 | | Re: When will Lugnet offer XXL, XXXL and XXXXL shirts?
|
|
(...) Working on it now. --Todd (26 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | When will Lugnet offer XXL, XXXL and XXXXL shirts?
|
|
Cafepress.com is now offering shirts in these larger sizes! I was hoping to get a 2X Lugnet shirt, but noticed that we can still only buy the smaller sizes. Todd, when are you going to offer the larger sizes for Lugnet shirts? The Lugnet stores on (...) (26 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Posting question
|
|
I posted a message yesterday about a sale at Fred Meyer. I guess I named my posting the same as an earlier posting and it was sent to this previous heading as a response. Why did this happen. We use a news reader and when a message is posted to an (...) (26 years ago, 2-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: pw checking (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G1L15F.K94@lugnet.com... [snip] (...) client (...) if (...) to (...) been (...) reason. (...) follow (...) it (...) Why would it have been a mistake to protect them? IMHO, if anyone can fake a (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Nuke Boston (was Re: Resolved: Tall SUVs should not be...)
|
|
(...) True - I actually went to .fun first, but didn't think a joke fit into Community, Gaming, Party, Crafts, or Holiday, and didn't realize that I could post directly to .fun, because when I had tried to post directly to (IIRC) .marketplace, it (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Set List Question
|
|
I noticed that I can go back and edit what I wrote in...so I have done that. -- Thomas Main main@appstate.edu (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | pw checking (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
|
|
(...) Well, enough new things that I think it will be hard for anyone to continue belittling the checking anymore. Plus, as I said before, it's possible (and likely, I hope) that the checking will be less stringent. Right now I'm guesstimating that (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) I was thinking more from the perspective of what you are going to create that will have a span of 9 months and not what might happen on the internet outside of LUGNET in 9 months. This still doesn't explain why you have a sophisticated (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) that (...) Is this debate flamebait? Or sarcasm The FDIC needs to do risk based underwriting instead of charging all banks the same rates. Online banks with lax security should have to pay higher premiums. FUT .debate if you must (seems (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Password Tips
|
|
(...) Easially? (...) Hey, we better enhance the tester to prevent that password, it's kind of sort of easy to remember. <GD&R> Seriously, I like the active anti cracker defense idea a lot better and I think that's the better way to solve the (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Thread views (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
|
|
(...) When you're viewing an article at the website (such as through one of the links as shown above), scroll down to the bottom of the page and click one of the "Entire Thread on One Page" links. You can see the thread in nested thread form or in (...) (26 years ago, 28-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
Todd - an interesting but minor question to these thread links - if I wanted the thread unraveled all the way back to it's source post, how would I do that? Cheers ... Geoffrey Hyde Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message (...) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Password checks (was: Re: LUGNET Memberships)
|
|
(...) I agree! In a cookie, you can put complete random garbage that only the authentication server knows how to interpret. And if certain bits contain an index, you can even use a one-time pad or other complex mapping to encrypt the data so that (...) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) What do you think about this?-- (URL) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Password Tips
|
|
[Reposted with corrections. I read the results incorrectly; the basepoint for passing is 100%, not 0%.] (...) I shouldn't be wasting my time disspelling FUD like this, but as long as I said the above, I should really define what I mean by "there are (...) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) ahh.... at least they have that one little thing that means so much to me... FDIC insured. :) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) Actually I found PayPal's pw filter to be fairly stringent. KL (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Password Tips
|
|
(...) Here's a good one: Long,Term/P1an! Passed with +178% I think I've got the hang of it now. (...) Delaying positive and negative results and temporarally blocking ip's for logins that have too many tries is probably the best way to discourage (...) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: LUGNET Memberships
|
|
(...) A combination of things... first, by then there will be more things in place that will matter more; second, the pw validator will very likely be less stringent; third, I predict that within the next nine months, a major online banking site (...) (26 years ago, 27-Sep-00, to lugnet.people, lugnet.admin.general)
|
