To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 12325 (-10)
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) I like how you are "asked" to do something, but yet if you do not reply, or do not agree to what is being "asked" you are suspended. So, what is the point of asking? Why not say the plain and simple truth - "look, we delete your post of you (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) I have no immediate problem with lugnet's rules. And for that manor I have no problem with the implementation of censorship here. I only object to the claim that it's not censorship. (...) Well the admins, mostly Larry, have stated repetedly (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) LUGNET *was* too peaceful for too long. It's about time. The place is starting to feel normal again. -Tim (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) You aren't considering how "heavy" the enforcement it is for the admins. I think that the particular model selected by Lugnet is unecessarily tough for the admins, and this example illustrates that. (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) (URL) I do>. The post you replied to wasn't necessarily me speaking as an admin, although I can see how you might make that mistake. Your point is taken that admins need to be crystal clear when they are speaking "for" LUGNET. (...) I don't (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) From a site listing Carlin's 7 words: "So far we can still write them on the Internet, at least until the thought Nazi's finally get their wish and reduce the limits of content to that which is suitable for two year olds." Food for thought. M (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) Fair point. Kelly is having some tech problems though, so please forgive if he just signs at the bottom till we get that fixed. (not speaking officially here, I haven't yet in this thread.) (20 years ago, 2-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)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) K, you are sooooo talking to the wrong guy about this one. If it were up to me, right now every bridge, every overhead sign, everything along the highway system, would have a photo radar installed. Give me 10 grande to install the first,then (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
 
(...) This is something people need to really think about. I have a gut feeling that all the admins (with perhaps the exception of Todd) are having these feelings. Big question: Do you folks want Lugnet to continue and prosper? Or do you want to (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)  


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR