|
|
 | | (canceled)
|
| | | | | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) I second that, Jason. Lugnet is one of the last forums on the 'net where admins don't moderate posts directly. Fortunately, direct editing hasn't been needed often. But in some cases, it was needed. Ofcourse, asking the poster to do it himself (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) A chat site that my wife used to use had a similar profanity replacement program, it replaced the words with amusing alternative that sometime gave a clue to the original word. However, with a bit of testing it was obvious that: A: There were (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Lugnet should be MORE draconian
|
| (...) if/when? Does Lugnet not view editing the FUT editing? This is widley done by the Admins. I thought if you changed anything about a post than you were editing it. Am I wrong in this assumption? M (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general) !
| | | | | Forced voluntary self-censorship?
|
| So its not censorship but "voluntary" self-censorship backed up by force? In short, this is like a gouvernment that says: "Oh, we are not going to torture you. AI is against this, and we need the good image. But we won't release you from prison (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general) !
| | | | | 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)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Bring on the Calum post!!!!!! Those are the best part of these things! Dave K (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| Hi Lenny! (...) In fact there is no explicit 'no cursing' policy. All there is on 1000steine is the usual 'net etiquette', everybody is held to try to be pleasant and polite. Of course no illegal content is allowed in any case. Most of the time only (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Do you insist on a speeding ticket every time you speed, or else repeal of all speeding laws? This "sometimes the admins spot it and sometimes they don't" is a red herring in my view. We spot what we spot, and we spot what people bring to our (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) I'll 3rd that suggestion. I don't mean that as any sort of "please go" but simply to agree that Rene, Ben, Axel, Holger, etc. are great guys and it's often fun explore new online communities. Also, I've heard nothing but good things about (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Willy, I'd like to 2nd Ben's suggestion. If Lugnet isn't your cup of tea, then 1000steine might be. I've met Rene and Ben in person and both are excellently nice guys. Ben, Are you meaning to say that 1000steine doesn't have a 'no cursing' (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
|
