 | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) When the TOS requires that *replies* to people asking about models go there if they just happen to be models that are commercially available. Since the TOS doesn't currently state that new posts that only mention what is for sale (with no (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) In a way, yes, your post answered a question. In a much larger way, it was a flog for your models for sale. And you know it. Therefore, IMHO, violates the spirit of the TOS. Auction flogging is frowned upon. I can only imagine that sale (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) No, and no. It was a brag. Steve asked who had done killer models and I answered. (...) No again. (...) You are correct sir, you can only imagine it, you can't cite ++Lar (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) Larry, for such a smart guy, you're acting incredibly dumb. Please stop it. Answering the question would have been "I've built some killer models! Here are some pictures of things I've built that Bulk sales made possible!" with a URL. Going (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) ++Lar, are you saying that you disagree that your post was a flog? It sure read like a flog to me, and only after you called it a brag was I able to see more insight into its purpose and agree that it's more a brag than a flog. But it's also a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) Well it is frowned upon, but not in an official manner... (...) This is just another example of why the TOS needs to either change to specifically address for sale posts in non-market groups, or that official words from Todd need to be made to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) Yup, and I've been promising an update for a long time. Darn everything is a moving target. I don't want to discourage local flogs in .loc groups, but definitely in just about everywhere else. There's a post I've been working on which has some (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) It's Lar. ++ is the signature lead in, not part of the name. Thanks. (...) Yes, I am specifically saying that I disagree that it was intended to be such. Everything in it was put there to back up my assertion (boast) that the doodlebug is a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: IOLTC the final word!!!!!!!!
|
| (...) Hmm, thoughts on how to make a simple statement which has the necessary effect... One thought would be to disallow market posts in the "theme" groups. That would leave some holes in other groups, but most of those other groups wouldn't attract (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) to (...) of (...) is (...) challenged. (...) Oh, Lar. You have had auction posts in Train that were "pseudo" information/auction posts. I personally feel that you toe the line on some of these and thus (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Thank you, Rose, for taking the time to dig up the links to all of these posts... it was very thoughtful to put them in one place for folks to look at. Before reading the rest of this post, people may actually want to go review them again as my (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) It must be a cultural thing - in the UK being called a brag really is an insult. I suppose we are a modest bunch. - nobody likes "the bray of bragging tongues." (...) I doubt a lawyer would advise you to break the law as the rules are "wrong". (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Unfortunately, you aren't the one who gets to define "flog" here. Todd is, and he weighed in and agreed that it seemed to be a flog. So, accept that the post in question was considered to be a flog, and probably shouldn't have been made in the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| I thought you weren't going to debate this? (...) Granted, but I do get to question the definition and point out where I think it's awry. Which is what I'm doing. (...) And Todd never changes his mind? Seemed to be != is, necessarily. (...) So (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) I either lied or changed my mind. You decide. (...) Todd has been known to chance his mind, yes. Until he does, let's agree that by his definition, this was a flog. He said so in (URL) Lehman wrote: (...) Since Todd's definition is pretty much (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) I'll second that. --Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) I suppose I wasn't totally clear in what I wrote earlier. Yes, I personally happen to feel that what (not ++, that's not part of his name)Lar wrote was a flog (IMHO), but I also added that I thought it was more brag than flog. To make an (...) (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) agreeing that it was, in addition to being a flog, a brag. IMHO. IOW, brag + flog != flog Not that that makes it any better or worse. Just clarifying what I meant. ^^Todd (23 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) (Responding to my own post.) YIKES -- it just occurred to me that what I wrote above might be mistaken as a condemnation of what Rose did. On the contrary, I actually meant it as a _complement_ to Rose. I thanked Rose this morning via private (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) <snip> I'm confused here, I sincerely meant my lead as a thank you to Rose, and I took your "I'll second that" as just that, an agreement and your own thanks as well. What am I missing here? Why would you think anyone would mistake what you (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Uhh - I've been seeing that != in a couple of posts. Would some tech jargon junkie remind me what it means? -- Cheers ... Geoffrey Hyde "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa4059f.183521...net.com... (...) was (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Not equal. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) != == Not equal to (form "C" el al programming languages) Software nerd (remember a nerd is just a geek with a degree) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Actually, it was a mathamatics/logic expression before it was a programming one. You software nerds are the new kids on the block <grin> James (who will confess he's a hardware nerd - it's like a software nerd, but you don't have to wear a (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| I watched this with some amusement, and some amazement. First, Larry is a stand up person, whom I have met, and whose creations are worth bragging about, having seen them up close. He does brag, it is part of him, but at the same time, I think he (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes: <snip> I said what I had to say about this. I did not intend this to be a flog. It may be perceived by some as that, but it was intended as boasting, nothing more. I tried to explain in more detail why it (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) writes: (...) Lar, That may be because you have the ability to come off as sarcastic even when you might be sincere. Todd first took it as sincerity then after re-reading he took it as sarcasm. Perhaps your diction was a little too vague, even (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| Todd, (...) Well, that settles that. Thank you Todd for the clarification. Scott S. (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | (canceled)
|
| | | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) For the record, I did not say that bragging didn't belong here. (...) First, I have to take it face value; I'm not a mind reader. Lar has stated several times that it was a brag and not a flog. So be it. Second, flogs in theme groups are (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Ooh, Scott's sentence structure there is icky. There's some double negatavism going on, but the phrase "does it not belong" is usually intended to mean the same is "is it true that it belongs"... (...) One thing I strongly suggest you also add (...) (23 years ago, 6-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) Icky? That's a new one. Well, serves me right for trying to reply to fast. : ) How about "Is bragging offensive to some people? Yes. Does it belong on LUGNET?" Better. FUT to off.topic.fun I guess. Scott "Off to fix the webpage" S. -- Personal (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.admin.terms, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Flogs, flogging, floggers, brags, bragging, braggers
|
| (...) I agree. In the past I have mailed posters to tell them of their "errors" - it saves all this huff and puff. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 7-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
| |
