 | | In support of Larry
|
|
I'm ashamed of all the Larry-bashing that's been taking place. If you've only interacted with the man online (which I believe is the case with some of his harshest critics), you have no perspective on who he really is. Hence, you're really not (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people) !
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) I think most people know I'm not much of a "me too" guy. But sometimes, you just have to say, ME TOO! Larry's work has been dilegent and has profoundly contributed to our community. Larry's work in all the aspects of the community that he has (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Tim, With respect, you are being obsequious. Can people not draw any conclusion from the fact that Larry has probably had more spats with more people than anyone else on LUGNET? Can they not make a judgment based on his willingness to flout (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> Not directed at you, Tim ('cause I like you and all...) but I wonder how people would have felt if someone told Jefferson, et al. the above--"Don't go attacking those British lords in (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Now there's the pot calling the kettle black... :P Rob (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) I can agree with you that the level of communication has been rather low. In fact I'm almost getting withdrawal symptoms, as the 'signal-to-fight' ratio has gone so low. I *know* that Larry has done, and does, a *lot* of good work for the (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Look at it from the realistic side. The more exposure you have, the more chances something you wrote will upset someone else. Ever since I joined the community, Larry has consistantly been the most active participant here on Lugnet. This and (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Are you saying that I: a) have "had more spats with more people than anyone else on LUGNET?" b) have shown a "willingness to flout the rules"? and c) have caused trouble on bricklink? ...or are you just attacking me rather than answering the (...) (19 years ago, 5-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) I make no (public) judgement about his character but I would make the following points in reply to this post: 1. Working tirelessly for a community does not automatically mean you are suited to any particular role within that community, and 2. (...) (19 years ago, 5-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people) !
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
"Scott A" <dr_scott_arthur@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:ICw2EC.o06@lugnet.com... (...) Had you noticed the ":P" at the end of my post, you would have immediately realized that I was joking. That being said and having read your baited reply, (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Do you care to justify that? I expect not! (...) I did it once to show it could be done. I was very open about what I was doing. It was a foolish thing to do; I even apologised IRC. I'm not sure that even compares to some of the things Larry (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Here we go again.... sadly. Kevin (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
I'm not clear what you mean by this(?) Scott A (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) Personal speculation. I haven't the time or desire to prove my point. If anyone else deems necessary, then I'll let them count them all. I'm just saying that you get into more argumentative situations on Lugnet because of your aggressive and (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) I thought as much. Try to be more constructive. (...) I don't think recounting events here would be particularly constructive. Why don't you ask him? If he does not tell you, drop me an e-mail. (...) My point was that I have not caused a pile (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) I do not dislike you. In fact I think you have the potential to be a very great guy. What I continually notice, though, are all the negative connotations spurring from your hatred for Larry or other people who aren't "right" all the time like (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | ...your hatred for Larry...
|
|
(...) For the record, I do not hate anyone; that would achieve nothing. I may dislike the things Larry does, but I do not dislike him. As I have said time-and-time again, I have a great deal of respect for Larry... I think everyone here does! I have (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: ...your hatred for Larry...
|
|
(...) Thank you for weighing in, LUGNET staff conduct issues are currently being weighed by the LUGNET admins. We expect to have a draft of several new and updated documents posted for review within the next several days. The discussions over the (...) (19 years ago, 8-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: In support of Larry
|
|
(...) [...] I totally see what you mean here. Until I met Larry in person and spent some time with him (he came to SF on business and we had dinner together) I didn't care much for him either. But after meeting him in person I really like the guy. (...) (19 years ago, 29-Mar-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
