Subject:
|
Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 Mar 2005 21:33:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
233 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
> > In lugnet.announce, Willy Tschager wrote:
> > > Dear friends,
> > >
> > > after posting this message http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/org/ldraw/?n=3467 (the
> > > post has been canceled in the meantime) containing the following sentence:
> >
> > - snip -
> >
> > This discussion venue, despite what many obviously believe, does not have an
> > agenda to tell you what you should think or what to believe. It's a simple
> > request, really: please just keep the cussing down.
[ snip ]
> > I ask everyone in this thread who found it necessary to intentionally disregard
> > the language rule to rethink their post, and request a cancel and repost. You
> > can get your point across without the language.
>
> Would it surprise you if I wrote that I agree with most of what you wrote?
Not really - I think I understand pretty well your argument about language, and
have no problem with it.
> The thing is that some long standing Lugnet members are getting very upset about
> getting threatening email regarding what may have been a comment in passing.
> This fact alone should tell you that something might be wrong with the way
> things are done.
It's difficult to judge things like this accurately when the entire sequence of
events isn't presented fully. Willy's quote included a slice of one of Larry's
emails (and I don't know if Willy asked for or received Larry's permission to
post a private email), not the entire exchange. I can't and won't speak for
Larry, but I do know there was more to this exchange than what's been presented
here; Willy's post does not include the first email exchange. That can be
inferred by Willy stating that the post he linked to has since been cancelled
(at his request).
> It is my belief that one slip does not equal a trend nor does one slip warrant a
> timeout or even a threat of timeout.
Again, for everyone here to judge whether or not this issue is even worth the
amount of time it's sucked from various people, the entire exchange between
Willy and Larry would need to be presented (after both agreed to such).
> In how many of Willy's posts has he posted a so called "bad" word? The only one
> I have read is the one that sparked this debate. I think that instead of
> immediately firing off a threatening email, the admin should have let it drop.
That would've sparked shouts of favoritism... I think consistency is vital,
especially when it comes to the so-called "worst" words.
> It is my hope that with this discussion the people on both sides of
> this issue will be able to compromise since the loss of a Lugnet member,
> especially one as prominent as Willy, is always a bad occurrence should be
> avoided with all reasonable efforts.
I agree completely.
- Kelly
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) The admins are in the business of issuing value judgments, so I contend that any decision that they make can spark shouts of favoritism which is why this should be, at the very least, marginalized as a factor in a judgment if not disregarded (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote: When speaking as an official representative of LUGNET, please make it clear by using the special symbol that Todd and others use. You presume we all know who you are and that is an invalid assumption. (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
