|
|
 | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) If the code puts ###@%% in for a list of words, then any word that 'slips thru' would be manually edited such that the word is now #@%#@#. The code'll catch the 95 percent, thus freeing up admins time for the other 5. Dave K (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) That's my sticking point too... we can technically put a filter in place, but that won't stop people from going around it. If they are going to violate the ToS, they're going to work at it. It's more a matter of understanding that rules are in (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | (canceled)
|
| | | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Perhaps rather than removing (or editing) the posts, the posts containing potentially offensive verbage should be quarantined. That is, insert a warning page in front of the post indicating that the moderators have determined that it might (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Hello Terry, Larry is really a great guy once you get to know him. Yes, he can be brash at times, but he means well. Lord knows I've had my disagreements with Larry, but we work through those and we are the better for it. (...) Larry brings a (...) (20 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX) !
|
|
