Subject:
|
Re: Pruning not good for the trees
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 8 Aug 2000 12:48:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
223 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matthew Miller writes:
> Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> > Editorial control would be if TLC requested removal of, say, an unfavorable
> > review of, say, 7190 Millennium Falcon. (And of course they'd be laughed at
> > if they asked that. Not that they'd ask that anyway.)
>
> 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 something Lego didn't want people to talk about -- just like
> they might not like people to talk negatively about the Millennium Falcon.
This is the problem with accepting funds from TLC. Cynics will say that TL is
TLC's pocket now, and that this is just a sign of things to come blah blah
blah. Although, I very much doubt that is the case. To avoid any fuss in the
future it important that LUGNET is both fair and should be seen to be fair on
issues like this.
All that aside, what are the legal issues at stake here? What risks were
associated with the posts? Would TLC really have done anything about it? Does
it matter if TLC are miffed with LUGNET posts anyway?
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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 (...) (24 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
33 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
|
|
|
|
