 | | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) It's very difficult -- and I'm not even going to try -- to sum everything up in a nice simple pat statement (not that you're asking for one), since, to various extents, I agree with almost everything that everyone here has said. My opinions (...) (26 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general) !
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) <snip? (...) OK quick question(1). Now I don't think many/any of us know much of Matthew other than he has some personal issues to work out and that he likes to cause havoc. So here's the question. Assume that Matthew is say 14 and he is (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) D'oh. I don't know where I got the impression that he was fairly new (to posting, at least, because there's no way to tell how long someone's been lurking). That does color things slightly- after all, it means he's been here long enough to (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) That would be censorship. No. (...) Even if it _didn't_ have LEGO material, they wouldn't get banned simply for posting a site address, no. Hopefully of course they wouldn't be posting such an address with malicious intentions to injure others (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Agreed. I went and looked using the search function. I may have missed some but I found a number of posts from Matthew going quite a ways back. Some were hyperbolic, but none (that I found, but I may have missed some) were vitriolic. Nothing (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I'm sure the phrase "new member" must means different things to different people -- perhaps two weeks to one person, two months to another, or even two years to another. In any case, for the record, Matthew's first post here was on April 9, (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Let's not forget this. John, thanks for drawing attention to this passage. --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: people.newbie
|
|
"Frank Buiting" <frank.buiting@infopulse.nl> wrote in message news:G2uFAt.ABA@lugnet.com... (...) organises (...) it (...) Oops! I didn't notice the 'New user? Come introduce yourself...' link on the news page! Ignore the above paragraph. -Frank (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | people.newbie
|
|
Larry wrote a very friendly introduction to LUGNET and made a lot of good suggestions for links to visit. Maybe it's a good idea to put the links he mentioned in the 'yellow' area (like the 'sites to see' section in (URL) and many other newsgroup (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
"Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:G2t3zJ.F5K@lugnet.com... (...) Yup. And how you're handling things now to me is just proving to me that perhaps I should not have been so quick to give you another chance a couple days ago. (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) Sign... I wish I can also do or say anything and expect others to take it easily if I got "very angry". You must be very special to have such privilege. (...) And people can't take your remarks on your public site personally because? (...) And (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Todd! Admin and owner
|
|
(...) Well I don't know how specific you want but without nameing names I will try. I also assume you want specifics as to what I don't like about the reasoning for banning Matthew not reasoning for not liking Matthew. It is my feeling that there (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
G'day Mike, I've already posted my personal points on this issue: (URL) I'll reinforce them for my part... (...) Why should the ToS of this site be relevant to off-site content? If the message posting the link (exluding the link itself) abides by (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: hackin the faq
|
|
(...) Would'a replied earlier if I saw it!! (...) You're doing a very good job (and great for the community)! I'm sure many will appreciate it, whether old-timers or newbies. (...) Good idea! [..] (...) Definitely! You might want to have a cross-ref (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.faq)
|
| |
| | Re: When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
(...) way? (...) I'd agree with the argument. And I think I'd go one step further. If I maintain a site at www.isecretlyhatetodd.com and I never mention it here, I'm not sure I should be held accountable ToS-wise if someone stumbles across it and (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) I don't mean even a bit by the above paragraph it was all you, and the flame war is not a big thing to me as alone. The paragraph is just a chronology, so I put it back to it's original form. (...) Read below. Besides, bet I care even a bit (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | When is a website "independent" and when is it "part of"?
|
|
Sorry for the malformed subject, it feels like it's 2 AM to me. Something has been nagging at me about one aspect of the latest... I think I want to recant some of my own words, and see if some other people do too. At least a little. Maybe it's a (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) You never were, and still aren't, in my mind. What you put on your site led me and countless others to the personal conclusion that you are a jerk, but that's a completely separate issue from judgment of what you did or didn't do here on this (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: A reixamination of what happened.
|
|
(...) While I would certainly agree that one person with a petty vendetta does not make a "huge conspiracy", if the idea that you were purposely out to harm the online LEGO community is "bs", how do you explain this post: (URL) seems pretty clear to (...) (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: My Stance
|
|
(...) Not accurate, no. Beside the point, nobody who wrote me was upset by your views -- only by your attitude and immature behavior level .space and .off-topic.debate. --Todd (26 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
