Subject:
|
Re: In support of Larry
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:55:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1208 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Rob Hendrix wrote:
| |
“Scott A” dr_scott_arthur@yahoo.co.uk wrote in message
news:ICw2EC.o06@lugnet.com...
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Rob Hendrix wrote:
| |
| |
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
the rules? What about all the trouble he has caused in Bricklink in the
past?
Do people have to look him in the eye to confirm he is his own worst
enemy?
Scott A
|
Now there’s the pot calling the kettle black...
|
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 points I raise?
Scott A
|
|
| |
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, I’ll just say this:
a) Per 1000 posts, you have had more arguments than anyone on Lugnet.
|
Do you care to justify that? I expect not!
| |
b) I recall your willingness to not only flout, but totally disregard the
rules and spoof your identity on previous baiting posts. In fact, I think
the baiting rule was introduced just because of your repeated misconduct.
|
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 has done!
| |
c) Bricklink rules, or bending of said rules, or anything that doesn’t
directly affect Lugnet has no place in this conversation.
|
That is a good point, but it does not answer my point!
| |
I don’t think BL
is the perfect selling place, I don’t think Larry is a perfect person, and I
saw valid points on both sides of that situation, but again, that has no
place in this conversation.
|
How can a person who disregards rules in one situation be trusted to enforce
them in another?
So it looks like your “the pot calling the kettle black” jibe does not hold
water.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
