To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.admin.generalOpen lugnet.admin.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Administrative / General / 7350 (-10)
  Re: Pruning not good for the trees
 
(...) I understand that you're acting in good faith and make no accusations against you. However, since this information was apparently available to the public before being posted to LUGnet, I have a hard time seeing how it's not editorial. It's (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Pruning not good for the trees
 
(...) This is so far from editorial control that light from editorial control takes ten million years just to reach here. The reaons were purely _legal_ and by specific request from TLC. Editorial control would be if TLC requested removal of, say, (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Pruning not good for the trees
 
(...) Prolly. But removing the whole thing is "less" control than excising words but leaving the rest. Or so I seem to recall Prodigy's lawyer telling me about 15 years ago when I first started looking into this topic. And "less" control, especially (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Pruning not good for the trees
 
(...) I'm pretty sure removing things like this is editorial control, wholesale or not. (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Pruning not good for the trees
 
I just went and looked at the 2001 set info tree and with all the cancels, that tree is dust. The tree view for me showed a bunch of disconnected posts with no hierarchy at all. Is that an inevitable outcome of wholesale cancellation or is there a (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: 2001 Set info
 
(...) I don't really have a problem with your reasons for canceling the various posts that began this thread. My problem is that TLC seems to be asking you to replace their clothing when *they* are the ones walking about nude! If they have a problem (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: 2001 Set info
 
(...) Well, you know, the same exact thing would have happened if LEGO had asked the same thing a year ago. The only difference now is that they're paying attention, so they notice things like this. And they use e-mail, which makes things go faster. (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Double Postings
 
I've noticed an increase of identical messages that are posted twice. Todd, Is it possible to do a simple check to see whether the same message has been posted within the last few minutes and then discard the second one? Optimize well, Andreas (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: 2001 Set info
 
(...) Yes, I deleted as few messages as possible -- only the ones which contained references to the materials which were asked to be deleted. --Todd (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: 2001 Set info
 
(...) Oh, and P.S.: Todd only deleted a lot of the reply messages because the original message was in with the reply, which makes a lot of sense. Most of the replies were mostly "Wow, that's cool" so, personally, I feel Todd did exercise good (...) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)

Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more
Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR