 | | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) What address did you mail? We have been having technical problems with some addresses. if it was actually feedback (at) ... then ya, that may not go anywhere other than the owner. Per this page (URL) it's not really the right place for (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) I am well aware of the issues in the past that molded the current shape of posting procedures; I was here at the time if you recall. However, they are in the past. I felt they were too extreme then and are too extreme now. However, I wouldn't (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) Lenny, I never said all the people would believe such assurances all the time. But I still think it's worth providing them. ROSCO (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association)
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) (it's possible other circumstances might alter this slightly, like if it's been excessively long between offenses-- like-- years, or if the user consciously defies being told otherwise): 1) First time offender A) Someone (officially or not) (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | light touches (was Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Yes. If posting an official warning is the right level of touch, that is. I said that after Tony had a chance to answer, I'd say what the admins did, and my guess at why. I'm still hoping Chris will answer why he thinks nothing should be done, (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
"Tony Alexander" <tw0nst3r@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:IFIJDx.FMy@lugnet.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) should (...) that (...) there (...) [ ... snipped ... ] Shouldn't Admin posting such as the one above be posted by "LUGNET Admin" as (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Lar++ is WRONG! (was: Re: LUGNET members association)
|
|
"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 (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) 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 (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
<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 (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The sky is not falling
|
|
(...) snip (...) This is a good reminder. Sometimes when you get close to something, problems seem overwhelming and all-encompassing. We have some significant issues that need to be worked on, but overall I have to agree with you that LUGNET is (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) <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 (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: I resign from the LPRV committee
|
|
(...) Sorry to reply to my own post, but a few caveats (still at work, but thought of more and had a chance): * I'm a member/user, not an admin; as such, my immediate reply to seeing this post would have been: "Hmmm...not technic...on to the next (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET members association
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.suggestions, FTX)
|
| |
| | The sky is not falling
|
|
Hey all, So many times these threads begin with a complaint, so I just wanted to point out something positive. There has been much discussion recently about the spotlighting, and various ways to "fix" it (and, I admit, I've added my share of blather (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Context: LUGNET is not a democracy
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Tom Duggan wrote: snip (...) Yet another good reason to tighten our borders! I am sure there are plenty of US citizens that could fill those jobs but they would want more money and benefits(1) ;) (1) And probably would want (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Posting Policy Changes
|
|
(...) We've had a lot of trouble with spoofed IDs, and also with emails that were not possible to spam decode, or not possible for LUGNET itself to parse properly, which is not really related to whether someone has made a donation or not. Todd took (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Badgering emails
|
|
(...) First of all, one can try to get a receipt from the receivers mail program. This is certainly not fool proof, but if you get a receipt, the receiver has almost certainly seen at least the Subject of the mail. If you never get a receipt, you (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Legends of Todd
|
|
(...) Again, I'm at work, and can't give this better attention until tonight if I get the chance, but: While this may be true in theory, it seems that many here **think** that the establishment is not interested in their opinions, and may feel (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
