 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Well that could be handled by having two groups. One for conducting auction business (soliciting bids) and one for asking questions about auctions. Then you just TOS quickly anyone who regularly manages to "announce" their auction in the Q&A (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) they (...) Mmm. That'll teach me to go around not qualifying my statements. Clearly, I don't think that the rules should be mutated too much to encourage everyone (coughMatthewMoultoncough) to join up- on the other hand, if subtle changes to (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I agree, I'd be sad to see it go. But what I'm really sad is that as far as I'm concerned, it's gone now. A year ago I really enjoyed .debate. The past few months, the time for a thread to deteriorate into one of the two recurring shouting (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
Call me elitist... (and I don't think I'm 100% disagreeing) (...) I'm not. That is, I'm not for enabling *everyone* to be a member. There are certain people I would be happy to see not join, heck, not even participate here. There are only a handful (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) That's a good point. It hadn't occurred to me because I don't usually get ensnared by a debate until it's already in .debate! Maybe we should have off-topic.debate.pure and off-topic.debate.spill. 8^) Dave! (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) <puts facilitator hat on> No no... post your ideas, no matter how wacky, as long as they haven't been posted yet. That's brainstorming. Even if you know there is a flaw in idea E1 and E2 of yours, and in L1 and L2 of mine, someone may come up (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Actually, those two are great ideas, IMHO. I wonder how many people that aren't members post updates about their LEGO eBay auctions on Lugnet, and never give back to the upkeep of Lugnet... I hadn't ever thought of that before. And the admin (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Hear, hear! Though I don't expect that I'll switch to Libertarianism or Christianity any time soon, I have learned a good deal about those two views. That, for me, is the primary reason for participating in .debate (that, and getting the (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) The recent history of .debate is certainly that the types of shouting matches have little chance of being productive, however, I will point out that back some time ago, the "Libertarian" debate DID have real productivity. It DID change (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Well, as soon as I can come up with an idea that I myself can't pick apart on 1000 levels, I will. Unfortunately, thus far I've been unsuccessful... (...) Yeah, but that's the default way of "winning" an argument or flamewar on Usenet. :D (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:>>Hey, that's a good idea- if you pay to become a Lugnet member, you're allowed (...) I'm not yet a member (mainly because most of my posting has been to OT rather than LEGO-specific contributions), (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Dot view parameterizable?? (Re: Excessive Cross Posting
|
|
(...) I would like to put into the enhancement hopper the idea of setting a personal preference for how big the tree view should be allowed to get before it is suppressed. I'm willing to pay a bit more delay to get larger trees, some others may want (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Personally, I come and go. I lose interest in some debates, and gain interest in others. Occasionally I'll see something that really does peak my interest, and other times, I just feel like debating. As to whether it's actually a waste of (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I wasn't clear enough. I was looking for some brainstorming on possible solutions first before we trotted out the sharpened knives to rip holes in the ideas. All the ones i posted were dreamt up in about 5 minutes total to act as thought (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
I *said* they had flaws and were thought starters... so you'll see a smiley behind every one of my responses, I'm trying to be funny in them. I suggest you post some ideas of your own, I'm trying to get some brainstorming going... (...) Why not? (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Only post via the web interface? NO THANKS. I've posted maybe a total of 5 times via the web interface (and only because I was in a training class, not on any of my computers). Broken. (...) Then people would just watch the branches to make (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) Hey, that's a good idea- if you pay to become a Lugnet member, you're allowed to voice your opinions. Sorry, Larry, I can't agree with that. (...) ...giving an automatic "last word" to the person who squeaks in under the post limit. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I'll take some culpability here, I'm a sucker for trying to show up the clueless, and no matter how many times I swear it off, it's just too tempting... he's just so cluelessly annoying when he wants to be. (but he CAN be a good contributor (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
(...) I agree with some of the philosophies about needing a place for off-topic things to spill, and needing a seperate place for them, etc, but I have to admit that I'm starting to wonder if there might not be a need to somehow restrict the posting (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
|
While I think many of the posts have been somewhat useless (not even entertaining!), there are still many posts that either make me think, or entertain me, so I'm all for keeping the group around. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|