|
|
 | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Please note that it is impossible for us to know whether you have seen a post and are pondering it, or whether you missed it. A short acknowledgement of receipt for suggestions made would be a big help in this situation... --Bill. (21 years ago, 12-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) <Playful-Sarcasm On> Ohhhhhhh, I see... What a big difference! ;) <Playful-Sarcasm Off> Sorry I didn’t know such clarity was needed! (Oups, didn’t completely turn Off the sarcasm) I jus’ assumed that someone would need to hear/read the post (...) (21 years ago, 11-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Ah, but you have to understand that most forums (and whether you think of LUGNET as a forum or not, most newcomers are introduced to it via the web archive, which reads like a more traditional form) require that you sign up as a member prior (...) (21 years ago, 11-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Well, do you think "to be heard" is the same as "to get a response"? 'Cause it's not. There's often a lot of perfectly good reasons for there to be a lag between the two. The "*" for emphasis was meant to highlight the distinction between the (...) (21 years ago, 11-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Troy, I could be wrong but my understanding of the way NNTP authentication & authorization works is that it's session-based rather than message-based or function-based. That is, I think when you require a username and password at login, when (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| "Dave Johann" <legomecha@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:HEL9DL.1u1G@lugnet.com... (...) that (...) last (...) And what still turns me off from using the web interface is the inability to track which messages I have read already in a reliable (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: Renaming Gaming group
|
| (...) Sure (...) It's easier to move 2 or 3 groups at once than separately. . . . what remapping would you suggest? --Todd (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: Renaming Gaming group
|
| (...) Very cool! Any chance you'd consider moving lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw to lugnet.cad.org.ldraw? I realize it's only 4 characters, but making this change would: a. Align the ldraw group with other <topic>.org groups. b. Get the LDraw.org group (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Ya, there seems to be a growing misunderstanding of what the word "member" and "membership" means on LUGNET. Back in '97 and '98, very few sites had "members" or "accounts" or even any kind of personal configuration. And a lot of people coming (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) I certainly did. I can't recall how many people told me what I understood as "you don't have to pay for membership", but the member sign-up page clearly stated that there was a $10 minimum. (...) It sounds like that specific concern is at the (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Thanx for the link Kevin. Here's a portion of the conversation: ---...--- (...) ---...--- (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| Sorry about that link. Here's a shorter one: (URL) Mall is back: (URL) TOWN PLANNING information: (URL) Lego parts store: (URL) Guild of Bricksmiths(TM): (URL) Lego Web page: (URL) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) The certain individual has vanished from LUGNET because of the improved security. He was still bad-mouthing LUGNET over on RTL as of this post: (URL) Mall is back: (URL) TOWN PLANNING information: (URL) Lego parts store: (URL) Guild of (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| Hendo (John P. Henderson) wrote in message ... (...) Yes, email verification is required for members too, when not using the web interface. For me, the Web interface is a health issue. With RSI in both hands and arms, a newsreader is orders of (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Rest easy, David, we're going to be fixing this once and for all soon. :-) (...) AucZILLA had proxy bidding too. And the e-mail list wasn't a single-auction-at-a-time deal; you stayed on the list, with all your settings preserved from auction (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) And of course that's precisely why I'm leery of the system. I can see the logic behind it, but it runs the risk of excluding people who misinterpret the system. It's been a long-standing problem where people have been confused about how to (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Nope! Nothing could be further from the truth, actually. To get on the AucZILLA list, all you had to do was submit a bid -- or reply to any public auction announcement posting. If someone forgot to include their name, I wrote them and asked. I (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Even if that had been the intent, it would always hold the possibility of backfiring. I've been a read-only lurker for almost two years now, and every once in a while I'd e-mail someone a response to their LUGNET post if I felt it was (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) Huh-- I had actually thought that posting setup was that way by design. I recall way back when Auczilla was around, someone saying that it was specifically designed to be tricky to sign up for. Hence, only people who were "truly serious" about (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: A Change
|
| (...) I won't lie, if the email verification system was removed I would likely post more, well, more respond to more threads anyway. but I can completely understand why this system is in place. if there is a way of provide similar protection by (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators)
|
|
