|
|
 | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| (...) hi, To be honest, if there is anyone else who used this language, I would be all for banning them. Especially if when they were approached on the issue they tried to dodge responsibility for it and then blamed someone else, and then stated (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Ongoing Battle in posts
|
| In lugnet.admin.general, Tanya K. Burkhart writes: <snipped all of a well said (and timely, inasmuch as it NEEDED to be said) post that I agree with, except for one line> (...) Almost no one... those members logged in to the web interface don't get (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Ongoing Battle in posts
|
| Note: This is a fire-it-and-forget-it post. I will state my opinions here, right, wrong, left, upside-down, backwards, or otherwise, and likely not respond to any replies. I would like to bring up several points that several people in our community (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: It is time to ban JAL from Lugnet.
|
| "Jesse Alan Long" <joyous4god2@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:GHM5oE.KCH@lugnet.com... <snip> (...) areas of (...) even so, (...) be some (...) to this (...) This has nothing to do with the laws of Mass. or Tenn. LUGNET is a privately owned (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
| Well, if we're going to start banning people from Lugnet for cussing, I'll be more than happy to do a little research and pull up all the delinquents that I can find, and it won't be overly difficult to find a couple. However, I think that banning (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
|
