Subject:
|
Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:13:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
729 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys wrote:
> > > In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.admin.general, David Koudys wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Explain to me how I violated the ToU?
> > > >
> > > > You posted a post that contained a word that clearly violates the ToU. It
> > > > matters not whether you quoted it, or what context you used it in, that
> > > > particular word is one we come down hard on, consistently. We always have.
> > >
> > >
> > > And you very well know as a libertarian that one is not responsible for other
> > > people's actions.
> >
> > True but irrelevant. You quoted, which was your choice. Therefore it was your
> > action, your transgression. All else is smoke.
>
> Your interpretation. If the >'s were still in the post, and I didn't do any
> editing at all, and the entire post appeared with mine, then where does that get
> us.
Still a violation and not just *my personal* interpretation. We already covered
this the last time JoJo pulled this stunt. Quoting that word will not be
tolerated.
The rules are what they are. LUGNET is run the way it is run. Do not violate the
rules. If you do not agree with them to the point that you cannot abide by them,
take your custom elsewhere.
You are welcome, and even encouraged, to discuss how things might be or ought to
be in future but for now things are as they are and you must abide by the rules
while you work for change.
Abide, or suffer the consequences.
You asked for a cancel, which is great. But you seem to think that you did not
transgress, which is false in my view and that of the other admins. You need to
accept that you transgressed in the view that matters, whether you agree or not,
and move on.
Else we will go round and round to no end. What's done is done, you messed up
and, deep down, you know it.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Deep down I'm extremely worried about the future of this website. When we have an issue like this, where well intentioned people (not me, mind you--I have an apparent issue realizing where I screwed up) who point out very valid concerns about (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
| (...) Your interpretation. If the >'s were still in the post, and I didn't do any editing at all, and the entire post appeared with mine, then where does that get us. Furthermore, you are ignoring the greater issue where we say "Profanity bad! Must (...) (20 years ago, 2-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
17 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
|
|
|
|
