 | | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) OK. But it isn't set up NOW, is it? If so, what then? (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I'd recommend setting it up so it'll work then. I can think of a few ways to do this. However, it doesn't change the point that it's up to LUGNET to make sure the admins can send email to users, assuming the user has actually provided a valid (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Legends of Todd
|
|
(...) Rosa Parks did what she did because the establishment was not interested in hearing her voice. Lugnet Admins, on the other hand, have always be interested in hearing the voices of all members and users of Lugnet. I don't see the need for civil (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Yes. However the LUGNET server doesn't currently have the capabilty to send (originate) mail, does it? That was how I read what you said before. In that case, if it's true that it can't, what then? (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) I think Kevin does have a working email? Unless you want to define working as "has to be able to accept email from whatever domains/servers the admins happen to use". I would define it as "able to accept email from the LUGNET server and not (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) ...and that is why he will not stand down even when it is the right thing to do... he is here for our good! lol. His nefarious activities are good for us! IMO, it is time the other admins had a quiet word with him. (...) Don't be a fool. It is (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) I ain't touchin' that one. (...) Okay, jut as soon as you can get to those, he'd appreciate it. He'll probably read this shortly. Thanks again, -Stefan- (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) I've been so busy reading all the posts saying what a terrible person I am and how everything I do is bad for LUGNET that I haven't had a chance to do approvals for a few days, and it looks like I'm the only person that seems to do them. (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Posting Policy Changes
|
|
On behalf of a friend (Jeff - builder of the Salamis MOC), I've been asked to tell you that he has been waiting almost three days for posting changes to take affect and he'd like an ETA on that please. Thank you, -Stefan- (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Not necessarily. LUGNET does not have this ability, as I understand it. It is possible to construct an email that shows the "from:" as being from a lugnet.com email address, but, again, as I understand it, not to have the email actually be (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I assume you mean they, the (other) admins? (...) Well maybe, but I'm not sure "should be expected to come to consensus" is very useful here. What if a majority do agree that an admin is a problem, but they can't all come to a consensus? At (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) The admin team has worked on a consensus basis, and the theory (OK, my theory) was that if a fellow admin was problematic enough to need to be removed, they would be the ones that would need to agree about it. A majority vote system might be (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I would be interested to hear the rationale behind that statement, specifically why it is more of a safety valve than majority decision. The reason I ask is that I, as a non-admin, see it as *removing* a safety valve. ROSCO (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
Just to make things clear...the views I expressed are my own, and not indicative of the rest on NELUG. Tom D (...) (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
(...) I think that's accurate, yes. (...) Playing devil's advocate, I would ask why you would expect that as a right? It's not a right I think you would expect from most other people. For example, I don't expect fair and just treatment from the (...) (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Could you clarify that a bit? Why should it not be technically possible to have official emails coming from the lugnet.com domain? That's a very basic ability of any serious website. If you mean that it is sometimes inconvenient to send emails (...) (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) This is explained clearly in the ToU, and in a previous post. (...) The main admin page lists all the LTT as @lugnet.com. I've done nothing to prevent those email addresses. If official Admin accounts are not able to send email on a particular (...) (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) Whatever. But the issue remains, whose responsibility is it to ensure email communication works? LUGNET and the LUGNET admins? Or the user? This issue has come up before and while the admins will do what they can, it's not their responsibility (...) (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snip> (...) I'm sure you do. (19 years ago, 24-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
