 | | Re: LUGNET members association —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | (...) Well, Lenny, Larry and I have had some conversations, especially when the LPRV was first formed, and he acknowledged that he felt that Admins should be held to a higher standard hat on, or hat off. So Larry beleives there should be a double (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LUGNET members association —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Thanks. For everything you said. "I can think of a hundred things I'd rather do than debate this stuff." Ya, me too! I'll see your 100 and raise you a hundred. Emotions have run high here, but your recent actions convince me I was wrong to (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LUGNET members association —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | (...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Larry, always the competitive one :P Levity is a good thing. and by the way, you're welcome. (...) I'm very pleased to hear this Larry, with this we can work to go forward. I look forward to it. If the LTT and LPRV (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LUGNET members association —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm happy to report that you should be back on the committee as soon as the email is reconfigured (from the LTT perspective). (which should be about 2 min after Matt reads his mail) I didn't even think to ask the rest of the LPRV how they felt (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LUGNET members association —Rob Hendrix
|
| | | | <SNIPPAGE> (...) ... (...) </SNIPPAGE> If you guys aren't going to stop hijacking my thread, I might as well join in on the claim-jumping too... I'd officially like to make this a red letter date. A day to remember. A day for the history book (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LUGNET members association —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) You are SO out of it, I admit I'm wrong all the time. It's just that... (wait for it) I never make misteaks! ++Lar (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association) —Rob Hendrix
|
| | | | "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@...e.DOT.com> wrote in message news:IFIpFp.1zt2@lugnet.com... (...) I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken... Please FUT to o-t.fun - I can't from NNTP Rob (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association) —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) Well, if you can't, it isn't a limitation of NNTP - but possibly of your newsreader. NNTP protocol has had the ability to set followups from pretty early on. On the other hand, I don't know if there's any facility to set followups for those (...) (20 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) Setting the reply-to header does that. (20 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Setting follow-up (was something else) —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | (...) In fact you can. With Outlook Express You just select "View" --> "Show all headers" when you're composing the message. And there it is: "Followup to", just enter the appropriate group. (All menu items translated from Swedish, so the actual (...) (20 years ago, 26-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| | | | |
