 | | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) I'd better check on that. As far as I'm aware, it's not illegal to publish a private communication, just rude (assuming it doesn't contain any sensitive information, of course). (...) Yes, for CYA reasons and out of respect for the community. (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) Absolutely -- I agree! -- and when I said before that I preferred clear legal requests to non-legal requests, I don't mean I prefer to heard heavy-handed manners :) but just to know that it's a legal request for removal. It can be perfectly (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) However, it has an effect which the more draconian-seeming approach of going over the head of the original poster doesn't -- it makes other people more likely to voluntarily stop spreading the information. If the original poster would have (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) Good idea, but those were _suggestions_ to LEGO, not site policies. (You snipped the part where I said "Here are my suggestions...") They can follow the suggestions or ignore them. #1 and #2 are especially important, IMHO, because I'm not (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) I have some questions and comments on the above: - Is the above sequence to be followed when someone posts or causes to be posted an individuals personal information (such as address - see the VLC meeting location incident for an example)? - (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: So where is Brad's answer to the 2001 info?
|
|
(...) For the record, I decided that this post was more noise than necessary and canceled it (and sent a private message). But since you replied anyway... :) (...) Either one would make me happier. I'd prefer it done on the NNTP side, but I (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Sets Auction (Last Day - NOT eBay)
|
|
(...) Wow, 4 times in the past 4 days: (URL) remind her. Thanks for pointing this out. --Todd (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Castle Sets Auction (Last Day - NOT eBay)
|
|
I beseech the LUGNET gods to smite this unholy infidel who hast dared to prefane the ".castle" group for the second time with a blasphemy -- an auction announcement! I myself did warn this unbeliever of her heresy not a day ago when she did this (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.market.auction, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Purpose of .lego.direct??
|
|
G'day folks, I recently stumbled upon the ruckus in .dear-lego about this-and-that of late pertaining to LEGO Direct's interaction with LUGNET. As I had not been following much of the posts leading up to that, someone referred me to the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) James Powell mentioned the bad news already on another thread (or was it another sub-branch of this huge thread?), but it bears repeating here for posterity... Here's a link to the Slashdot story for those who haven't seen it yet: (URL) (26 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) I said that, yes. But you're still misunderstanding what I said. I would recommend that you print it out on paper and sit down and talk about it with a parent or guardian or attorney. (...) No, you can't assume that just because I haven't said (...) (26 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
Todd, I'm not trying to misquote you. You said, what is posted in #179 right? I then posted a link, on the basis that you are _not_ hosting this info. My understanding of what you had responded to me, given the chain of E-mails was that if I wanted (...) (26 years ago, 19-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) The point I was trying to make in both posts is that I can't "give permission" any more than I could give someone permission to steal a car or rob a bank. The law (fuzzy and gray!) governs what is permissible and the T&C are fuzzy and gray as (...) (26 years ago, 18-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) Well I don't want to get into splitting hairs but I think James might have been refering to this post: (URL) I think he missinterpreted as you giving the go ahead for such a thing. (URL) post that you (Todd) refer to is clear cut but the other (...) (26 years ago, 18-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: The 2001 lineup (list on FBTB)
|
|
(...) James, Please don't ever misquote me like that again. Here is what I said to you: (URL) Perhaps a link to the FBTB site would be nice (I don't have it bookmarked) (...) (26 years ago, 18-Aug-00, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Trailing Slashes (Re: Stick in the mud...)
|
|
(...) This sounds like a bug in IE. (URL) refers to a different thing than (URL). (26 years ago, 18-Aug-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
