 | | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
|
(...) <snip list, including me> OK. (...) OK. I was completely unaware that the term I habitually use was considered offensive. Now that I've been made aware, I'm voluntarily banning myself. James (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
|
(...) No, there isn't. Both have exactly the same effect- obsceneties in a Lugnet post, violating the ToS. Like I said, I understand that (and understand why) Jessie is unpopular, but banning him from Lugnet for something that other people have done (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
|
(...) Just a note here - Frequently, mild obscenity is let slide by because whenever someone calls the abuser on it, it pretty much invariably turns into a huge fight. Slippery slope? Yup. Ethically lax of me (and others) to let it slide? You (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
|
(...) Many people have violated this particular ToS and not been banned. In the past, folks who have posted obscenities (and been called on it, frequently they aren't) have simply been made to understand that NO posting of profanities is allowed, (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: It is time to ban JAL.
|
|
(...) I don't think banning (forever) someone would be appropriate, for using a bad word in his post, not to insult someone, but just as an example, and also apologizing for this afterwards. If I remember correctly, the practice was warning and (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
