| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> 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 arguments are based on them (that is, based on the actual
> posts, not my intent).
>
> In lugnet.admin.general, Rose Regner writes:
>
> > 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 have shown a history.
> >
> > A search ( Pieniazek ebay ) in trains reveals the following;
> > http://news.lugnet.com/market/auction/?n=3608 to be fair, the follow up to
> > this post http://news.lugnet.com/market/auction/?n=3612
> >
> > http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=9730
> >
> > http://news.lugnet.com/trains/?n=7467
> >
> > http://news.lugnet.com/market/theory/?n=1715
> >
> > Some of your models do deserve bragging, but you have also shown a pattern
> > of bragging. :)
>
> I won't dispute a pattern of bragging. I am, after all, a braggart.
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."
>
> What I WILL dispute is that any of these are flogs. Unless you define a flog
> as the mere mention of something commercial, that is, which is a definition
> I dispute. Strongly.
>
> EVERY ONE of these has as its topic something entirely different from a pure
> "hey I have something to sell" message. Most of them started quite
> interesting (dare I say significant in some cases) threads of discussion.
>
> Are we going to ban any mention of things commercial, no matter how passing,
> no matter the context, in any group that doesn't have market somewhere in
> its name? That would be wrong. With the discussion commencing on a major
> reorg in admin.nntp, this seems an important point. VERY important.
>
> As for the charge that I deliberately push the envelope, I'll take the
> lawyer defense: I didn't, but if I did, it isn't against the rules, and if
> it's against the rules, the rules are wrong.
I doubt a lawyer would advise you to break the law as the rules are "wrong".
The fact is, there is a framework here for changing the rules - so there is
no need offend everyone by doing what you do/did.
Scott A
>
> - I don't deliberately push the rules envelope, I just have stuff I want to
> share, I am terribly busy and don't have as much time to do elaborate sites
> as I might like, so I share it as soon as I can. The envelope I am actually
> pushing is what is possible to do with this stuff (in a model, in
> instructions, in commercial sites, in bands of folks getting together to do
> exciting things, in nudging TLC, in trying to bring regular model
> railroaders into the fold, etc etc etc).
> - There is nothing stated that one cannot come as close as the rules allow
> to the edge without going over.
> - Nor should there be. If things aren't close to the edge how do we know
> where the edges are (or should be)? Nothing succeeds in defining things like
> a concrete example.
>
> To sum up, I don't flog, except under a fundamentally flawed definition of
> flog. Brag? Guilty as charged.
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
33 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
