as a dark corner is valid, or useful.
Richie’s post raises an administrative issue. One could argue that he knew darn
well that .general was a poor choice of topic area and set it that way precisely
to try to cause a row. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and credit his
error to an oversight rather than a genuine desire to be difficult.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) It seems like the definition of what is on-topic for .general is very elastic. If a post shows up in .general which could conceivably show up in a more specific newsgroup, does that mean it's off-topic for general? If so, than the last 25 (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | Open source and admin.suggestions
|
| (...) Is Lugnet going to become open source? If so, I think the answer to this and many other technical issues lies there. If not, then it would be interesting to know the reasons. On a personal note, I would most likely contribute in some manner (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) You see it as a mock of someone. I see it as a mock of an outrageous claim. (...) Mocks of some people are acceptable, though perhaps not appropriate, outside the administrative area. (...) And yet, Larry, you mocked me... -snip- (...) One (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) From the Terms of Use: 12. (do not) Stray hopelessly off-topic without moving the discussion to a more appropriate location. (There is a fair amount of leeway here, since it is natural for discussions to drift, and moving a discussion can (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
16 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
|
|
|
|
